Index 
Texts adopted
Tuesday, 27 October 2015 - StrasbourgFinal edition
Common Agricultural Policy: repealing obsolete acts ***I
 EU-Switzerland agreement on the automatic exchange of financial account information *
 Taxation of savings income in the form of interest payments: repealing the Savings Directive *
 Automated data exchange with regard to dactyloscopic data in Sweden *
 Automated data exchange with regard to dactyloscopic data in Belgium *
 Automated data exchange with regard to dactyloscopic data in Poland *
 Package travel and linked travel arrangements ***II
 European single market for electronic communications ***II
 Trade in certain goods which could be used for capital punishment, torture or other treatment or punishment ***I
 Mandatory automatic exchange of information in the field of taxation *
 Discharge 2013: ARTEMIS Joint Undertaking
 Discharge 2013: European Institute of Innovation and Technology (EIT)
 Discharge 2013: ENIAC Joint Undertaking
 Discharge 2013: EU general budget - European Council and Council
 Ebola crisis: long-term lessons
 Emission measurements in the automotive sector

Common Agricultural Policy: repealing obsolete acts ***I
PDF 245kWORD 63k
Resolution
Text
European Parliament legislative resolution of 27 October 2015 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council repealing Council Directive 76/621/EEC relating to the fixing of the maximum level of erucic acid in oils and fats and Council Regulation (EC) No 320/2006 establishing a temporary scheme for the restructuring of the sugar industry (COM(2015)0174 – C8-0101/2015 – 2015/0090(COD))
P8_TA(2015)0360A8-0255/2015

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2015)0174),

–  having regard to Article 294(2), Article 42, first paragraph, and Article 43(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C8‑0101/2015),

–  having regard to the opinion of the Committee on Legal Affairs on the proposed legal basis,

–  having regard to Article 294(3) and Article 114 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 1 July 2015(1),

–  having regard to the undertaking given by the Council representative by letter of 7 September 2015 to approve Parliament’s position, in accordance with Article 294(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to Rules 59 and 39 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development (A8-0255/2015),

1.  Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;

2.  Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend its proposal substantially or replace it with another text;

3.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 27 October 2015 with a view to the adoption of Regulation (EU) 2015/... of the European Parliament and of the Council repealing Council Directive 76/621/EEC relating to the fixing of the maximum level of erucic acid in oils and fats and Council Regulation (EC) No 320/2006 establishing a temporary scheme for the restructuring of the sugar industry

(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Regulation (EU) 2015/2284.)

(1) Not yet published in the Official Journal.


EU-Switzerland agreement on the automatic exchange of financial account information *
PDF 251kWORD 67k
European Parliament legislative resolution of 27 October 2015 on the draft Council decision on the conclusion, on behalf of the European Union, of the Amending Protocol to the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation providing for measures equivalent to those laid down in Council Directive 2003/48/EC on taxation of savings income in the form of interest payments (08266/1/2015 – C8-0169/2015 – 2015/0076(NLE))
P8_TA(2015)0361A8-0271/2015

(Consultation)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the draft Council decision (08266/1/2015),

–  having regard to the draft Amending Protocol to the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation providing for measures equivalent to those laid down in Council Directive 2003/48/EC on taxation of savings income in the form of interest payments (08297/2015),

–  having regard to Article 115 and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (b), and Article 218(8), second subparagraph, of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C8‑0169/2015),

–  having regard to Rules 59 and 108(7) of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (A8-0271/2015),

1.  Approves the draft Council decision as amended and approves conclusion of the Amending Protocol to the Agreement;

2.  Regrets that no improvements can be made, particularly regarding information provided and the automatic, binding and unrestricted nature of exchanges of information;

3.  Calls upon the Commission to keep Parliament informed in case of any change or new development in the final steps of the conclusion of the Amending Protocol to the Agreement;

4.  Reminds the Council of its obligation to consult Parliament once more should it modify its draft decision;

5.  Stresses the importance of taking effective action against fraud and tax avoidance and in particular tax evasion and tax avoidance by natural and legal persons based in the Union with the involvement of financial institutions based in third countries;

6.  Calls upon the Commission to assess, 18 months after the date of entry into force of the Amending Protocol to the Agreement, the application of the Agreement and its outcome, and present a report to the European Parliament and the Council, accompanied where appropriate by proposals for its review;

7.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and of the Swiss Confederation.

Draft decision   Amendment
Amendment 1
Draft decision
Article 2 – paragraph 1
1.  The President of the Council shall, on behalf of the Union, give the notification provided for in Article 2(1) of the Amending Protocol4.
1.  The President of the Council shall, on behalf of the Union, give the notification provided for in Article 2(1) and Article 4 of the Amending Protocol4 in order to ensure that the rules on automatic exchange of information with respect to reportable accounts are being followed and collaboration on compliance and enforcement is enabled.
__________________
__________________
4 The date of entry into force of the Amending Protocol will be published in the Official Journal of the European Union by the General Secretariat of the Council.
4 The date of entry into force of the Amending Protocol will be published in the Official Journal of the European Union by the General Secretariat of the Council.
Amendment 2
Draft decision
Article 2 – paragraph 2
2.  The Commission shall inform the Swiss Confederation and the Member States of the notifications given in accordance with point (d) of Article 1(1) of the Agreement between the European Union and the Swiss Confederation on the automatic exchange of financial account information to improve international tax compliance as resulting from the Amending Protocol.
2.  The Commission shall inform the Swiss Confederation and the Member States of the notifications given in accordance with point (d) of Article 1(1) of the Agreement between the European Union and the Swiss Confederation on the automatic exchange of financial account information to improve international tax compliance as following from the Amending Protocol.

Taxation of savings income in the form of interest payments: repealing the Savings Directive *
PDF 251kWORD 68k
European Parliament legislative resolution of 27 October 2015 on the proposal for a Council directive repealing Council Directive 2003/48/EC (COM(2015)0129 – C8-0086/2015 – 2015/0065(CNS))
P8_TA(2015)0362A8-0299/2015

(Special legislative procedure – consultation)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to the Council (COM(2015)0129),

–  having regard to Article 115 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C8‑0086/2015),

–  having regard to Rules 59 and 50(2) of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (A8-0299/2015),

1.  Approves the Commission proposal as amended;

2.  Calls on the Commission to alter its proposal accordingly, in accordance with Article 293(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;

3.  Calls on the Council to notify Parliament if it intends to depart from the text approved by Parliament;

4.  Asks the Council to consult Parliament again if it intends to substantially amend the Commission proposal;

5.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

Text proposed by the Commission   Amendment
Amendment 1
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
(5)  Directive 2014/107/EU is generally broader in scope than Directive 2003/48/EC and provides that in cases of overlap of scope, Directive 2014/107/EU prevails. There are still residual cases in which only Directive 2003/48/EC would otherwise apply. These residual cases are a consequence of slight differences in approach between the two directives and of different specific exemptions. Where, in those limited instances, the scope of Directive 2003/48/EC lies outside the scope of Directive 2014/107/EU, the relevant provisions of Directive 2003/48/EC would continue to apply, resulting in dual reporting standards within the Union. The minor benefits of retaining such dual reporting would be outweighed by the costs.
(5)  Directive 2014/107/EU is generally broader in scope than Directive 2003/48/EC and provides that in cases of overlap of scope, Directive 2014/107/EU prevails. There are still residual cases in which only Directive 2003/48/EC would otherwise apply. These residual cases are a consequence of slight differences in approach between the two directives and of different specific exemptions. Where, in those limited instances, the scope of Directive 2003/48/EC lies outside the scope of Directive 2014/107/EU, the relevant provisions of Directive 2003/48/EC would continue to apply, resulting in dual reporting standards within the Union. Although no specific cost-benefit analysis has been made of a dual reporting system, not even for a temporary transition period between the two standards, it is reasonable to assume that the minor benefits of retaining such dual reporting would be outweighed by the costs.
Amendment 2
Proposal for a directive
Recital 11 a (new)
(11a)  Provisions equivalent to those in Directive 2003/48/EC are at present applied through separate bilateral agreements between the Union and five European countries that are not Member States of the Union (the Swiss Confederation, the Principality of Liechtenstein, the Republic of San Marino, the Principality of Monaco and the Principality of Andorra), as well as between each of the Member States and 12 dependent or associated territories (the Channel Islands, the Isle of Man and the dependent or associated territories in the Caribbean). It is important that all of those bilateral agreements are adapted to the new OECD Global Standard and to Directive 2014/107/EU. It is also crucial that no loopholes or other inadequacies are created in the process of moving from the existing to the new standard. While having a clear mandate for negotiating the changes to the agreements with those five European countries that are not Member States of the Union, the Commission should, within the framework of its expertise, also take an active role in facilitating and promoting the revision of the Member State agreements with the 12 dependent or associated territories. In order to facilitate ease and efficiency, the Commission should, where appropriate, and subject to explicit Member State consent, take charge of such negotiations.
Amendment 3
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a.  The Commission shall, by 1 July 2016, submit a report to the Council and to the European Parliament on the transition of moving from the reporting standard applied under Directive 2003/48/EC to the new reporting standard established by Directive 2014/107/EU. The report shall include, but not be limited to, any risks of creating loopholes or other inaccuracies in reporting that could have opened up for cross-border tax fraud and evasion. The report shall also cover the related process of revising the separate bilateral agreements between the Union and five European countries that are not Member States of the Union (the Swiss Confederation, the Principality of Liechtenstein, the Republic of San Marino, the Principality of Monaco and the Principality of Andorra) as well as between each of the Member States and 12 dependent or associated territories (the Channel Islands, the Isle of Man and the dependent or associated territories in the Caribbean). The Commission shall, by 1 October 2017, submit a follow-up report in order to closely monitor the situation. The reports shall, where appropriate, be accompanied by legislative proposals.

Automated data exchange with regard to dactyloscopic data in Sweden *
PDF 244kWORD 60k
European Parliament legislative resolution of 27 October 2015 on the draft Council implementing decision on the launch of automated data exchange with regard to dactyloscopic data in Sweden (10027/2015 – C8-0197/2015 – 2015/0804(CNS))
P8_TA(2015)0363A8-0304/2015

(Consultation)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Council draft (10027/2015),

–  having regard to Article 39(1) of the Treaty on European Union, as amended by the Treaty of Amsterdam, and Article 9 of Protocol No 36 on transitional provisions, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C8-0197/2015),

–  having regard to Council Decision 2008/615/JHA of 23 June 2008 on the stepping up of cross-border cooperation, particularly in combating terrorism and cross-border crime(1), and in particular Article 33 thereof,

–  having regard to its resolution of 10 October 2013 on strengthening cross-border law-enforcement cooperation in the EU: the implementation of the ‘Prüm Decision’ and the European Information Exchange Model(2),

–  having regard to its resolution of 9 July 2015 on the European Agenda on Security(3),

–  having regard to Rule 59 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (A8-0304/2015),

1.  Approves the Council draft;

2.  Calls on the Council to notify Parliament if it intends to depart from the text approved by Parliament;

3.  Asks the Council to consult Parliament again if it intends to substantially amend the text approved by Parliament;

4.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and the Commission.

(1)OJ L 210, 6.8.2008, p. 1.
(2) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0419.
(3) Texts adopted, P8_TA(2015)0269.


Automated data exchange with regard to dactyloscopic data in Belgium *
PDF 244kWORD 60k
European Parliament legislative resolution of 27 October 2015 on the draft Council implementing decision on the launch of automated data exchange with regard to dactyloscopic data in Belgium (10029/2015 – C8-0196/2015 – 2015/0805(CNS))
P8_TA(2015)0364A8-0303/2015

(Consultation)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Council draft (10029/2015),

–  having regard to Article 39(1) of the Treaty on the European Union, as amended by the Treaty of Amsterdam, and Article 9 of Protocol No 36 on transitional provisions, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C8-0196/2015),

–  having regard to Council Decision 2008/615/JHA of 23 June 2008 on the stepping up of cross-border cooperation, particularly in combating terrorism and cross-border crime(1), and in particular Article 33 thereof,

–  having regard to its resolution of 10 October 2013 on strengthening cross-border law-enforcement cooperation in the EU: the implementation of the ‘Prüm Decision’ and the European Information Exchange Model(2),

–  having regard to its resolution of 9 July 2015 on the European Agenda on Security(3),

–  having regard to Rule 59 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (A8-0303/2015),

1.  Approves the Council draft;

2.  Calls on the Council to notify Parliament if it intends to depart from the text approved by Parliament;

3.  Asks the Council to consult Parliament again if it intends to substantially amend the text approved by Parliament;

4.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and the Commission.

(1)OJ L 210, 6.8.2008, p. 1.
(2)Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0419.
(3)Texts adopted, P8_TA(2015)0269.


Automated data exchange with regard to dactyloscopic data in Poland *
PDF 243kWORD 60k
European Parliament legislative resolution of 27 October 2015 on the draft Council implementing decision on the launch of automated data exchange with regard to dactyloscopic data in Poland (09989/2015 – C8-0195/2015 – 2015/0806(CNS))
P8_TA(2015)0365A8-0302/2015

(Consultation)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Council draft (09989/2015),

–  having regard to Article 39(1) of the Treaty on European Union, as amended by the Treaty of Amsterdam, and Article 9 of Protocol No 36 on transitional provisions, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C8-0195/2015),

–  having regard to Council Decision 2008/615/JHA of 23 June 2008 on the stepping up of cross-border cooperation, particularly in combating terrorism and cross-border crime(1), and in particular Article 33 thereof,

–  having regard to its resolution of 10 October 2013 on strengthening cross-border law-enforcement cooperation in the EU: the implementation of the ‘Prüm Decision’ and the European Information Exchange Model(2),

–  having regard to its resolution of 9 July 2015 on the European Agenda on Security(3),

–  having regard to Rule 59 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (A8-0302/2015),

1.  Approves the Council draft;

2.  Calls on the Council to notify Parliament if it intends to depart from the text approved by Parliament;

3.  Asks the Council to consult Parliament again if it intends to substantially amend the text approved by Parliament;

4.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and the Commission.

(1)OJ L 210, 6.8.2008, p. 1.
(2)Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0419.
(3)Texts adopted, P8_TA(2015)0269.


Package travel and linked travel arrangements ***II
PDF 248kWORD 61k
Resolution
Annex
European Parliament legislative resolution of 27 October 2015 on the Council position at first reading with a view to the adoption of a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on package travel and linked travel arrangements, amending Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 and Directive 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directive 90/314/EEC (09173/3/2015 – C8-0281/2015 – 2013/0246(COD))
P8_TA(2015)0366A8-0297/2015

(Ordinary legislative procedure: second reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Council position at first reading (09173/3/2015 – C8‑0281/2015),

–  having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 11 December 2013(1),

–  having regard to its position at first reading(2) on the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2013)0512),

–  having regard to Article 294(7) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to Rule 76 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the recommendation for second reading of the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection (A8-0297/2015),

1.  Approves the Council position at first reading;

2.  Takes note of the Commission statement annexed to this resolution;

3.  Notes that the act is adopted in accordance with the Council position;

4.  Instructs its President to sign the act with the President of the Council, in accordance with Article 297(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;

5.  Instructs its Secretary-General to sign the act, once it has been verified that all the procedures have been duly completed, and, in agreement with the Secretary-General of the Council, to arrange for its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union;

6.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

ANNEX TO THE LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION

Commission statement

When revising the Commission staff working document of 3 December 2009 entitled "Guidance on the implementation/application of Directive 2005/29/EC on unfair commercial practices", the Commission will also address the issue of commercial practices whereby travel service providers who market their services online offer additional services in a hidden, unclear or ambiguous manner, such as hiding the option of not booking any further services. The Commission will inform Parliament on how its views have been taken into account when the revised Guidance is adopted.

(1) OJ C 170, 5.6.2014, p. 73.
(2) Texts adopted of 12.3.2014, P7_TA(2014)0222.


European single market for electronic communications ***II
PDF 245kWORD 61k
European Parliament legislative resolution of 27 October 2015 on the Council position at first reading with a view to the adoption of a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down measures concerning open internet access and amending Directive 2002/22/EC on universal service and users’ rights relating to electronic communications networks and services and Regulation (EU) No 531/2012 on roaming on public mobile communications networks within the Union (10788/2/2015 – C8-0294/2015 – 2013/0309(COD))
P8_TA(2015)0367A8-0300/2015

(Ordinary legislative procedure: second reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Council position at first reading (10788/2/2015 – C8‑0294/2015),

–  having regard to the reasoned opinions submitted, within the framework of Protocol No 2 on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality, by the Irish Houses of the Oireachtas, the Maltese Parliament, the Austrian Federal Council and the Swedish Parliament, asserting that the draft legislative act does not comply with the principle of subsidiarity,

–  having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 21 January 2014(1),

–  having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions of 31 January 2014(2),

–  having regard to its position at first reading(3) on the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2013)0627),

–  having regard to Article 294(7) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to Rule 76 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the recommendation for second reading of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (A8-0300/2015),

1.  Approves the Council position at first reading;

2.  Notes that the act is adopted in accordance with the Council position;

3.  Instructs its President to sign the act with the President of the Council, in accordance with Article 297(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;

4.  Instructs its Secretary-General to sign the act, once it has been verified that all the procedures have been duly completed, and, in agreement with the Secretary-General of the Council, to arrange for its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union;

5.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

(1) OJ C 177, 11.6.2014, p. 64.
(2) OJ C 126, 26.4.2014, p. 53.
(3) Texts adopted of 3.4.2014, P7_TA(2014)0281.


Trade in certain goods which could be used for capital punishment, torture or other treatment or punishment ***I
PDF 460kWORD 187k
Amendments adopted by the European Parliament on 27 October 2015 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Regulation (EC) No 1236/2005 concerning trade in certain goods which could be used for capital punishment, torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (COM(2014)0001 – C7-0014/2014 – 2014/0005(COD))(1)
P8_TA(2015)0368A8-0267/2015

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

Text proposed by the Commission   Amendment
Amendment 1
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
(8)  Granting a global authorisation would also be appropriate where a manufacturer needs to export medicinal products controlled by Regulation (EC) No 1236/2005 to a distributor in a country that has not abolished capital punishment, provided the exporter and the distributor have concluded a legally binding agreement requiring the distributor to apply an appropriate set of measures ensuring that the medicinal products will not be used for capital punishment.
(8)  Granting a global authorisation would also be appropriate where a manufacturer needs to export medicinal products controlled by Regulation (EC) No 1236/2005 to a distributor in a country that has not abolished capital punishment, provided the exporter and the distributor have concluded a legally binding agreement requiring the distributor to apply an appropriate set of measures ensuring that the medicinal products will not be used for capital punishment, for torture or for other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
Amendment 2
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
(12)  It is necessary to prohibit brokers in the Union from providing brokering services in relation to goods whose export and import are prohibited as such goods have no practical use other than for capital punishment, torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Prohibiting the provision of such services serves the purpose of protecting public morals.
(12)  It is necessary to prohibit brokers in the Union from providing brokering services in relation to goods whose export and import are prohibited as such goods have no practical use other than for capital punishment, torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Prohibiting the provision of such services serves the purpose of protecting public morals and respecting the principles of human dignity which underpin European values, as embodied in the Treaty on European Union and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.
Amendment 3
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19 a (new)
(19a)  A targeted end-use clause should be introduced in order for Member States to suspend or halt the transfer of security-related items not listed in Annexes II and III that clearly have no practical use other than for the purposes of capital punishment, torture or other cruel, degrading or inhuman treatment or punishment, or where there are reasonable grounds to believe that the transfer of those items would lead to the facilitation or the commission of capital punishment, torture or other cruel, degrading or inhuman treatment or punishment. Powers granted under the targeted end-use clause should not extend to medical products that could be used for the purpose of capital punishment,
Amendment 4
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 2 – point a a (new)
Regulation (EC) No 1236/2005
Article 2 – point f
(aa)  Point (f) is replaced by the following:
(f)  ‘technical assistance’ means any technical support related to repairs, development, manufacture, testing, maintenance, assembly or any other technical service, and may take forms such as instruction, advice, training, transmission of working knowledge or skills or consulting services. Technical assistance includes verbal forms of assistance and assistance provided by electronic means;
"(f) 'technical assistance' means any technical support related to repairs, development, manufacture, testing, maintenance, assembly, usage, practices or any other technical service, and may take forms such as instruction, advice, training, transmission of working knowledge or skills or consulting services. Technical assistance includes verbal forms of assistance and assistance provided by electronic means;"
Amendment 5
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 2 – point c
Regulation (EC) No 1236/2005
Article 2 – point k – subparagraph 2
For the purposes of this Regulation the sole provision of ancillary services is excluded from this definition. Ancillary services are transportation, financial services, insurance or re-insurance, or general advertising or promotion;
For the purposes of this Regulation the provision of ancillary services is included in this definition. Ancillary services are transportation, financial services, insurance or re-insurance, or general advertising or promotion, including via internet;
Amendment 6
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 2 – point c
Regulation (EC) No 1236/2005
Article 2 – point l
(l)  'broker' means any natural or legal person or partnership resident or established in a Member State of the Union that carries out services defined under point (k) from the Union into the territory of a third country;
(l)  'broker' means any natural or legal person or partnership resident or established in, or a national of, a Member State of the Union, or a subsidiary of a legal person or partnership, that carries out services defined under point (k);
Amendment 7
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 2 – point c
Regulation (EC) No 1236/2005
Article 2 – point m
(m)  ”supplier of technical assistance' means any natural or legal person or partnership resident or established in a Member State of the Union that supplies technical assistance defined under point (f) from the Union into the territory of a third country;
(m)  ”supplier of technical assistance' means any natural or legal person or partnership resident or established in a Member State of the Union that supplies technical assistance defined under point (f);
Amendment 8
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 2 – point c
Regulation (EC) No 1236/2005
Article 2 – point n
(n)  ‘exporter’ means any natural or legal person or partnership on whose behalf an export declaration is made, that is to say the person who, at the time when the declaration is accepted, holds a contract with the consignee in the third country concerned and has the necessary power for determining the sending of the goods out of the customs territory of the Union. If no export contract has been concluded or if the holder of the contract does not act on its own behalf, the exporter means the person who has the necessary power for determining the sending of the item out of the customs territory of the Union. Where the benefit of a right to dispose of the goods belongs to a person established outside the Union pursuant to the contract on which the export is based, the exporter shall be considered to be the contracting party established in the Union;
(n)  ‘exporter’ means any natural or legal person or partnership on whose behalf an export declaration is made, that is to say the person who, at the time when the declaration is accepted, holds a contract with the consignee in the third country concerned and has the necessary power for determining the sending of the goods out of the customs territory of the Union. If no export contract has been concluded or if the holder of the contract does not act on its own behalf, the exporter means the person who has the necessary power for determining the sending of the item out of the customs territory of the Union. Where the benefit of a right to dispose of the goods belongs to a person established outside the Union pursuant to the contract on which the export is based, the exporter shall be considered to be the contracting party resident or established in the Union;
Amendment 9
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 2 – point c
Regulation (EC) No 1236/2005
Article 2 – point ra (new)
(ra)  'transit' means a transport of non-Union goods, listed in Annexes, entering and passing through the customs territory of the Union with a destination outside the Union.
Amendment 10
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 3 a (new)
Regulation (EC) No 1236/2005
Article 4 b (new)
(3a)  The following article is inserted:
'Article 4b
Transit prohibition
1.  Any transit of goods listed in Annex II shall be prohibited, irrespective of the origin of such goods.
2.  By way of derogation from paragraph 1, the competent authority may authorise a transit of goods listed in Annex II, if it is demonstrated that, in the country to which the goods will be exported, such goods will be used for the exclusive purpose of public display in a museum in view of their historic significance.'
Amendment 11
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 3 b (new)
Regulation (EC) No 1236/2005
Article 4 c (new)
(3b)  The following article is inserted:
‘Article 4c
Prohibition of commercial marketing and promotion
Online and offline commercial marketing and promotion activities within the Union, by any natural or legal person or partnership, for the purpose of the transfer of goods listed in Annex II shall be prohibited.’
Amendment 12
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 5
Regulation (EC) No 1236/2005
Article 6 – paragraph 1
1.  Decisions on applications for authorisations in respect of the export of goods listed in Annex IIIa shall be taken by the competent authorities on a case by case basis, taking into account all relevant considerations, including in particular whether an application in respect of an essentially identical export has been dismissed by another Member State in the preceding three years and considerations about intended end-use and the risk of diversion.
1.  Decisions on applications for authorisations in respect of the export of goods listed in Annexes III and IIIa shall be taken by the competent authorities on a case by case basis, taking into account all relevant considerations, including in particular whether an application in respect of an essentially identical export has been dismissed by another Member State in the preceding three years and considerations about intended end-use and the risk of diversion.
Amendment 13
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 5 a (new)
Regulation (EC) No 1236/2005
Article 6 – paragraph 1a (new)
(5a)  In Article 6, the following paragraph is inserted:
1a.  The competent authority, taking into account all relevant evidence, shall , along with Member States, ensure that all companies marketing security equipment and those organising trade fairs and other events where such equipment is marketed, are made aware of the fact that such equipment could be used for torture and other cruel, degrading or inhuman treatment or punishment and that marketing such equipment may become prohibited and authorisations relating to it may be withdrawn.
Amendment 14
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 5 b (new)
Regulation (EC) No 1236/2005
Article 6 – paragraph 2
(5b)  In Article 6, paragraph 2 is replaced by the following:
2.  The competent authority shall not grant any authorisation when there are reasonable grounds to believe that goods listed in Annex III might be used for torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, including judicial corporal punishment, by a law enforcement authority or any natural or legal person in a third country.
2.  The competent authority shall not grant any authorisation when there are reasonable grounds to believe that goods listed in Annex III and Annex IIIa might be used for torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, including judicial corporal punishment, by a law enforcement authority or any natural or legal person in a third country.
The competent authority shall take into account:
The competent authority shall take into account:
—  available international court judgements,
–  available international court judgements,
—  findings of the competent bodies of the UN, the Council of Europe and the EU, and reports of the Council of Europe's European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment and Punishment and of the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
–  findings of the competent bodies of the UN, the Council of Europe and the EU, and reports of the Council of Europe's European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment and Punishment and of the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
Other relevant information, including available national court judgements, reports or other information prepared by civil society organisations and information on restrictions on exports of goods listed in Annexes II and III applied by the country of destination, may be taken into account.
Other relevant information, including available national court judgements, reports or other information prepared by civil society organisations and information on restrictions on exports of goods listed in Annexes II, III and IIIa applied by the country of destination, may be taken into account.
Amendment 15
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 5 c (new)
Regulation (EC) No 1236/2005
Article 6 a (new)
(5c)  The following article is inserted:
'Article 6a
Transit authorisation requirement
1.  An authorisation shall be required for the transit of goods listed in Annex III or IIIa if the economic operator has been informed by the competent authorities of the Member State where the transit occurs that the items in question are or may be intended, in their entirety or in part, for capital punishment, torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
2.  If an economic operator is aware that the goods in transit listed in Annex III or IIIa are intended, in their entirety or in part, for the purpose of capital punishment, torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, it shall notify the competent authorities, which shall decide whether or not it is expedient to make the transit concerned subject to authorisation.
3.  A Member State which imposes an authorisation requirement, pursuant toparagraphs 1 and 2, on the transit of an item not listed in Annex III or IIIa, shall inform the other Member States and the Commission.'
Amendment 16
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 6
Regulation (EC) No 1236/2005
Article 7a – paragraph 1
1.  A broker shall be prohibited from providing to any person, entity or body in a third country brokering services in relation to goods listed in Annex III, irrespective of the origin of such goods, if the broker knows or has grounds for suspecting that any part of a shipment of such goods is or may be intended to be used for torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment in a country that does not belong to the customs territory of the Union.
1.  A broker shall be prohibited from providing to any person, entity or body in a third country brokering services in relation to goods listed in Annexes III and IIIa, irrespective of the origin of such goods, if the broker knows or has grounds for suspecting that any part of a shipment of such goods is or may be intended to be used for torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment in a country that does not belong to the customs territory of the Union.
Amendment 17
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 6
Regulation (EC) No 1236/2005
Article 7a – paragraph 2
2.  A supplier of technical assistance shall be prohibited from supplying to any person, entity or body in a third country technical assistance in relation to goods listed in Annex III, irrespective of the origin of such goods, if the supplier of such assistance knows or has grounds for suspecting that some or all of the relevant goods are or may be intended to be used for torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment in a country that does not belong to the customs territory of the Union.
2.  A supplier of technical assistance shall be prohibited from supplying to any person, entity or body in a third country technical assistance in relation to goods listed in Annexes III and IIIa, irrespective of the origin of such goods, if the supplier of such assistance knows or has grounds for suspecting that some or all of the relevant goods are or may be intended to be used for torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment in a country that does not belong to the customs territory of the Union. A supplier of technical assistance shall also be prohibited from giving instruction, advice, training or transmitting working knowledge or skills that could aid the commission of capital punishment, torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
Amendment 18
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 6 a (new)
Regulation (EC) No 1236/2005
Article 7 aa (new)
6a.  The following article is inserted:
‘Article 7aa
Exchange of best practices
Member States are encouraged to promote best practice between suppliers of technical assistance to ensure that this assistance contributes positively to combating torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.’
Amendment 19
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 7
Regulation (EC) No 1236/2005
Article 7c – paragraph 3 – point 3.3 (new)
'3.3. The Commission, in cooperation with competent authorities of the Member States and third countries where appropriate, shall adopt best practice guidelines on the verification of end-use.'
Amendment 20
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 7 a (new)
Regulation (EC) No 1236/2005
Chapter III b (new) – Article 7e (new)
(7a)  The following Chapter is inserted:
'Chapter III b
Non-listed goods
Article 7e
Catch-all clause
1.  An authorisation shall be required for the export of items not listed in the Annexes to this Regulation if the exporter has been informed by the competent authorities of the Member State in which it is established that the items in question are or may be intended, in their entirety or in part, for the purpose of capital punishment or for the purpose of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
2.  If an exporter is aware that items which it proposes to export, not listed in Annex II, III or IIIa, are intended, in their entirety or in part, for the purpose of capital punishment or for the purpose of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, it shall notify the authorities of the Member State in which it is established, which shall decide whether or not it is expedient to make the export concerned subject to authorisation.
3.  A Member State which imposes an authorisation requirement, pursuant to paragraphs 1 and 2, on the export of item not listed in Annex II, III or IIIa, shall immediately inform the other Member States and the Commission thereof and indicate precise reasons for the imposition of an authorisation requirement. Member States shall also immediately inform the Commission of any modifications made to measures adopted under paragraphs 1 and 2.
4.  The other Member States shall give all due consideration to this information and shall inform their customs administration and other relevant national authorities.
5.  When imperative grounds of urgency so require, the Commission shall adopt delegated acts adding items referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 to Annex II, Annex III or Annex IIIa. The procedure provided for in Article 15b shall apply to delegated acts adopted pursuant to this paragraph.
6.  Medicinal products, as defined in Directive 2001/83/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council1a, shall be excluded from the scope of this Article.
_________________________
1a.Directive 2001/83/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 November 2001 on the Community code relating to medicinal products for human use (OJ L 311, 28.11.2001, p. 67).’
Amendment 21
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 8
Regulation (EC) No 1236/2005
Article 8 – paragraph 6
6.  By way of derogation from paragraph 5, where medicinal products are to be exported by a manufacturer to a distributor, the manufacturer shall provide information on the arrangements made and the measures taken to prevent these products from being used for capital punishment, on the country of destination and, if it is available, information on the end-use and the end-users of the goods.
6.  By way of derogation from paragraph 5, where medicinal products are to be exported by a manufacturer to a distributor, the manufacturer shall provide information on the arrangements made and the measures taken to prevent these products from being used for capital punishment, on the country of destination and, if it is available, information on the end-use and the end-users of the goods. This information shall be accessible, upon request, to a relevant independent oversight body such as National Preventive Mechanism established under the Optional Protocol to the UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, or a national human rights institution in a Member State.
Amendment 22
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 8 a (new)
Regulation (EC) No 1236/2005
Article 10 – paragraph 2
(8a)  In Article 10, paragraph 2 is replaced by the following:
2.  If a customs declaration is made concerning goods listed in Annexes II or III, and it is confirmed that no authorisation has been granted pursuant to this Regulation for the intended export or import, the customs authorities shall detain the goods declared and draw attention to the possibility to apply for an authorisation pursuant to this Regulation. If no application for an authorisation is made within six months of time after the detention, or if the competent authority dismisses such an application, the customs authorities shall dispose of the detained goods in accordance with applicable national legislation.
‘2. If a customs declaration is made concerning goods listed in Annex II, III, or IIIa and it is confirmed that no authorisation has been granted pursuant to this Regulation for the intended export or import, the customs authorities shall detain the goods declared and draw attention to the possibility to apply for an authorisation pursuant to this Regulation. If no application for an authorisation is made within six months of time after the detention, or if the competent authority dismisses such an application, the customs authorities shall dispose of the detained goods in accordance with applicable national legislation.’
Amendment 23
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 12
Regulation (EC) No 1236/2005
Article 12a – paragraph 2
2.  The Commission may, within three months, ask the requesting Member State to provide supplementary information, if it considers that the request fails to address one or more relevant points or that additional information on one or more relevant points is necessary. It shall communicate the points on which supplementary information needs to be provided.
2.  Upon receipt of a request referred to in paragraph 1, the Commission shall immediately inform all Member States and circulate the information received from the requesting Member State. Pending a final decision by the Commission, Member States may immediately suspend transfers of the goods contained in the request. The Commission may, within three months, ask the requesting Member State to provide supplementary information, if it considers that the request fails to address one or more relevant points or that additional information on one or more relevant points is necessary. It shall communicate the points on which supplementary information needs to be provided.
Amendment 24
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 12
Regulation (EC) No 1236/2005
Article 12 a – paragraph 3
3.  If it considers that there is no need to ask for supplementary information or, where applicable, upon receipt of the supplementary information it has requested, the Commission shall within six months commence the procedure for the adoption of the requested amendment or inform the requesting Member States of the reasons for not doing so.
3.  If it considers that there is no need to ask for supplementary information or, where applicable, upon receipt of the supplementary information it has requested, the Commission shall within three months commence the procedure for the adoption of the requested amendment or inform the requesting Member States of the reasons for not doing so.
Amendment 25
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 12 a (new)
Regulation (EC) No 1236/2005
Article 13 – paragraph 1
(12a)  In Article 13, paragraph 1 is replaced by the following:
1.  Without prejudice to Article 11, the Commission and the Member States shall, upon request, inform each other of the measures taken under this Regulation and supply each other with any relevant information at their disposal in connection with this Regulation, in particular information on authorisations granted and refused.
‘1. Without prejudice to Article 11, each Member State shall inform the Commission of measures taken under this Regulation and supply any relevant information at their disposal in connection with this Regulation, in particular information on authorisations granted and refused, as well as in relation to measures taken under the targeted end-use clause. The Commission shall forward the information to other Member States.’
Amendment 26
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 12 b (new)
Regulation (EC) No 1236/2005
Article 13 – paragraph 3a (new)
(12b)  In Article 13, the following paragraph is inserted:
‘3a. The Commission shall make annual report compiled of annual activity reports referred to in paragraph 3. The report shall be made publicly available.’
Amendment 27
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 15
Regulation (EC) No 1236/2005
Article 15 a
Article 15a
deleted
Exercise of delegation
1.  The power to adopt delegated acts is conferred on the Commission subject to the conditions laid down in this Article.
2.  The delegation of power referred to in Article 12 shall be conferred on the Commission for a period of five years from …. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five-year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
3.  The delegation of power referred to in Article 12 may be revoked at any time by the European Parliament or by the Council. A decision to revoke shall put an end to the delegation of the power specified in that decision. It shall take effect on the day following the publication of the decision in the Official Journal of the European Union or at a later date specified therein. It shall not affect the validity of any delegated acts already in force.
4.  As soon as it adopts a delegated act, the Commission shall notify it simultaneously to the European Parliament and to the Council.
5.  A delegated act adopted pursuant to Article 12 shall enter into force only if no objection has been expressed either by the European Parliament or by the Council within a period of two months from the notification of that act to the European Parliament and to the Council or if, before expiry of that period, the European Parliament and the Council have both informed the Commission that they will not object. That period shall be extended by two months at the initiative of the European Parliament or of the Council.
Amendment 28
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 15 a (new)
Regulation (EC) No 1236/2005
Article 15c (new)
(15a)  The following article is inserted;
'Article 15c
Anti-Torture Coordination Group
1.  An Anti-Torture Coordination Group chaired by a representative of the Commission shall be set up. Each Member State shall appoint a representative to this Group. It shall examine any question concerning the application of this Regulation which may be raised either by the chair or by a representative of a Member State.
2.  The Coordination Group shall in cooperation with the Commission take appropriate measures to establish direct cooperation and exchange of information between competent authorities, in particular to eliminate the risk of possible disparities in the application of export controls to goods which could be used for capital punishment, torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment and which may lead to a deflection of trade.
3.  The Chair of the Anti-Torture Coordination Group shall, whenever it considers it to be necessary, consult exporters, brokers and other relevant stakeholders, including from all parts of civil society with relevant expertise in matters covered by this Regulation.
4.  The Commission shall submit an annual report in writing to the European Parliament on the activities, examinations and consultations of the Anti-Torture Coordination Group, which shall be subject to Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council .'
Amendment 29
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 15 b (new)
Regulation (EC) No 1236/2005
Article 15d (new)
(15b)  The following article is inserted:
'Article 15d
1.  By...*, and every three years thereafter, the Commission shall review the implementation of this Regulation and present a comprehensive implementation and impact assessment report to the European Parliament and to the Council, which may include proposals for its amendment. Member States shall provide to the Commission all appropriate information for the preparation of the report.
2.  Special sections of the report shall deal with:
(a)  the Anti-Torture Coordination Group and its activities, examinations and consultations. Information that the Commission provides on the Coordination Group’s examinations and consultations shall be treated as confidential pursuant to Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001. Information shall, in any case, be considered to be confidential if its disclosure is likely to have a significantly adverse effect upon the supplier or the source of such information;
(b)  information on national licensing decisions by Member States, reporting to the Commission by Member States, notification and consultation mechanisms among Member States, promulgation and enforcement.
(c)  comprehensive information on the nature and effect of measures taken by the Member States pursuant to Article 17, including operation of the penalty regimes introduced by Member States, and assessment whether such regimes are effective, proportionate and dissuasive.
______________
* OJ: please insert date: three years after the entry into force of this Regulation.’
Amendment 30
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 15 c (new)
Regulation (EC) No 1236/2005
Article 17 – paragraph 2.a (new)
(15c)  In Article 17, the following paragraph is added:
‘2.a The Commission shall assess whether rules on penalties laid down by Member States are of a similar nature and effect.’
Amendment 31
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 15 – point (-a) (new)
Regulation (EC) No 1236/2005
Annex III – column 2 – points 1 and 2
(-a) In Annex III, in the second column, points 1 and 2 are replaced by the following:
1.  Goods designed for restraining human beings, as follows:
‘1. Goods designed for restraining human beings, as follows:
1.1.  Shackles and gang chains
1.1.  Shackles and gang chains
Notes:
Notes:
1.  Shackles are restraints consisting of two cuffs or rings fitted with a locking mechanism, with a connecting chain or bar
1.  Shackles are restraints consisting of two cuffs or rings fitted with a locking mechanism, with a connecting chain or bar
2.  This item does not control the leg restraints and gang chains prohibited by item 2.3 of Annex II
2.  This item does not control the leg restraints and gang chains prohibited by item 2.3 of Annex II
3.  This item does not control ‘ordinary handcuffs’. Ordinary handcuffs are handcuffs which meet all the following conditions:
3.  This item does not control ‘ordinary handcuffs’. Ordinary handcuffs are handcuffs which meet all the following conditions:
—  their overall dimension including chain, measured from the outer edge of one cuff to the outer edge of the other cuff, is between 150 and 280 mm when both cuffs are locked;
—  their overall dimension including chain, measured from the outer edge of one cuff to the outer edge of the other cuff, is between 150 and 280 mm when both cuffs are locked;
—  the inside circumference of each cuff is a maximum of 165 mm when the ratchet is engaged at the last notch entering the locking mechanism;
—  the inside circumference of each cuff is a maximum of 165 mm when the ratchet is engaged at the last notch entering the locking mechanism;
—  the inside circumference of each cuff is a minimum of 200 mm when the ratchet is engaged at the first notch entering the locking mechanism; and
—  the inside circumference of each cuff is a minimum of 200 mm when the ratchet is engaged at the first notch entering the locking mechanism; and
—  the cuffs have not been modified to cause physical pain or suffering.
—  the cuffs have not been modified to cause physical pain or suffering.
1.2.  Individual cuffs or rings fitted with a locking mechanism, having an inside circumference exceeding 165 mm when the ratchet is engaged at the last notch entering the locking mechanism
1.2.  Individual cuffs or rings fitted with a locking mechanism, having an inside circumference exceeding 165 mm when the ratchet is engaged at the last notch entering the locking mechanism
Note:
Note:
This item includes neck restraints and other individual cuffs or rings fitted with a locking mechanism, which are linked to ordinary handcuffs by means of a chain
This item includes neck restraints and other individual cuffs or rings fitted with a locking mechanism, which are linked to ordinary handcuffs by means of a chain
1.3.  Spit hoods: hoods, including hoods made of netting, comprising a cover of the mouth which prevents spitting
Note: This item includes spit hoods which are linked to ordinary handcuffs by means of a chain
1.3.  Spit hoods: hoods, including hoods made of netting, comprising a cover of the mouth which prevents spitting
Note: This item includes spit hoods which are linked to ordinary handcuffs by means of a chain
1.3.a Chairs, boards and beds fitted with straps
2.  Weapons and devices designed for the purpose of riot control or self-protection, as follows:
2.  Weapons and devices designed for the purpose of riot control or self-protection, as follows:
2.1.  Portable electric discharge weapons that can target only one individual each time an electric shock is administered, including but not limited to electric shock batons, electric shock shields, stun guns and electric shock dart guns
2.1.  Portable electric discharge weapons that can target only one individual each time an electric shock is administered, including but not limited to electric shock batons, electric shock shields, stun guns and electric shock dart guns
Notes:
Notes:
1.  This item does not control electric shock belts and other devices falling within item 2.1 of Annex II
1.  This item does not control electric shock belts and other devices falling within item 2.1 of Annex II
2.  This item does not control individual electronic shock devices when accompanying their user for the user's own personal protection
2.  This item does not control individual electronic shock devices when accompanying their user for the user's own personal protection
2.2.  Kits containing all essential components for assembly of portable electric discharge weapons controlled by item 2.1
2.2.  Kits containing all essential components for assembly of portable electric discharge weapons controlled by item 2.1
Note:
Note:
The following goods are considered to be essential components:
The following goods are considered to be essential components:
—  the unit producing an electric shock,
—  the unit producing an electric shock,
—  the switch, whether or not on a remote control, and
—  the switch, whether or not on a remote control, and
—  the electrodes or, where applicable, the wires through which the electrical shock is to be administered
—  the electrodes or, where applicable, the wires through which the electrical shock is to be administered
2.3.  Fixed or mountable electric discharge weapons that cover a wide area and can target multiple individuals with electrical shocks
2.3.  Fixed or mountable electric discharge weapons that cover a wide area and can target multiple individuals with electrical shocks
2.3.a Acoustic devices for the purpose of crowd/riot control
2.3.b Millimetre wave weapons’
Amendment 32
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2
Point 6 of Article 1 and, to the extent that it inserts Article 7d, point 7 of Article 1 shall apply as from 1 January 2015.
Point 6 of Article 1 and, to the extent that it inserts Article 7d, point 7 of Article 1 shall apply as from 1 February 2016.
Amendment 33
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – Part 2
Regulation (EC) No 1236/2005
Annex IIIb
Benin
deleted
Amendment 34
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – Part 2
Regulation (EC) No 1236/2005
Annex IIIb
Gabon
Amendment 35
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – Part 2
Regulation (EC) No 1236/2005
Annex IIIb
Liberia
deleted
Amendment 36
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – Part 2
Regulation (EC) No 1236/2005
Annex IIIb
Madagascar
deleted
Amendment 37
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – Part 2
Regulation (EC) No 1236/2005
Annex IIIb
Mongolia
deleted
Amendment 38
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – Part 2
Regulation (EC) No 1236/2005
Annex IIIb
Sao Tome and Principe
deleted

(1) The matter was referred back to the committee responsible for reconsideration pursuant to Rule 61(2), second subparagraph (A8-0267/2015)


Mandatory automatic exchange of information in the field of taxation *
PDF 462kWORD 195k
European Parliament legislative resolution of 27 October 2015 on the proposal for a Council directive amending Directive 2011/16/EU as regards mandatory automatic exchange of information in the field of taxation (COM(2015)0135 – C8-0085/2015 – 2015/0068(CNS))
P8_TA(2015)0369A8-0306/2015

(Special legislative procedure – consultation)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to the Council (COM(2015)0135),

–  having regard to Article 115 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C8‑0085/2015),

–  having regard to Rule 59 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs and the opinion of the Committee on Legal Affairs (A8-0306/2015),

1.  Approves the Commission proposal as amended;

2.  Calls on the Commission to alter its proposal accordingly, in accordance with Article 293(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;

3.  Calls on the Council to notify Parliament if it intends to depart from the text approved by Parliament;

4.  Asks the Council to consult Parliament again if it intends to substantially amend the Commission proposal;

5.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

Text proposed by the Commission   Amendment
Amendment 1
Proposal for a directive
Citation 2 a (new)
Having regard to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, in particular the respect for the right to the protection of personal data and the freedom to conduct a business,
Amendment 2
Proposal for a directive
Recital 1
(1)  The challenge posed by cross-border tax avoidance, aggressive tax planning and harmful tax competition has increased considerably and has become a major focus of concern within the Union and at global level. Tax base erosion is considerably reducing national tax revenues, which hinders Member States in applying growth-friendly tax policies. In particular, rulings concerning tax-driven structures lead to a low level of taxation of artificially high amounts of income in the country giving the advance ruling and may leave artificially low amounts of income to be taxed in any other countries involved. An increase in transparency is therefore urgently required. The tools and mechanisms established by Council Directive 2011/16/EU13 need to be enhanced in order to achieve this.
(1)  The challenge posed by cross-border tax avoidance, aggressive tax planning and harmful tax competition has increased considerably and has become a major focus of concern within the Union and at global level. Tax base erosion is considerably reducing national tax revenues, which hinders Member States in applying growth-friendly tax policies, causes distortions of competition to the detriment of undertakings – particularly SMEs – which pay the correct amounts of tax and shifts taxation towards less mobile factors such as labour and consumption. However, in specific cases, rulings concerning tax-driven structures have led to a low level of taxation of artificially high amounts of income in the country giving the advance ruling and have left artificially low amounts of income to be taxed in any other countries involved, thereby reducing the tax base in those Member States. An increase in targeted transparency and exchange of information is therefore urgently required at least in accordance with OECD standards. The tools and mechanisms established by Council Directive 2011/16/EU13 need to be enhanced in order to achieve this.
__________________
__________________
13 Council Directive 2011/16/EU of 15 February 2011 on administrative cooperation in the field of taxation and repealing Directive 77/799/EEC (OJ L 64, 11.3.2011, p. 1).
13 Council Directive 2011/16/EU of 15 February 2011 on administrative cooperation in the field of taxation and repealing Directive 77/799/EEC (OJ L 64, 11.3.2011, p. 1).
Amendment 3
Proposal for a directive
Recital 1 a (new)
(1a)  Following the LuxLeaks scandal and by means of this report, the European Parliament expresses its strong determination not to tolerate tax fraud and tax avoidance as well as to advocate for a fair distribution of the tax burden between citizens and companies.
Amendment 4
Proposal for a directive
Recital 2
(2)  The European Council, in its conclusions of 18 December 2014, underlined the urgent need to advance efforts in the fight against tax avoidance and aggressive tax planning, both at the global and Union levels. Stressing the importance of transparency, the European Council welcomed the Commission’s intention to submit a proposal on the automatic exchange of information on tax rulings in the Union.
(2)  The European Council, in its conclusions of 18 December 2014, underlined the urgent need to advance efforts in the fight against tax avoidance and aggressive tax planning, both at the global and European levels. Stressing the importance of transparency and corresponding information exchange, the European Council welcomed the Commission’s intention to submit a proposal on the automatic exchange of information on tax rulings in the Union.
Amendment 5
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
(4)  However, the efficient spontaneous exchange of information in respect of advance cross-border rulings and advance pricing arrangements is hindered by several important practical difficulties such as the discretion permitted to the issuing Member State to decide which other Member States should be informed.
(4)  However, the efficient spontaneous exchange of information in respect of advance cross-border rulings and advance pricing arrangements is hindered by several important practical difficulties such as the discretion permitted to the issuing Member State to decide which other Member States should be informed and the weak monitoring system which makes it difficult for the Commission to identify any violation of the requirement to exchange information.
Amendment 6
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4 a (new)
(4a)  An efficient exchange and processing of tax information and the resulting peer pressure would have a strong deterrent effect against the introduction of harmful tax practices and would allow Member States and the Commission to have all the relevant information at their disposal in order to take action against such practices.
Amendment 7
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
(5)  The possibility that the provision of information may be refused where it would lead to the disclosure of a commercial, industrial or professional secret or of a commercial process, or of information whose disclosure would be contrary to public policy should not apply to provisions of mandatory automatic exchange of information on advance cross-border rulings and advance pricing arrangements in order not to reduce the effectiveness of these exchanges. The limited nature of the information that is required to be shared with all Member States should ensure sufficient protection of those commercial interests.
(5)  The possibility that the provision of information may be refused where it would lead to the disclosure of a commercial, industrial or professional secret or of a commercial process, or of information whose disclosure would be contrary to public policy must not apply to provisions of mandatory automatic exchange of information on advance rulings and advance pricing arrangements in order not to reduce the effectiveness of these exchanges. The limited nature of the information that is required to be shared with all Member States ensures sufficient protection of those commercial interests.
Amendment 8
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5 a (new)
(5a)  Advance tax rulings and price arrangements can have a cross-border dimension even though they relate to purely national transactions. That is particularly true of cascade transactions, where the advance tax ruling or price arrangement concerns the first national transactions, without taking into consideration the next (cross-border) transactions.
Amendment 9
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5 b (new)
(5b)  In order to avoid arbitrary distinctions between tax arrangements that arise in the context of different national administrative practices, the definitions of advance rulings and advance pricing arrangements should cover tax arrangements regardless of the formal or informal manner in which they were issued, and irrespective of their binding or non-binding nature.
Amendment 10
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5 c (new)
(5c)  Advance tax rulings facilitate the consistent and transparent application of the law.
Amendment 11
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5 d (new)
(5d)  Transparent tax rules provide legal certainty for taxpayers and businesses and generate investment.
Amendment 12
Proposal for a directive
Recital 6
(6)  In order to reap the benefits of the mandatory automatic exchange of advance cross-border rulings and advance pricing arrangements, the information should be communicated promptly after they are issued and therefore regular intervals for the communication of the information should be established.
(6)  In order to reap the benefits of the mandatory automatic exchange of advance rulings and advance pricing arrangements, the information concerning them should be communicated immediately after they are issued. Efficient and effective penalties can be developed in cases of non-compliance.
Amendment 13
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7
(7)  The mandatory automatic exchange of advance cross-border rulings and advance pricing arrangements should in each case include communication of a defined set of basic information to all Member States. The Commission should adopt any measures necessary to standardise the communication of such information under the procedure laid down in Directive 2011/16/EC for establishing a standard form to be used for the exchange of information. That procedure should also be used in the adoption of any necessary measures and practical arrangements for the implementation of the information exchange.
(7)  The mandatory automatic exchange of advance rulings and advance pricing arrangements should in each case include communication of a defined set of basic information to all Member States. The Commission should adopt any measures necessary to standardise the communication of such information under the procedure laid down in Directive 2011/16/EC for establishing a standard form to be used for the exchange of information. That procedure should also be used in the adoption of any necessary measures and practical arrangements for the implementation of the information exchange.
Amendment 14
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
(8)  Member States should exchange the basic information to be communicated also with the Commission. This would enable the Commission at any point in time to monitor and evaluate the effective application of the automatic exchange of information on advance cross-border rulings and advance pricing arrangements. Such communication will not discharge a Member State from its obligations to notify any state aid to the Commission.
(8)  Member States should exchange the basic information to be communicated also with the Commission, since the Commission should be able to assess independently if such information is relevant for detecting illegal state aid. This basic information should enable the Commission at any point in time to efficiently monitor and evaluate the effective application of the automatic exchange of information on advance rulings and advance pricing arrangements and to ensure that rulings do not have a negative impact on the internal market. Such communication will not discharge a Member State from its obligations to notify any state aid to the Commission.
Amendment 15
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8 a (new)
(8a)  Before 1 October 2018 Member States should provide the Commission with an ex-post analysis of the effectiveness of this Directive.
Amendment 16
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
(9)  Feedback by the receiving Member State to the Member State sending the information is a necessary element of the operation of an effective system of automatic information exchange. It is therefore appropriate to provide for measures enabling the provision of feedback in cases where the information has been used and where no feedback can be provided under other provisions of Directive 2011/16/EU.
(9)  Feedback by the receiving Member State to the Member State sending the information is a necessary element of the operation of an effective system of automatic information exchange, as it encourages administrative cooperation between Member States. It is therefore appropriate to provide for measures enabling the provision of feedback in cases where the information has been used and where no feedback can be provided under other provisions of Directive 2011/16/EU. That would make it more difficult to circumvent the information for purposes of fraud.
Amendment 17
Proposal for a directive
Recital 10
(10)  A Member State should be able to rely on Article 5 of Directive 2011/16/EU as regards the exchange of information on request to obtain additional information, including the full text of advance cross-border rulings or advance pricing arrangements, from the Member State having issued such rulings or arrangements.
(10)  A Member State should be able to rely on Article 5 of Directive 2011/16/EU as regards the exchange of information on request to obtain additional information, including the full text of advance rulings or advance pricing arrangements, from the Member State having issued such rulings or arrangements and any texts which effect subsequent changes.
Amendment 18
Proposal for a directive
Recital 10 a (new)
(10a)  The expression ‘information that is foreseeably relevant’ as referred to in Article 1(1) of Directive 2011/16/EU should be clarified in order to prevent interpretations whose purpose is tax avoidance.
Amendment 19
Proposal for a directive
Recital 11
(11)  Member States should take all measures necessary to remove any obstacle that might hinder the effective and widest possible mandatory automatic exchange of information on advance cross-border rulings and advance pricing arrangements.
(11)  Member States should take all measures necessary to remove any obstacle that might hinder the effective and widest possible mandatory automatic exchange of information on advance rulings and advance pricing arrangements.
Amendment 20
Proposal for a directive
Recital 12 a (new)
(12a)  In order to enhance transparency for citizens, the Commission should publish a summary of the main tax rulings agreed in the previous year, based on information contained in the secure central directory. That report should include at least a description of the issues addressed in the tax ruling, a description of the criteria used to determine an advance pricing arrangement and identify the Member State(s) most likely to be affected. In doing so, the Commission should comply with the confidentiality provisions laid down in this Directive.
Amendment 21
Proposal for a directive
Recital 12 b (new)
(12b)  It is desirable that the Member States ask their competent authorities to allocate human resources from among their existing staff to gather and analyse such information.
Amendment 22
Proposal for a directive
Recital 12 c (new)
(12c)  By 26 June 2017, a Union-wide register for beneficial ownership should be operational, which will aid in tracking down possible tax avoidance and profit shifting. The creation of a central register for automatic exchange of advance tax rulings or price arrangements between Member States, which would be accessible to tax authorities and responsible administrations in the Member States and the Commission would be significant.
Amendment 23
Proposal for a directive
Recital 15
(15)  The existing provisions regarding confidentiality should be amended to reflect the extension of mandatory automatic exchange of information to advance cross-border rulings and advance pricing arrangements.
(15)  The existing provisions regarding confidentiality should be amended to reflect the extension of mandatory automatic exchange of information to advance rulings and advance pricing arrangements.
Amendment 24
Proposal for a directive
Recital 15 a (new)
(15a)  It is essential that the fundamental principle of the Member States’ sovereignty in tax matters is upheld where direct taxes are concerned and that the current proposal does not jeopardise the subsidiarity principle.
Amendment 25
Proposal for a directive
Recital 16
(16)  This Directive respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised in particular by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. In particular, this Directive seeks to ensure full respect for the right to the protection of personal data and the freedom to conduct a business.
(16)  This Directive respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised in particular by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. In particular, this Directive seeks to ensure full respect for the right to the protection of personal data and the freedom to conduct a business. The personal data should be processed for specific, explicit and legitimate purposes and only if adequate, relevant and not excessive in relation to the purposes. Any restriction of those rights should only be imposed provided that the conditions set out in the Charter of Fundamental Rights are complied with. Subject to the principle of proportionality, restrictions may be imposed provided that they comply with the necessary and true objectives of general interest recognised by the law, or satisfy the need to protect the rights and liberties of others.
Amendment 26
Proposal for a directive
Recital 17
(17)  Since the objective of this Directive, namely the efficient administrative cooperation between Member States under conditions compatible with the proper functioning of the Internal Market, cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States but can rather, by reason of the uniformity and effectiveness required, be better achieved at Union level, the Union may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Directive does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve that objective.
(17)  Since the objective of this Directive, namely the efficient administrative cooperation between Member States under conditions compatible with the proper functioning of the Internal Market, cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States but can rather, by reason of the uniformity and effectiveness required, be better achieved at European level, the Union may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Directive does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve that objective.
Amendment 27
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 1 – point a
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 3 – point 9 – point a
(a)  for the purposes of Article 8(1) and Article 8a, the systematic communication of predefined information to another Member State, without prior request, at pre-established regular intervals. For the purposes of Article 8(1), reference to available information relates to information in the tax files of the Member State communicating the information, which is retrievable in accordance with the procedures for gathering and processing information in that Member State.
(a)  for the purposes of Article 8(1) and Article 8a, the systematic communication of predefined information to another Member State, without prior request, which, in respect of Article 8(1), takes place at pre-established regular intervals. For the purposes of Article 8(1), reference to available information relates to information in the tax files of the Member State communicating the information, which is retrievable in accordance with the procedures for gathering and processing information in that Member State.
Amendment 28
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 3 – point 14 – introductory part
14.  'advance cross-border ruling' means any agreement, communication, or any other instrument or action with similar effects, including one issued in the context of a tax audit, which:
14.  'advance ruling' means any agreement, communication, or any other instrument or action with similar effects, including one issued in the context of a tax audit and irrespective of its formal, informal, legally binding or non-binding nature, which:
Amendment 29
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 3 – point 14 – point a
(a)  is given by, or on behalf of, the government or the tax authority of a Member State, or any territorial or administrative subdivisions thereof, to any person;
(a)  is given or published by, or on behalf of, the government or the tax authority of a Member State, or any territorial or administrative subdivisions thereof, on which one or more persons can rely;
Amendment 30
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 1 – point b
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 3 – point 14 – point c
(c)  relates to a cross-border transaction or to the question of whether or not activities carried on by a legal person in the other Member State create a permanent establishment, and;
(c)  relates to a transaction or to the question of whether or not activities carried on by a legal person in the other Member State create a permanent establishment, and;
Amendment 31
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 1 – point b
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 3 – point 14 – subparagraph 2
The cross-border transaction may involve, but is not restricted to, the making of investments, the provision of goods, services, finance or the use of tangible or intangible assets and does not have to directly involve the person receiving the advance cross-border ruling;
The transaction may involve, but is not restricted to, the making of investments, the provision of goods, services, finance or the use of tangible or intangible assets and does not have to directly involve the person receiving the advance ruling;
Amendment 32
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 3 – point 15 – subparagraph 1
15.  'advance pricing arrangement' means any agreement, communication or any other instrument or action with similar effects, including one issued in the context of a tax audit, given by, or on behalf of, the government or the tax authority of one or more Member States, including any territorial or administrative subdivision thereof, to any person that determines in advance of cross-border transactions between associated enterprises, an appropriate set of criteria for the determination of the transfer pricing for those transactions or determines the attribution of profits to a permanent establishment.
15.  'advance pricing arrangement' means any agreement, communication or any other instrument or action with similar effects, including one issued in the context of a tax audit, given or published by, or on behalf of, the government or the tax authority of one or more Member States, including any territorial or administrative subdivision thereof, on which one or more persons can rely, that determines in advance of transactions between associated enterprises, an appropriate set of criteria for the determination of the transfer pricing for those transactions or determines the attribution of profits to a permanent establishment.
Amendment 33
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 1 – point b
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 3 – point 16
16.  For the purpose of point 14 'cross-border transaction' means a transaction or series of transactions where:
deleted
(a)  not all the parties to the transaction or series of transactions are resident for tax purposes in the Member State giving the advance cross-border ruling, or;
(b)  any of the parties to the transaction or series of transactions is simultaneously resident for tax purposes in more than one jurisdiction, or;
(c)  one of the parties to the transaction or series of transactions carries on business in another Member State through a permanent establishment and the transaction or series of transactions forms part or the whole of the business of the permanent establishment. A cross-border transaction or series of transactions shall also include arrangements made by a single legal person in respect of business activities in another Member State which that person carries on through a permanent establishment.
For the purpose of point 15 'cross-border transaction' means a transaction or series of transactions involving associated enterprises which are not all resident for tax purposes in the territory of a single Member State.
Amendment 34
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 3
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 8a – paragraph 1
1.  The competent authority of a Member State issuing or amending an advance cross-border ruling or an advance pricing arrangement after the date of entry into force of this Directive shall, by automatic exchange, communicate information thereon to the competent authorities of all other Member States as well as to the European Commission.
1.  The competent authority of a Member State issuing or amending an advance ruling or an advance pricing arrangement after the date of entry into force of this Directive shall, by automatic exchange, communicate information thereon to the competent authorities of all other Member States as well as to the European Commission.
Amendment 35
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 3
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 8a – paragraph 2
2.  The competent authority of a Member State shall also communicate information to the competent authorities of all other Member States as well as to the European Commission on advance cross-border rulings and advance pricing arrangements issued within a period beginning ten years before the entry into force but still valid on the date of entry into force of this Directive;
2.  The competent authority of a Member State shall also communicate information to the competent authorities of all other Member States as well as to the European Commission on advance rulings and advance pricing arrangements issued before the entry into force but still valid on the date of entry into force of this Directive;
Amendment 36
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 3
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 8a – paragraph 3
3.  Paragraph 1 shall not apply in a case where an advance cross-border ruling exclusively concerns and involves the tax affairs of one or more natural persons.
3.  Paragraph 1 shall not apply in a case where an advance ruling exclusively concerns and involves the tax affairs of one or more natural persons.
Amendment 37
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 3
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 8a – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a.  Paragraph 1 shall also apply where the request for an advance ruling relates to a legal structure without legal personality. In that instance, the competent authority of the Member State issuing the advance ruling shall forward the information it has to the competent authorities of all other Member States and shall arrange for the memorandum of incorporation to be transferred to the Member State of residence of each incorporator and each beneficiary.
Amendment 38
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 3
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 8a – paragraph 4 – point a
(a)  in respect of the information exchanged pursuant to paragraph 1: within one month following the end of the quarter during which the advance cross-border rulings or advance pricing arrangements have been issued or amended.
(a)  in respect of the information exchanged pursuant to paragraph 1: immediately and at the latest one month after the advance rulings or advance pricing arrangements have been issued or amended.
Amendment 39
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 8a – paragraph 4 – point b
(b)  in respect of the information exchanged pursuant to paragraph 2: before 31 December 2016;
(b)  in respect of the information exchanged pursuant to paragraph 2: within three months following the entry into force;
Amendment 40
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 3
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 8a – paragraph 5 – point b
(b)  the content of the advance cross-border ruling or advance pricing arrangement, including a description of the relevant business activities or transactions or series of transactions;
(b)  the content of the advance ruling or advance pricing arrangement, including a description of the relevant business activities or transactions or series of transactions;
Amendment 41
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 8a – paragraph 5 – point b a (new)
(ba)  the criteria used to determine the advance ruling or the advance pricing arrangement, as well as the limitation in time thereof, if any, or the circumstances under which the decision can be revoked;
Amendment 42
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 3
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 8a – paragraph 5 – point d
(d)  the identification of the other Member States likely to be directly or indirectly concerned by the advance cross-border ruling or advance pricing arrangement;
(d)  the identification of the other Member States likely to be directly or indirectly concerned by the advance ruling or advance pricing arrangement;
Amendment 43
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 3
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 8a – paragraph 5 – point e
(e)  the identification of any person, other than a natural person, in the other Member States likely to be directly or indirectly affected by the advance cross-border ruling or advance pricing arrangement (indicating to which Member State the affected persons are linked).
(e)  the identification of any person, other than a natural person, in the other Member States likely to be directly or indirectly affected by the advance ruling or advance pricing arrangement (indicating to which Member State the affected persons are linked).
Amendment 44
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 8a – paragraph 5 – point e a (new)
(ea)  as soon as it is available, the European Tax Identification Number (TIN) as outlined in the Commission's Action Plan on the fight against tax fraud and tax evasion of 2012;
Amendment 45
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 8a – paragraph 5 – point e b (new)
(eb)  a description of the set of criteria used and of the arrangements applicable where, by means of a de jure or de facto mechanism, the taxpayer's taxable base is reduced by derogation from the standard rules of the Member State issuing the opinion, involving, for example, authorisation for a faster rate of amortisation than is customary or deduction of costs not directly incurred or not actually incurred by the taxpayer;
Amendment 46
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 8a – paragraph 5 – point e c (new)
(ec)  a description of the set of criteria used and of the arrangements applicable where a taxpayer is granted a rate of taxation which is lower than the standard rate in the Member State issuing the opinion;
Amendment 47
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 8a – paragraph 5 – point e d (new)
(ed)  a description of the set of criteria used and of the mechanism applied where a party to that mechanism is established in a third country in which taxation is either non-existent or much more favourable.
Amendment 48
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 8a – paragraph 6
6.  To facilitate the exchange the Commission shall adopt any measures and practical arrangements necessary for the implementation of this Article, including measures to standardise the communication of the information set out in paragraph 5 of this Article, as part of the procedure for establishing the standard form provided in Article 20(5).
6.  To facilitate the exchange the Commission shall adopt any measures and practical arrangements necessary for the implementation of this Article, including measures to standardise the communication of the information set out in paragraph 5 of this Article, as part of the procedure for establishing the standard form provided in Article 20(5). The Commission shall assist Member States which have endowed decentralised territorial or administrative bodies with tax-related competences in ensuring that they meet their responsibility to provide training and support to those bodies.
Amendment 49
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 8a – paragraph 7
7.  The competent authority to which information is communicated pursuant to paragraph 1 shall confirm, if possible by electronic means, the receipt of the information to the competent authority which provided the information immediately and in any event no later than seven working days.
7.  The competent authority to which information is communicated pursuant to paragraph 1 shall confirm, if possible by electronic means, the receipt of the information to the competent authority which provided the information immediately and in any event no later than seven working days, thus facilitating the operation of an effective system of automatic information exchange.
Amendment 50
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 3
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 8a – paragraph 8
8.  Member States may, in accordance with Article 5, request additional information, including the full text of an advance cross-border ruling or an advance pricing arrangement, from the Member State which issued it.
8.  Member States – or their territorial or administrative bodies including local authorities if applicable – may, in accordance with Article 5, request additional information, including the full text of an advance ruling or an advance pricing arrangement, from the Member State which issued it.
Amendment 51
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 8a – paragraph 9 a (new)
9a.  Member States shall notify the Commission and other Member States at an early stage about any relevant change in their tax ruling practice (application formalities, decision process, etc.).
Amendment 52
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 8a – paragraph 9 b (new)
9b.  Member States' tax authorities shall notify the Commission and other Member States about any relevant changes to their domestic laws on corporate taxation (introduction of a new allowance, relief, exception, incentive or similar measure etc.) that could have an impact on their effective tax rates or on any other Member State's tax revenue.
Amendment 53
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 8b – paragraph 1
1.  Before 1 October 2017, Member States shall provide the Commission on an annual basis with statistics on the volume of automatic exchanges under Articles 8 and 8a and, to the extent possible, with information on the administrative and other relevant costs and benefits relating to exchanges that have taken place and any potential changes, for both tax administrations and third parties.
1.  Before 1 October 2017, Member States shall provide the Commission on an annual basis with statistics on the volume of automatic exchanges under Articles 8 and 8a, the types of ruling granted, and, to the extent possible, with information on the administrative and other relevant costs and benefits relating to exchanges that have taken place and any potential changes, for both tax administrations and third parties;
Amendment 54
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 8b – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a.  Before 1 October 2017, and on an annual basis thereafter, the Commission shall publish a report summarising the main cases contained in the secure central directory referred to in Article 21(5). In doing so, the Commission shall comply with the confidentiality provisions laid down in Article 23a.
Amendment 55
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 14 – paragraph 3
3.  Where a Member State makes use of any information communicated by another Member State in accordance with Article 8a, it shall send feedback thereon to the competent authority which provided the information as soon as possible, and no later than three months after the outcome of the use of the requested information is known, except if feedback has already been provided pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Article. The Commission shall determine the practical arrangements in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 26(2).
3.  Where a Member State makes use of any information communicated by another Member State in accordance with Article 8a, it shall send feedback thereon to the Commission and the competent authority which provided the information as soon as possible, and no later than three months after the outcome of the use of the requested information is known, except if feedback has already been provided pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Article. The Commission shall determine the practical arrangements in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 26(2).
Amendment 56
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 5
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 20 – paragraph 5
5.  The automatic exchange of information on advance cross-border rulings and advance pricing arrangements pursuant to Article 8a shall be carried out using a standard form once that form has been adopted by the Commission in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 26(2).
5.  The automatic exchange of information on advance rulings and advance pricing arrangements pursuant to Article 8a shall be carried out using a standard form once that form has been adopted by the Commission in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 26(2).
Amendment 57
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 6
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 21 – paragraph 5
5.  The Commission shall develop a secure central directory where information to be communicated in the framework of Article 8a of this Directive may be recorded in order to satisfy the automatic exchange provided for in paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 8a. The Commission shall have access to the information recorded in this directory. The necessary practical arrangements shall be adopted by the Commission in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 26(2).
5.  On 31 December 2016 at the latest, the Commission shall develop a secure central directory where information to be communicated in the framework of Article 8a of this Directive must be recorded in order to satisfy the automatic exchange provided for in paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 8a. Member States shall ensure that all information communicated in the framework of Article 8a during the transitional period where the secure central directory is not yet developed is uploaded into the secure central directory by 1 April 2017. The Commission and the Member States shall have access to the information recorded in this directory. The necessary practical arrangements shall be adopted by the Commission in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 26(2).
Amendment 58
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 23a – paragraph 1
1.  Information communicated to the Commission pursuant to this Directive shall be kept confidential by the Commission in accordance with the provisions applicable to Union authorities.
1.  Information communicated to the Commission pursuant to this Directive shall be kept confidential by the Commission in accordance with the provisions applicable to Union authorities, as enshrined in Article 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.
Amendment 59
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 23a – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
2.  Information communicated to the Commission by a Member State under Article 23, as well as any report or document produced by the Commission using such information, may be transmitted to other Member States. Such transmitted information shall be covered by the obligation of official secrecy and enjoy the protection extended to similar information under the national law of the Member State which received it.
2.  Information communicated to the Commission by an EU or EEA Member State under Article 23, as well as any report or document produced by the Commission using such information, may be transmitted to other EU Member States (and in case of reciprocity also EEA Member States). Such transmitted information shall be covered by the obligation of official secrecy and enjoy the protection extended to similar information under the national law of the EU Member State (and in case of reciprocity also EEA Member State) which received it.
Amendment 60
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 23a – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Reports and documents produced by the Commission referred to in the first subparagraph may only be used by the Member States for analytical purposes but shall not be published or made available to any other person or body without express agreement of the Commission.
Reports and documents produced by the Commission referred to in the first subparagraph may only be used by the EU or EEA Member States for analytical purposes but shall not be published or made available to any other person or body without express agreement of the Commission.
Amendment 61
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 a (new)
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 23 b (new)
(8a)  The following Article is inserted:
“Article 23b
Penalties
The Commission shall examine all penalties to be established in the event of refusal or omission of information exchange.”
Amendment 62
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1– point 9 a (new)
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 25 a (new)
(9a)  The following Article is inserted:
"Article 25a
OECD developments
This Directive shall be compatible with OECD developments and shall take into consideration the OECD comprehensive set of rules contained in the Standard for Automatic Exchange of Financial Account."
Amendment 63
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1– point 9 b (new)
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 25 b (new)
(9b)   The following Article is inserted:
"Article 25b
Further action of Member States
This Directive shall not preclude Member States from taking further action to develop domestic or agreement-based provisions for the prevention of tax avoidance."
Amendment 64
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 c (new)
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 27
(9c)  Article 27 is replaced by the following:
"Article 27
Reporting
Every three years after the entry into force of this Directive, the Commission shall submit a report on the application of this Directive to the European Parliament and to the Council."

Discharge 2013: ARTEMIS Joint Undertaking
PDF 180kWORD 76k
Decision
Decision
Resolution
1.European Parliament decision of 27 October 2015 on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the ARTEMIS Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2013 (2014/2132(DEC))
P8_TA(2015)0370A8-0283/2015

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the final annual accounts of the ARTEMIS Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2013,

–  having regard to the Court of Auditors’ report on the annual accounts of the ARTEMIS Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2013, together with the Joint Undertaking’s replies(1),

–  having regard to the statement of assurance(2) as to the reliability of the accounts and the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions provided by the Court of Auditors for the financial year 2013, pursuant to Article 287 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to the Council’s recommendation of 17 February 2015 on discharge to be given to the Joint Undertaking in respect of the implementation of the budget for the financial year 2013 (05306/2015 – C8‑0049/2015),

–  having regard to its decision of 29 April 2015(3) postponing the discharge decision for the financial year 2013, and the replies from the Executive Director of the ECSEL Joint Undertaking (formerly the ARTEMIS Joint Undertaking),

–  having regard to Article 319 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities(4),

–  having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union and repealing Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002(5), and in particular Article 209 thereof,

–  having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 74/2008 of 20 December 2007 on the establishment of the ‘ARTEMIS Joint Undertaking’ to implement a Joint Technology Initiative in Embedded Computing Systems(6),

–  having regard to Council Regulation (EU) No 561/2014 of 6 May 2014 establishing the ECSEL Joint Undertaking(7), and in particular Article 1(2) and Article 12 thereof,

–  having regard to Commission Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2343/2002 of 19 November 2002 on the framework Financial Regulation for the bodies referred to in Article 185 of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities(8),

–  having regard to Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 110/2014 of 30 September 2013 on the model financial regulation for public-private partnership bodies referred to in Article 209 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council(9),

–  having regard to Rule 94 of and Annex V to its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the second report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A8-0283/2015),

1.  Grants the Executive Director of the ECSEL Joint Undertaking discharge in respect of the implementation of the ARTEMIS Joint Undertaking’s budget for the financial year 2013;

2.  Sets out its observations in the resolution below;

3.  Instructs its President to forward this decision and the resolution forming an integral part of it to the Executive Director of the ECSEL Joint Undertaking, the Council, the Commission and the Court of Auditors, and to arrange for their publication in the Official Journal of the European Union (L series).

2.European Parliament decision of 27 October 2015 on the closure of the accounts of the ARTEMIS Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2013 (2014/2132(DEC))

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the final annual accounts of the ECSEL Joint Undertaking (formerly the ARTEMIS Joint Undertaking) for the financial year 2013,

–  having regard to the Court of Auditors’ report on the annual accounts of the ARTEMIS Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2013, together with the Joint Undertaking’s replies(10),

–  having regard to the statement of assurance(11) as to the reliability of the accounts and the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions provided by the Court of Auditors for the financial year 2013, pursuant to Article 287 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to the Council’s recommendation of 17 February 2015 on discharge to be given to the Joint Undertaking in respect of the implementation of the budget for the financial year 2013 (05306/2015 – C8‑0049/2015),

–  having regard to its decision of 29 April 2015(12) postponing the discharge decision for the financial year 2013, and the replies from the Executive Director of the ECSEL Joint Undertaking (formerly the ARTEMIS Joint Undertaking),

–  having regard to Article 319 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities(13),

–  having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union and repealing Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002(14), and in particular Article 209 thereof,

–  having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 74/2008 of 20 December 2007 on the establishment of the 'ARTEMIS Joint Undertaking' to implement a Joint Technology Initiative in Embedded Computing Systems(15),

–  having regard to Council Regulation (EU) No 561/2014 of 6 May 2014 establishing the ECSEL Joint Undertaking(16), and in particular Article 1(2) and Article 12 thereof,

–  having regard to Commission Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2343/2002 of 19 November 2002 on the framework Financial Regulation for the bodies referred to in Article 185 of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities(17),

–  having regard to Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 110/2014 of 30 September 2013 on the model financial regulation for public-private partnership bodies referred to in Article 209 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council(18),

–  having regard to Rule 94 of and Annex V to its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the second report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A8-0283/2015),

1.  Approves the closure of the accounts of the ARTEMIS Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2013;

2.  Instructs its President to forward this decision to the Executive Director of the ECSEL Joint Undertaking, the Council, the Commission and the Court of Auditors, and to arrange for its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union (L series).

3.European Parliament resolution of 27 October 2015 with observations forming an integral part of the decision on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the ARTEMIS Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2013 (2014/2132(DEC))

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to its decision on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the ARTEMIS Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2013,

–  having regard to Rule 94 of and Annex V to its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the second report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A8-0283/2015),

A.  whereas the ARTEMIS Joint Undertaking (“the Joint Undertaking”) was set up in December 2007 for a period of 10 years to define and implement a “Research Agenda” for the development of key technologies for embedded computing systems across different application areas in order to strengthen Union competitiveness and sustainability and to allow for the emergence of new markets and societal applications;

B.  whereas the Joint Undertaking started to work autonomously in October 2009;

C.  whereas financial contributions from ARTEMIS Member States should amount in total to 1,8 times the Union's financial contribution and the in-kind contribution of research and development organisations participating in projects over the duration of the Joint Undertaking shall be equal to or greater than the contribution of public authorities;

D.  whereas the Joint Undertaking and the ENIAC Joint Undertaking were merged to create the Electronic Components and Systems for European leadership Joint Technology Initiative (ECSEL JTI) which has started its activity in June 2014 and will run for 10 years;

Budgetary and Financial Management

1.  Recalls that the Court of Auditors (“the Court”) stated that the 2013 annual accounts of the Joint Undertaking present fairly, in all material respects, its financial position as of 31 December 2013 and the results of its operations and its cash flows for the year-end, in accordance with the provisions of its Financial Rules;

2.  Acknowledges from the Joint Undertaking that the practical arrangements for ex post audits concerning the administrative agreements signed with the national funding authorities (“NFAs”) have been put in place; takes note that the practical arrangements include the introduction of a specific reporting form, reinforced by the assessment of the national assurance systems by the Joint Undertaking and visits to the NFAs by the Court;

3.  Recalls that the ex post strategy adopted by the Joint Undertaking states that it must assess at least once a year whether the information sent by the NFAs provide sufficient assurance as to the regularity and legality of the executed transactions;

4.  Acknowledges from the Joint Undertaking that the 23 NFAs that shared information on their audit strategies represent 95 % of the total grants awarded; welcomes the fact that in order to complement the information obtained by the Joint Undertaking, the Court acquires additional information directly from the NFAs in order to express an opinion on the legality and regularity of the transactions underlying the accounts;

5.  Acknowledges from the Joint Undertaking that it made progress in implementing the action plan aimed at remedying the deficiencies identified by the Court in its qualified opinion; notes that the assurances provided by the national systems were positively assessed for countries representing 54 % of the total grants, while the assessments for further countries are in an advanced phase of execution which will bring the assessed grant coverage to 84 %; calls on the Joint Undertaking to continue the assessment in order to reach 100 % coverage of the total grants;

6.  Takes note that a workshop on assurance was organised, bringing together the representatives of the Court, the Commission and the Commission’s Internal Audit Service, as well as representatives of NFAs active in the Joint Undertaking; notes that this workshop highlighted requirements of European programmes and enabled the exchange of information and best practices with the NFAs;

7.  Notes that the Joint Undertaking developed a new methodology for residual error rate estimation, similar to the one used by the Commission services in charge of co-managed funding; acknowledges that the first evaluation of the residual error rate based on the 157 audited transactions was 0,73 %, while a recent update based on 331 transactions resulted in an error rate of 0,66 %, below the materiality threshold of 2 %;

8.  Recalls that the utilisation rate of payment appropriations after the end of year budget amendment was 69 %; acknowledges from the Joint Undertaking that the delay in issuing payment certificates by the NFAs is one of the main reasons for the low utilisation rate as the payments are executed without delay as soon as the national certificates are received; acknowledges moreover that the slower payment pace did not affect the technical execution of the projects;

9.  Ascertains from the Joint Undertaking that the contributions committed by Member States were at the level of 1,8 times the Union commitments; acknowledges that the commitments by Member States had to be reduced below the 1,8 threshold when awarding the grants in order to comply with the limitations imposed by the State aid rules; takes note that the resulting contributions to the Joint Undertaking by the Union were EUR 181 454 844, whereas the Member States contributions were EUR 341 842 261, resulting in a level of 1,88;

10.  Takes note that the Commission will carry out an evaluation to assess the ARTEMIS activity up to the date of the ECSEL JTI creation, as provided for in Council Regulation (EC) No 74/2008 setting up the ARTEMIS Joint Undertaking, to be considered for the discharge for the financial year 2014;

Internal control systems

11.  Takes note from the Joint Undertaking that further to the requirements of Article 6(2) of its establishing Regulation, the Internal Audit Capability (IAC) established in the ENIAC Joint Undertaking (ENIAC JU) is now established as the Joint Undertaking’s IAC due to the merger of the two Joint Undertakings;

12.  Acknowledges from the Joint Undertaking that its Disaster Recovery Plan for the Joint Undertaking’s common IT infrastructure is approved;

Prevention and management of conflicts of interests and transparency

13.  Notes that due to the merger with the ENIAC JU, the Comprehensive policy for the prevention and management of conflicts of interests of the ENIAC JU is also applicable to the Joint Undertaking; notes, furthermore, that the procedures for managing situations of conflicts of interests, as well as the mechanism proceedings in the event of a violation of the rules, are part of the adopted policy;

14.  Acknowledges from the Joint Undertaking that the CVs and the declarations of interests of its Executive Director and managers as required by the Staff Regulations and the implementing rules were collected and posted on the Joint Undertaking’s web site; notes that a comprehensive database including all identified information related to conflicts of interests as well as the measures taken, has been established and is regularly maintained;

Monitoring and reporting of research results

15.  Recalls that the Seventh Framework Programme (FP7) Decision(19) establishes a monitoring and reporting system related to the protection, dissemination and transfer of research results; acknowledges from the Joint Undertaking that 211,5 publications and 16,6 patents per EUR 10 000 000 of Union grants shows a high productivity of its research results and that it is compliant with all requests expressed so far by the FP7 coordinators.

(1) OJ C 452, 16.12.2014, p. 8.
(2) OJ C 452, 16.12.2014, p. 9.
(3) OJ L 255, 30.9.2015, p. 416.
(4) OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.
(5) OJ L 298, 26.10.2012, p. 1.
(6) OJ L 30, 4.2.2008, p. 52.
(7) OJ L 169, 7.6.2014, p. 152.
(8) OJ L 357, 31.12.2002, p. 72.
(9) OJ L 38, 7.2.2014, p. 2.
(10) OJ C 452, 16.12.2014, p. 8.
(11) OJ C 452, 16.12.2014, p. 9.
(12) OJ L 255, 30.9.2015, p. 416.
(13) OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.
(14) OJ L 298, 26.10.2012, p. 1.
(15) OJ L 30, 4.2.2008, p. 52.
(16) OJ L 169, 7.6.2014, p. 152.
(17) OJ L 357, 31.12.2002, p. 72.
(18) OJ L 38, 7.2.2014, p. 2.
(19) Article 7 of Decision No 1982/2006/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 18 December 2006 concerning the Seventh Framework Programme of the European Community for research, technological development and demonstration activities (2007-2013) (OJ L 412, 30.12.2006, p. 6).


Discharge 2013: European Institute of Innovation and Technology (EIT)
PDF 183kWORD 77k
Decision
Decision
Resolution
1.European Parliament decision of 27 October 2015 on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology for the financial year 2013 (2014/2125(DEC))
P8_TA(2015)0371A8-0282/2015

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the final annual accounts of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology for the financial year 2013,

–  having regard to the Court of Auditors’ report on the annual accounts of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology for the financial year 2013, together with the Institute’s replies(1),

–  having regard to the statement of assurance(2) as to the reliability of the accounts and the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions provided by the Court of Auditors for the financial year 2013, pursuant to Article 287 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to the Council’s recommendation of 17 February 2015 on discharge to be given to the European Institute of Innovation and Technology in respect of the implementation of the budget for the financial year 2013 (05304/2015 – C8‑0054/2015),

–  having regard to its decision of 29 April 2015(3) postponing the discharge decision for the financial year 2013, and the replies from the Director of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology,

–  having regard to Article 319 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities(4),

–  having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union and repealing Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002(5), and in particular Article 208 thereof,

–  having regard to Regulation (EC) No 294/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2008 establishing the European Institute of Innovation and Technology(6), and in particular Article 21 thereof,

–  having regard to Commission Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2343/2002 of 19 November 2002 on the framework Financial Regulation for the bodies referred to in Article 185 of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities(7),

–  having regard to Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 1271/2013 of 30 September 2013 on the framework financial regulation for the bodies referred to in Article 208 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council(8), and in particular Article 108 thereof,

–  having regard to Rule 94 of and Annex V to its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the second report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A8-0282/2015),

1.  Grants the Director of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology discharge in respect of the implementation of the Institute’s budget for the financial year 2013;

2.  Sets out its observations in the resolution below;

3.  Instructs its President to forward this decision, and the resolution forming an integral part of it, to the Director of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology, the Council, the Commission and the Court of Auditors, and to arrange for their publication in the Official Journal of the European Union (L series).

2.European Parliament decision of 27 October 2015 on the closure of the accounts of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology for the financial year 2013 (2014/2125(DEC))

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the final annual accounts of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology for the financial year 2013,

–  having regard to the Court of Auditors’ report on the annual accounts of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology for the financial year 2013, together with the Institute’s replies(9),

–  having regard to the statement of assurance(10) as to the reliability of the accounts and the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions provided by the Court of Auditors for the financial year 2013, pursuant to Article 287 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to the Council’s recommendation of 17 February 2015 on discharge to be given to the European Institute of Innovation and Technology in respect of the implementation of the budget for the financial year 2013 (05304/2015 – C8‑0054/2015),

–  having regard to its decision of 29 April 2015(11) postponing the discharge decision for the financial year 2013, and the replies from the Director of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology,

–  having regard to Article 319 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities(12),

–  having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union and repealing Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002(13), and in particular Article 208 thereof,

–  having regard to Regulation (EC) No 294/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2008 establishing the European Institute of Innovation and Technology(14), and in particular Article 21 thereof,

–  having regard to Commission Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2343/2002 of 19 November 2002 on the framework Financial Regulation for the bodies referred to in Article 185 of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities(15),

–  having regard to Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 1271/2013 of 30 September 2013 on the framework financial regulation for the bodies referred to in Article 208 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council(16), and in particular Article 108 thereof,

–  having regard to Rule 94 of and Annex V to its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the second report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A8-0282/2015),

1.  Approves the closure of the accounts of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology for the financial year 2013;

2.  Instructs its President to forward this decision to the Director of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology, the Council, the Commission and the Court of Auditors, and to arrange for its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union (L series).

3.European Parliament resolution of 27 October 2015 with observations forming an integral part of the decision on discharge for implementation of the budget for the European Institute of Innovation and Technology for the financial year 2013 (2014/2125(DEC))

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to its decision on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology for the financial year 2013,

–  having regard to Rule 94 of and Annex V to its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the second report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A8-0282/2015),

Comments on the legality and regularity of transactions

1.  Recalls that the Court of Auditors (“the Court”), in its report on the annual accounts of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology (“the Institute”) for the financial year 2013, found for the second consecutive year no reasonable assurance on the legality and regularity of the grant transactions; notes that in the Court´s view the quality of the certificates was compromised as they were issued by independent audit firms contracted by the grant beneficiaries, covering about 87 % of the grant expenditure; recalls furthermore that in order to address the shortcomings related to the quality of the audit certificates, the Institute improved the instructions provided to certifying auditors and communicated the updated instructions to the “Knowledge and Innovation Communities” (KICs), the recipients of the Institute's grants, in June 2013;

2.  Notes from the Institute that the improved instructions resulted in an improvement of the quality of the audit certificates received in respect to 2013 grant transactions for which the final payments were made in 2014;

3.  Acknowledges that, starting with the 2014 grant agreements, the Institute uses the same audit certificate methodology as all other programmes under the Horizon 2020 framework programme; notes that the use of a more detailed and consistent certification methodology has further increased the assurance obtained in the course of ex ante verifications;

4.  Recalls that the Institute introduced complementary ex post verifications for grant transactions as a second layer of assurance on the legality and regularity of grant transactions; acknowledges that the Institute carried out “on the spot” audits covering around 40 % of the grants paid under the 2013 Grant Agreements; notes that these audits resulted in the recovery of EUR 263 239, out of the total audited amount of EUR 29 163 272; acknowledges that the detected error rate in the audited sample is 0,90 % and the residual error rate is 0,69 %, which is below the materiality threshold of 2 %; notes that the Court has not raised any comments or findings in relation to ex ante or ex post verifications in its preliminary observations for the financial year 2014;

5.  Acknowledges from the Institute that it improved its procurement procedures since 2013 and took a proactive approach after the detection of errors by the Court; notes in particular that the Institute cancelled the two framework contracts concluded in 2010 and 2012 where the use of the negotiated procedure was found as being irregular; notes furthermore that the Institute revised its internal procedures, circuits and templates in order to fully comply with the respective public procurement rules, with special attention given to the sound planning and estimation of needs; acknowledges that the Institute recruited an additional procurement officer in 2015 and that it carried out a series of trainings on procurement for its staff;

6.  Acknowledges that further to the consultancy assignment performed by the Institute’s Internal Audit Capability (IAC), the Institute implemented the following actions:

   developing a vade mecum on procurement which includes checklists for different procurement procedures and specific contracts under framework contracts;
   requiring the procurement function to verify all requests for service before requesting an offer, which provides an additional layer of control;
   ensuring that staff members are sufficiently trained through targeted training sessions;
   clarifying the respective role of procurement, operational and contract management function as well as introducing improved checklists and routing slips;
   documenting the procurement procedures within one single and practically usable repository which is proportionate to the size of the Institute;

7.  Notes from the Institute that no procurement errors were detected in respect of the year 2014; notes furthermore that as the residual error rate in grant expenditure is 0,69 %, the combined error rate for administrative and operational expenditure is around 0,5 % of the total payments made in 2014; looks forward to the Court’s report on the Institute’s annual accounts for the year 2014 in order to confirm these findings;

8.  Ascertains that the Institute obtained the audit certificates on the costs of KIC complementary activities incurred in the period 2010-2014; notes that the Institute carried out a review of the portfolio of KIC complementary activities to ensure that only the activities with a clear link to the KIC added value activities funded by the Institute are accepted;

9.  Acknowledges that the Institute’s funding provided to the KICs in the period 2010-2014 has not exceeded the 25 % ceiling as set out in the Framework Partnership Agreements between the KICs and the Institute;

Budget and financial management

10.  Notes that the Institute improved the planning and monitoring procedures related to the budget implementation; takes note that these procedures now include a more rigorous assessment of all activities proposed with a budget impact over EUR 50 000, as well as the introduction of additional planning documents which ensure that the needs of human and financial resources are well identified and available to implement all planned activities; notes, furthermore, that the link between planned activities and resource allocation has been strengthened by linking the Annual Work Programme with the annual budget;

11.  Notes that the Institute has, together with the KICs, significantly improved the absorption capacity of the first-wave KICs for the 2010-2014 period, with an average annual growth rate of the Institute’s absorbed grants at 85 %; notes furthermore that the Institute’s Governing Board selected and designated two partnerships to become the second-wave KICs, which will further increase the absorption capacity from the year 2015 and increase the Institute’s budget execution rate;

12.  Recalls that the low budget implementation rate for Title I (staff expenditure) is mainly related to the high turnover of staff and the outstanding adoption of the regulations on salary adjustments; takes note that the analysis of staff exit interviews identified the lack of a clear career perspective, a difficult work environment and an unattractive salary package related to the correction coefficient for Hungary as the main reasons for the high staff turnover;

13.  Acknowledges the actions taken by the Institute in order to mitigate the high staff turnover; notes in particular the improvements in the vacancy management, the establishment of an appraisal and re-classification system, providing a better career perspective and strengthening middle management level; welcomes the decrease in the staff turnover rate from 20-25 % in the period of 2012-2013 to 12 % in 2014; takes note that the four remaining vacant posts are to be gradually filled during 2015;

Internal audit

14.  Acknowledges that the Commission’s Internal Audit Service (IAS) issued a follow-up audit report in June 2014 regarding the status of the implementation of the action plan resulting from the “Limited Review on Grant Management – Preparation of Annual Grant Agreements”; takes note that the IAS closed two recommendations out of the original six and that one further recommendation was downgraded from “Critical” to “Very Important”;

15.  Acknowledges that the IAS carried out a fact-finding visit in the Institute in December 2014 in order to review the progress made in the implementation of open recommendations; acknowledges furthermore that the visit resulted in the IAS acknowledging further improvements made in the annual grant allocation process and that all detailed actions presented to the IAS during the visit, whether completed, ongoing or planned, are adequately addressing the risks highlighted in the IAS’ limited review;

16.  Notes that out of the 25 actions resulting from the action plan, 18 have been implemented and that the implementation of the remaining seven actions is ongoing; notes, moreover, that three out of those seven actions are to be implemented before the end of 2015, after the amended Framework Partnership Agreement between the Institute and the KICs has been signed; takes note from the Institute that the implementation of the remaining actions is progressing as planned;

17.  Notes that the IAC carried out seven audit and consultancy engagements in 2014 and acknowledges the Institute’s actions taken on the IAC’s recommendations.

(1) OJ C 442, 10.12.2014, p. 184.
(2) OJ C 442, 10.12.2014, p. 184.
(3) OJ L 255, 30.9.2015, p. 409.
(4) OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.
(5) OJ L 298, 26.10.2012, p. 1.
(6) OJ L 97, 9.4.2008, p. 1.
(7) OJ L 357, 31.12.2002, p. 72.
(8) OJ L 328, 7.12.2013, p. 42.
(9) OJ C 442, 10.12.2014, p. 184.
(10) OJ C 442, 10.12.2014, p. 184.
(11) OJ L 255, 30.9.2015, p. 409.
(12) OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.
(13) OJ L 298, 26.10.2012, p. 1.
(14) OJ L 97, 9.4.2008, p. 1.
(15) OJ L 357, 31.12.2002, p. 72.
(16) OJ L 328, 7.12.2013, p. 42.


Discharge 2013: ENIAC Joint Undertaking
PDF 181kWORD 76k
Decision
Decision
Resolution
1.European Parliament decision of 27 October 2015 on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the ENIAC Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2013 (2014/2135(DEC))
P8_TA(2015)0372A8-0285/2015

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the final annual accounts of the ENIAC Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2013,

–  having regard to the Court of Auditors’ report on the annual accounts of the ENIAC Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2013, together with the Joint Undertaking’s replies(1),

–  having regard to the statement of assurance(2) as to the reliability of the accounts and the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions provided by the Court of Auditors for the financial year 2013, pursuant to Article 287 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to the Council’s recommendation of 17 February 2015 on discharge to be given to the Joint Undertaking in respect of the implementation of the budget for the financial year 2013 (05306/2015 – C8‑0049/2015),

–  having regard to its decision of 29 April 2015(3) postponing the discharge decision for the financial year 2013, and the replies from the Executive Director of the ECSEL Joint Undertaking (formerly the ENIAC Joint Undertaking),

–  having regard to Article 319 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities(4),

–  having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union and repealing Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002(5), and in particular Article 209 thereof,

–  having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 72/2008 of 20 December 2007 setting up the ENIAC Joint Undertaking(6),

–  having regard to Council Regulation (EU) No 561/2014 of 6 May 2014 establishing the ECSEL Joint Undertaking(7), and in particular Article 1(2) and Article 12 thereof,

–  having regard to Commission Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2343/2002 of 19 November 2002 on the framework Financial Regulation for the bodies referred to in Article 185 of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities(8),

–  having regard to Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 110/2014 of 30 September 2013 on the model financial regulation for public-private partnership bodies referred to in Article 209 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council(9),

–  having regard to Rule 94 of and Annex V to its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the second report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A8-0285/2015),

1.  Grants the Executive Director of the ECSEL Joint Undertaking discharge in respect of the implementation of the ENIAC Joint Undertaking’s budget for the financial year 2013;

2.  Sets out its observations in the resolution below;

3.  Instructs its President to forward this decision and the resolution forming an integral part of it to the Executive Director of the ECSEL Joint Undertaking, the Council, the Commission and the Court of Auditors, and to arrange for their publication in the Official Journal of the European Union (L series).

2.European Parliament decision of 27 October 2015 on the closure of the accounts of the ENIAC Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2013 (2014/2135(DEC))

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the final annual accounts of the ENIAC Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2013,

–  having regard to the Court of Auditors’ report on the annual accounts of the ENIAC Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2013, together with the Joint Undertaking’s replies(10),

–  having regard to the statement of assurance(11) as to the reliability of the accounts and the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions provided by the Court of Auditors for the financial year 2013, pursuant to Article 287 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to the Council’s recommendation of 17 February 2015 on discharge to be given to the Joint Undertaking in respect of the implementation of the budget for the financial year 2013 (05306/2015 – C8‑0049/2015),

–  having regard to its decision of 29 April 2015(12) postponing the discharge decision for the financial year 2013, and the replies from the Executive Director of the ECSEL Joint Undertaking (formerly the ENIAC Joint Undertaking),

–  having regard to Article 319 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities(13),

–  having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union and repealing Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002(14), and in particular Article 209 thereof,

–  having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 72/2008 of 20 December 2007 setting up the ENIAC Joint Undertaking(15),

–  having regard to Council Regulation (EU) No 561/2014 of 6 May 2014 establishing the ECSEL Joint Undertaking(16), and in particular Article 1(2) and Article 12 thereof,

–  having regard to Commission Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2343/2002 of 19 November 2002 on the framework Financial Regulation for the bodies referred to in Article 185 of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities(17),

–  having regard to Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 110/2014 of 30 September 2013 on the model financial regulation for public-private partnership bodies referred to in Article 209 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council(18),

–  having regard to Rule 94 of and Annex V to its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the second report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A8-0285/2015),

1.  Approves the closure of the accounts of the ENIAC Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2013;

2.  Instructs its President to forward this decision to the Executive Director of the ECSEL Joint Undertaking, the Council, the Commission and the Court of Auditors, and to arrange for its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union (L series).

3.European Parliament resolution of 27 October 2015 with observations forming an integral part of the decision on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the ENIAC Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2013 (2014/2135(DEC))

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to its decision on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the ENIAC Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2013,

–  having regard to Rule 94 of and Annex V to its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the second report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A8-0285/2015),

A.  whereas the ENIAC Joint Undertaking ("the Joint Undertaking") was set up on 20 December 2007 for a period of 10 years to define and implement a “research agenda” for the development of key competences for nanoelectronics across different application areas;

B.  whereas the Joint Undertaking was granted its financial autonomy in July 2010;

C.  whereas the founding members of the Joint Undertaking are the Union, represented by the Commission, Belgium, Germany, Estonia, Ireland, Greece, Spain, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Sweden, the United Kingdom and the Association for European Nanoelectronics Activities (AENEAS);

D.  whereas the maximum contribution for the period of 10 years from the Union to the Joint Undertaking is EUR 450 000 000, to be paid from the budget of the Seventh Research Framework Programme;

E.  whereas AENEAS is to make a maximum contribution of EUR 30 000 000 to the Joint Undertaking's running costs and the Member States are to make in-kind contributions to the running costs and to provide financial contributions of 1,8 times the Union contribution;

F.  whereas the Joint Undertaking and the ARTEMIS Joint Undertaking were merged to create the Electronic Components and Systems for European leadership Joint Technology Initiative (ECSEL JTI) which has started its activity in June 2014 and will run for 10 years;

Budgetary and financial management

1.  Recalls that the Court of Auditors ("the Court") stated that the 2013 annual accounts of the Joint Undertaking present fairly, in all material respects, its financial position as of 31 December 2013 and the results of its operations and its cash flows for the year-end, in accordance with the provisions of its Financial Rules and the accounting rules adopted by the Commission’s Accounting Officer;

2.  Recalls that the Court issued a qualified opinion on the legality and regularity of the transactions underlying the annual accounts, on the grounds of not being able to conclude whether or not the ex post audit strategy, which relies heavily on the National Funding Authorities (NFAs) auditing project cost claims, provides sufficient assurance with respect to the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions;

3.  Acknowledges from the Joint Undertaking that the Court will take steps in order to obtain sufficient assurances on the audits carried out by the NFAs; acknowledges furthermore that the ECSEL JTI is making further assessments of the national assurance systems following the merger of the Joint Undertaking and ARTEMIS Joint Undertaking;

4.  Notes that the Joint Undertaking established the practical arrangements for ex post audits concerning the administrative agreements signed with the NFAs; takes note that the practical arrangements include the introduction of a specific reporting form, reinforced by the assessment of the national assurance systems by the Joint Undertaking and visits to the NFAs by the Court;

5.  Takes note that the limited review of cost claims undertaken by the Joint Undertaking in 2012 was one of the elements enhancing the assurance, which allowed the Joint Undertaking to monitor which transactions were submitted to audits prior to the introduction of a specific reporting form; notes that this sampling showed a small number of the first national audits starting in 2012 and reached a volume allowing for meaningful statistical evaluations in 2014;

6.  Acknowledges from the Joint Undertaking that 23 NFAs shared information on their audit strategies, which represents 95 % of the total grants awarded; welcomes the fact that in order to complement the information obtained by the Joint Undertaking, the Court acquires additional information directly from the NFAs in order to express an opinion on the legality and regularity of the transactions underlying the accounts;

7.  Acknowledges from the Joint Undertaking that it made progress in implementing the action plan aimed at remedying the deficiencies identified by the Court in its qualified opinion; notes that the assurances provided by the national systems were positively assessed for countries representing 54 % of the total grants, while the assessments for further countries are in an advanced phase of execution, which will bring the assessed grant coverage to 84 %; calls on the Joint Undertaking to continue the assessment in order to reach 100 % coverage of the total grants;

8.  Takes note that a workshop on assurance was organised, bringing together the representatives of the Court, the Commission and the Commission’s Internal Audit Service, as well as representatives of NFAs active in the Joint Undertaking; notes that this workshop highlighted requirements of European programmes and enabled the exchange of information and best practices with the NFAs;

9.  Notes that the Joint Undertaking developed a new methodology for residual error rate estimation, similar to the one used by the Commission services in charge of co-managed funding; acknowledges that the first evaluation of the residual error rate based on the 157 audited transactions was 0,73 %, while a recent update based on 331 transactions resulted in an error rate of 0,66 %, below the materiality threshold of 2 %;

10.  Ascertains from the Joint Undertaking that the Member States’ contributions were under the level of 1,8 times the Union contribution as requested by the Joint Undertaking’s statute in order to comply with the limitations imposed by the State aid rules; notes in particular that for the industrial participants in large pilot line projects the total public funding cannot exceed 25 % while the Joint Undertaking’s statute requires allocating the same reimbursement rate to each participant;

11.  Acknowledges that the lower contributions from the Members States were more than compensated by increased private sector contributions, carrying 65 % of the total costs and thus reaching a very high leverage of the Union funding;

12.  Takes note that the Commission will carry out an evaluation to assess the ENIAC activity up to the date of the ECSEL JTI creation, as provided for in Council Regulation (EC) No 72/2008 setting up the ENIAC Joint Undertaking, to be considered for the discharge for the financial year 2014;

Prevention and management of conflicts of interests and transparency

13.  Acknowledges from the Joint Undertaking that the CVs and the declarations of interests of its Executive Director and managers as required by the Staff Regulations and the implementing rules were collected and posted on the Joint Undertaking’s web site; notes that a comprehensive database including all identified information related to conflicts of interests as well as the measures taken has been established and is regularly maintained;

Monitoring and reporting of research results

14.  Recalls that the Seventh Framework Programme (FP7) Decision(19) establishes a monitoring and reporting system related to the protection, dissemination and transfer of research results; acknowledges from the Joint Undertaking that 211,5 publications and 16,6 patents per EUR 10 000 000 of Union grants shows a high productivity of its research results and that it is compliant with all requests expressed so far by the FP7 coordinators.

(1) OJ C 452, 16.12.2014, p. 26.
(2) OJ C 452, 16.12.2014, p. 27.
(3) OJ L 255, 30.9.2015, p. 424.
(4) OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.
(5) OJ L 298, 26.10.2012, p. 1.
(6) OJ L 30, 4.2.2008, p. 21.
(7) OJ L 169, 7.6.2014, p. 152.
(8) OJ L 357, 31.12.2002, p. 72.
(9) OJ L 38, 7.2.2014, p. 2.
(10) OJ C 452, 16.12.2014, p. 26.
(11) OJ C 452, 16.12.2014, p. 27.
(12) OJ L 255, 30.9.2015, p. 424.
(13) OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.
(14) OJ L 298, 26.10.2012, p. 1.
(15) OJ L 30, 4.2.2008, p. 21.
(16) OJ L 169, 7.6.2014, p. 152.
(17) OJ L 357, 31.12.2002, p. 72.
(18) OJ L 38, 7.2.2014, p. 2.
(19) Article 7 of Decision No 1982/2006/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 18 December 2006 concerning the Seventh Framework Programme of the European Community for research, technological development and demonstration activities (2007-2013) (OJ L 412, 30.12.2006, p. 6).


Discharge 2013: EU general budget - European Council and Council
PDF 260kWORD 71k
Decision
Resolution
1.European Parliament decision of 27 October 2015 on discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2013, Section II – European Council and Council (2014/2079(DEC))
P8_TA(2015)0373A8-0269/2015

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2013(1),

–  having regard to the consolidated annual accounts of the European Union for the financial year 2013 (COM(2014)0510 – C8‑0148/2014)(2),

–  having regard to the Court of Auditors’ annual report on the implementation of the budget concerning the financial year 2013, together with the institutions’ replies(3),

–  having regard to the statement of assurance(4) as to the reliability of the accounts and the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions provided by the Court of Auditors for the financial year 2013, pursuant to Article 287 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to its decision of 29 April 2015(5) postponing the discharge decision for the financial year 2013, and the accompanying resolution,

–  having regard to Article 314(10) and Articles 317, 318 and 319 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities(6),

–  having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union and repealing Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002(7), and in particular Articles 55, 99, 164, 165 and 166 thereof,

–  having regard to Rule 94 of and Annex V to its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the second report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A8-0269/2015),

1.  Refuses to grant the Secretary-General of the Council discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Council and of the Council for the financial year 2013;

2.  Sets out its observations in the resolution below;

3.  Instructs its President to forward this decision and the resolution forming an integral part of it to the European Council, the Council, the Commission, the Court of Justice of the European Union, the Court of Auditors, the European Ombudsman, the European Data Protection Supervisor and the European External Action Service, and to arrange for their publication in the Official Journal of the European Union (L series).

2.European Parliament resolution of 27 October 2015 with observations forming an integral part of the decision on discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2013, Section II – European Council and Council (2014/2079(DEC))

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to its decision on discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2013, Section II – European Council and Council,

–  having regard to Rule 94 of and Annex V to its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the second report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A8-0269/2015),

A.  whereas all Union institutions ought to be transparent and fully accountable to the citizens of the Union for the funds entrusted to them as Union institutions;

B.  whereas the European Council and the Council, as Union institutions, should be subject to democratic accountability towards the citizens of the Union as far as they are beneficiaries of the general budget of the European Union;

C.  whereas Parliament is the sole directly elected body among the Union institutions and has responsibility to grant discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union;

1.  Emphasises Parliament's role specified in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) in respect of the budget discharge;

2.  Points out that under Article 335 TFEU, "[…] the Union shall be represented by each of the institutions, by virtue of their administrative autonomy, in matters relating to their respective operation" and that, accordingly, taking into account Article 55 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 (the Financial Regulation), the institutions are individually responsible for the implementation of their budgets;

3.  Emphasises the role of Parliament and of other institutions within the discharge procedure as governed by the provisions of the Financial Regulation, in particular Articles 164, 165 and 166 thereof;

4.  Notes that under Rule 94 of its Rules of Procedure, "the provisions governing the procedure for granting discharge to the Commission in respect of the implementation of the budget shall likewise apply to the procedure for granting discharge to [...] the persons responsible for the implementation of the budgets of other institutions and bodies of the European Union such as the Council (as regards its activity as executive) […]";

5.  Regrets that the Council did not provide any explanation on the increasing underspending and carryovers of commitments in their 2013 budget;

Pending issues

6.  Reminds the Council of Parliament's call for progress reports on building projects and a detailed breakdown of the costs incurred to date;

7.  Urges the Council to provide a thorough written explanation detailing the total amount of appropriations used in the purchase of the 'Residence Palace' building, the budget items from which those appropriations were drawn, the instalments that have been paid thus far and the instalments that remain to be paid;

8.  Reiterates its call on the Council to provide information on its process of administrative modernisation, in particular on the concrete implementing measures of that process and on the anticipated impact on the Council's budget;

9.  Regrets the difficulties repeatedly encountered in the discharge procedures to date, which were due to a lack of cooperation from the Council; points out that Parliament refused to grant discharge to the Secretary-General of the Council in relation to the financial years 2009, 2010, 2011 and 2012 for the reasons set out in its resolutions of 10 May 2011(8), 25 October 2011(9), 10 May 2012(10), 23 October 2012(11), 17 April 2013(12), 9 October 2013(13), 3 April 2014(14) and 23 October 2014(15) and postponed its decision on granting the Secretary-General of the Council discharge in relation to the financial year 2013 for the reasons set out in its resolution of 29 April 2015(16);

10.  Insists that an effective budgetary control exercise requires cooperation between Parliament and the Council as set out in its resolution of 29 April 2015; confirms that Parliament is unable to make an informed decision on granting discharge;

11.  Reminds the Council of the Commission's view, expressed in its letter of 23 January 2014, that all institutions are fully part of the follow-up process after the observations made by Parliament in the discharge exercise and that all institutions should cooperate to ensure the smooth functioning of the discharge procedure;

12.  Notes that the Commission stated in the abovementioned letter that it will not oversee the implementation of the budget of the other institutions and that giving a response to questions addressed to another institution would infringe the autonomy of that institution to implement its own section of the budget;

13.  Regrets that the Council continues to fail to provide answers to Parliament's questions; recalls the conclusions of the Parliament workshop on Parliament's Right to Grant Discharge to the Council held on 27 September 2012, at which the legal and academic experts largely agreed on the Parliament's right to information; in this respect refers to the third subparagraph of Article 15(3) TFEU which stipulates that each institution, body, office or agency shall ensure that its proceedings are transparent;

14.  Insists that the expenditure of the Council must be scrutinised in the same way as that of other institutions and that the fundamental elements of such scrutiny have been laid down in its discharge resolutions of the past years;

15.  Emphasises Parliament's prerogative to grant discharge pursuant to Articles 316, 317 and 319 TFEU, in line with current interpretation and practice, namely to grant discharge to each heading of the budget individually in order to maintain transparency and democratic accountability towards Union taxpayers;

16.  Takes the view that Council's failure to submit the requested documents to Parliament above all undermines the right of citizens of the Union to information and transparency and is becoming a cause for concern, reflecting as it does a certain democratic deficit within the Union institutions;

17.  Believes that it is necessary to consider different possibilities to update the rules on granting discharge laid down in the TFEU;

18.  Considers that satisfactory cooperation between Parliament, the European Council and the Council as a result of an open and formal dialogue procedure can be a positive sign to be sent to the citizens of the Union.

(1) OJ L 66, 8.3.2013.
(2) OJ C 403, 13.11.2014, p. 1.
(3) OJ C 398, 12.11.2014, p. 1.
(4) OJ C 403, 13.11.2014, p. 128.
(5) OJ L 255, 30.9.2015, p. 21.
(6) OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.
(7) OJ L 298, 26.10.2012, p. 1.
(8) OJ L 250, 27.9.2011, p. 25.
(9) OJ L 313, 26.11.2011, p. 13.
(10) OJ L 286, 17.10.2012, p. 23.
(11) OJ L 350, 20.12.2012, p. 71.
(12) OJ L 308, 16.11.2013, p. 22.
(13) OJ L 328, 7.12.2013, p. 97.
(14) OJ L 266, 5.9.2014, p. 26.
(15) OJ L 334, 21.11.2014, p. 95.
(16) OJ L 255, 30.9.2015, p. 22.


Ebola crisis: long-term lessons
PDF 205kWORD 95k
European Parliament resolution of 27 October 2015 on the Ebola crisis: the long-term lessons and how to strengthen health systems in developing countries to prevent future crises (2014/2204(INI))
P8_TA(2015)0374A8-0281/2015

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to United Nations Security Council Resolution 2177 (2014) of 18 September 2014 on peace and security in Africa,

–  having regard to United Nations General Assembly Resolution 69/1 of 19 September 2014 on measures to contain and combat the recent Ebola outbreak in West Africa,

–  having regard to the decision by the United Nations Secretary-General, Ban Ki-moon, to set up the organisation’s first emergency health mission, the UN Mission for Ebola Emergency Response (UNMEER), following the adoption of General Assembly Resolution 69/1 and Security Council Resolution 2177 (2014) on the Ebola epidemic,

–  having regard to the World Health Organisation’s International Health Regulations (IHR) of 2005 (WA 32.1),

–  having regard to the recommendations from the WHO’s consultation on zoonoses of 5 May 2004,

–  having regard to the WHO’s statement of 8 August 2014 declaring the Ebola epidemic a public health emergency of international concern,

–  having regard to the WHO’s Ebola response roadmap of 28 August 2014 and the updates thereto,

–  having regard to the Director-General of the WHO’s report to the Executive Council at its extraordinary session on Ebola held in Geneva on 25 January 2015,

–  having regard to the WHO’s statement of 9 May 2015 on the end of the epidemic of the Ebola virus in Liberia,

–  having regard to the Guidance for Immunization Programmes in the African Region in the Context of Ebola, issued by the WHO,

–  having regard to the statement made following the spring 2015 meeting of the World Bank Group and the International Monetary Fund held in Washington DC from 17 to 19 April 2015,

–  having regard to the international conference entitled ‘Ebola: from emergency to recovery’ held in Brussels on 3 March 2015,

–  having regard to the establishment by the African Union of the African Union Support to Ebola Outbreak in West Africa (ASEOWA) mission on 21 August 2014,

–  having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1291/2013 of 11 December 2013 establishing Horizon 2020 – the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation (2014-2020),

–  having regard to the Commission communication COM(2010)0128 together with SEC(2010)0380, 0381 and 0382 on the EU Role in Global Health,

–  having regard to the European Council conclusions of 24 October 2014,

–  having regard to the Council conclusions on the EU Role in Global Health of the 3011th Foreign Affairs Council meeting in Brussels on 10 May 2010,

–  having regard to the conclusions of the EU Foreign Affairs Council meetings of 15 August 2015, 20 October 2014, 17 November 2014 and 12 December 2014 and 16 March 2015 on the Ebola crisis in West Africa,

–  having regard to the reports to the European Council drawn up in November 2014 and March 2015 by Christos Stylianides, Commissioner and EU Ebola Coordinator,

–  having regard to the Comprehensive Response Framework for the Ebola Virus Outbreak in Western Africa drawn up by the European External Action Service and the Commission,

–  having regard to the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) and to the 2011 EITI progress report of Sierra Leone, the 2012 EITI progress report of Liberia and the 2012 EITI progress report of Guinea,

–  having regard to the French RIPOST ‘Network of Public Health Institutes in West Africa’ programme,

–  having regard to the resolution on the Ebola outbreak adopted by the ACP-EU Parliamentary Assembly on 3 December 2014 in Strasbourg, France,

–  having regard to its resolution of 18 September 2014 on the EU’s response to the Ebola outbreak(1),

–  having regard to Rule 52 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Development and the opinions of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety and the Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality (A8-0281/2015),

A.  whereas the health systems of Liberia, Sierra Leone and Guinea contain massive gaps, and whereas the three countries already before the outbreak were among those at the bottom of the UNDP’s human development index, with around 80 % of the countries’ citizens living in extreme poverty, and scored highest in the world in premature adult and under-five mortality rates, mainly for treatable conditions;

B.  whereas the Ebola crisis is systemic at local and regional level and also at national and global governance level;

C.  whereas the magnitude of the catastrophe can be attributed to several factors, among which: the political failure of the affected countries to sound the alarm, the ill-adapted response of the international community, the shattering effects of closure of borders and restrictions on people, the ineffectiveness of the surveillance and alert mechanisms, the slow and poorly adapted response once aid was eventually mobilised, the stark absence of leadership from the WHO, the lack of research and development of drugs, diagnostics and vaccines;

D.  Whereas three new confirmed cases of Ebola virus disease were registered in the week to 18 October 2015, all in Guinea; whereas the country had reported zero cases for the previous two weeks; whereas Sierra Leone reported zero cases for a fifth consecutive week; whereas the WHO declared Liberia free of Ebola virus transmission in the human population on 3 September 2015; whereas there have been 28 512 confirmed cases, including 11 313 confirmed deaths;

E.  whereas still too little is known about the prevalence, transmission and mutation potential of the Ebola virus; whereas widespread confusion and prevailing misunderstandings about the causes and consequences of Ebola virus disease have perpetuated the spread of the virus; whereas ethnographic research is useful in order to understand how communities work and how to reach people with different cultural backgrounds;

F.  whereas Ebola virus disease was found in semen and in ocular fluid of convalescent persons; whereas there are single evident cases of sexual transmission, which indicates difficulties to eradicate the virus and to determine a point in time when countries really can be regarded as Ebola free;

G.  whereas in a large number of African countries the health and education systems have deteriorated throughout the Structural Adjustment Programmes imposed by the IMF and World Bank, which required budget cuts in the public sector;

H.  whereas the Ebola outbreak in West Africa has shown that local and national health systems in low-income countries do not have the means or resilience to respond to an infectious disease outbreak such as that of Ebola; whereas strengthening global health systems has therefore become an integral part of global health governance;

I.  having regard to the importance of culture and traditional customs in the management of the Ebola crisis(2);

J.  whereas children, adolescent girls and young women are among the most marginalised and vulnerable during such a crisis, which poses a serious threat to women’s engagement in economic activities and has increased gender gaps in education; whereas orphans may face repudiation and stigmatisation;

K.  whereas the Ebola epidemic which affected West Africa is the largest and most complex outbreak in the history of the disease; whereas the WHO was first alerted to the outbreak of Ebola on 23 March 2014, but whereas it was only on 8 August 2014 that the International Health Regulations Emergency Committee declared it a public health emergency of international concern; whereas prior to this outbreak, Ebola had not been considered a major public health challenge;

L.  whereas nearly 500 healthcare workers have died of Ebola in Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone, in countries suffering already from a serious shortfall of staff before the outbreak of the Ebola crisis; whereas hospitals and health staff did not have the capacity to deal with other diseases owing to the resources mobilised to fight the Ebola epidemic; whereas there is a need to protect health facilities and health workers to enable the sustainable provisions of medical care;

M.  whereas many recovered patients have had to face stigmatisation from both their relatives and society; whereas this situation particularly affects children who have lost one or two parents, and many of these children have been rejected by their surviving relatives for fear of infection;

N.  whereas there is a need to integrate epidemiology, public health and social science in order to draw appropriate lessons from the Ebola outbreak;

O.  whereas in the first few months of the Ebola crisis, the humanitarian NGOs – Médecins Sans Frontières and the Red Cross in particular – were the most effective, best informed and most experienced players and therefore played a front-line role in initial efforts to combat the virus;

P.  whereas the closing of schools and the tendency for orphaned children to become caregivers in households risk creating a ‘lost generation’ of children deprived of formal education for long periods of time;

Q.  whereas with their know-how and their ability to work together, the humanitarian organisations showed that, when it is necessary at the start of a crisis, they can be more relevant and more effective than the ‘institutional players’;

R.  whereas the Ebola crisis has resulted in another problem which Médecins Sans Frontières has referred to as ‘a crisis within a crisis’, namely that people with conditions other than Ebola are not going to hospital for fear that they will be infected with the virus;

S.  whereas the EU, together with its Member States, is the biggest donor of development aid in the world and has made available more than EUR 1,39 billion to help contain the outbreak of Ebola virus disease in West Africa; whereas this amount enables the EU to negotiate with partner countries and other donors to support a comprehensive national health system development that builds on a coherent, inclusive, needs-based strategy;

T.  whereas the United Nations World Food Programme has proved that it has an effective logistics capability that could be used in future for early warning and response purposes as well;

U.  whereas the safety of caregivers is essential for the international mobilisation of health workers;

V.  whereas the European Council appointed an EU Ebola Coordinator on 23 October 2014 in the person of the Commissioner for Humanitarian Aid and Crisis Management, Mr Stylianides; whereas since 12 November 2014 he has visited the countries most affected, accompanied by the Commissioner for Health, Mr Andriukaitis;

W.  whereas the United Nations, the WHO and the Commission have established procedures for assessing the management of the epidemic;

X.  whereas in a statement issued in April 2015 the WHO acknowledged that the world and the organisation itself were poorly prepared to deal with a lengthy epidemic;

Y.  whereas it is essential to improve international governance of health crises;

Z.  whereas access to medicines is a key part of the right to health;

AA.  whereas 2 billion people worldwide do not have access to the vaccines or treatments they need to stay alive and healthy;

AB.  whereas access to medicines and to research and development findings in this area must be geared, as a priority, to the needs of sufferers, whether in Europe or in developing countries;

AC.  whereas Innovative Medicines Initiative is the world’s biggest public-private partnership in life sciences, with a budget of EUR 3,3 billion for the 2014-2024 period, of which EUR 1,638 billion comes from Horizon 2020;

AD.  whereas the trauma of Ebola has left people distrustful of health facilities, left health workers fearful of resuming services and left communities impoverished and suspicious; whereas the basic relaunching of health services is urgent; and whereas it is equally essential to set up robust and effective health systems, including mutualisation of risks, in all developing countries, which also implies solid training of the local medical staff;

AE.  whereas the Ebola crisis has dragged the countries in the area affected deeper into recession, and whereas in 2015 alone, according to the World Bank, the GDP of the three countries worst affected will be reduced by USD 2 billion as a result;

AF.  whereas those three countries have applied to the IMF and the World Bank for a ‘Marshall Plan’ package worth EUR 7 500 million, to help them to overcome their economic difficulties;

AG.  whereas some NGOs have called on the World Bank to raise some USD 1,7 billion in order to help those countries to make lasting improvements to their healthcare infrastructure;

AH.  whereas the international community needs to remain vigilant, and whereas the goal is to reach the post-Ebola stage, i.e. the stage at which there have been no new cases of infection for a long period;

AI.  whereas good hygiene practices are indispensable; whereas, however, the three countries lack sufficiently working water and sanitation systems;

AJ.  whereas it is to be feared that in the case of any other outbreak, the scale of the death toll would reoccur;

AK.  whereas Vice-President/High Representative Federica Mogherini, European Commissioner for Humanitarian Aid and EU Ebola Coordinator Christos Stylianides, European Commissioner for International Cooperation and Development Neven Mimica, Members of the European Parliament, governments and parliamentarians of the Member States have repeatedly called for the strengthening of health systems;

AL.  whereas, under the 11th European Development Fund, health system strengthening and the strengthening of water and sanitation services are only among the focal sectors for Guinea, and not for Liberia and Sierra Leone;

AM.  whereas the Commission communication on the EU Role in Global Health (COM(2010)0128) presents a comprehensive and holistic needs-based global health strategy that was endorsed by the Member States;

AN.  whereas not all states fully implemented the IHR; whereas the IHR should be revised after gaining experience during the latest Ebola epidemic;

AO.  whereas little is known about potentially dangerous zoonoses; whereas food and agricultural practices, deforestation and trade in animals and animal products led to the emergence of newly evolving zoonotic diseases such as avian influenza, Ebola and HIV;

AP.  whereas the WHO recommends coordination between public health and veterinary sectors;

AQ.  whereas a delegation from the Committee on Development will visit Sierra Leone in November 2015;

1.  Criticises the slow international response to the crisis during the first months; stresses, however, the response and commitment of the EU and its Member States since March 2014 to help contain the propagation of the Ebola virus; notes the scaling-up of the EU and its Member States’ commitment in the areas of humanitarian and development aid, logistics and research to respond to the crisis;

2.  Welcomes the development of a new vaccine (in record time), which has proven 100 % effective in Guinea as of 23 March 2015, and calls for urgent guaranteed access to this vaccine, which should be affordable to everyone in Liberia and Sierra Leone;

3.  Considers that there should be no lowering of the guard in relation to some new cases of Ebola, the mode of transmission of which remains open to question;

4.  Calls on all parties concerned, particularly governments of developing countries, European institutions and international organisations, to learn from this crisis, including from the negative impacts on health sectors in developing countries of the conditionalities of IMF and World Bank structural adjustment facilities, and to develop effective means of dealing with international health crises;

5.  Notes, in this context, the reform announced by the Director of the WHO on 18 May 2015, particularly as regards the establishment of a new emergency programme and a world reserve of staff who can be deployed quickly on the ground, and the establishment of a new reserve fund of USD 100 million specifically for emergencies; welcomes the commitment to increase the WHO’s budget by 10 % within two years, bringing it to USD 4,5 billion;

6.  Calls on the international community to promote information and education campaigns in the countries concerned; stresses the crucial importance of prevention and information campaigns in managing the crisis, in particular in order to limit contamination, and to raise awareness of unsafe practices that should be avoided; stresses the importance of alternative means of disseminating information;

7.  Strongly emphasises the importance of combating increased tensions between groups as a result of the Ebola outbreak, as the creation of myths could mean that certain ethnic groups are blamed for the Ebola outbreak;

8.  Takes the view that, once emergency assistance is no longer required, the EU’s long-term response should focus first on development assistance, which will need to include investment in the health sector to promote resilience, particularly as regards the organisation and management of health systems, health monitoring and information, medicine supply systems, domestic governance and state-building, and then focus on the assistance that is essential in order to get the three countries’ economies back on their feet;

9.  Calls on the authorities to take into account the lessons learnt concerning the stigmatisation phenomenon and to implement them in similar humanitarian crisis which may occur;

10.  Recalls the importance of conflict prevention, as conflicts and fragility have a very negative impact on health systems;

11.  Calls for the establishment of a permanent European rapid response capability comprising experts, laboratory support staff, epidemiologists and logistics facilities, including mobile laboratories, that can be deployed extremely swiftly; draws attention in particular to the contribution the EU can make to screening at land and maritime borders and to the fact that the Union could seek to emulate and benefit from the level of excellence achieved by the US health authorities in screening at airports;

12.  Calls also on the EU to support the establishment of a network of monitoring points in developing countries to make it possible to detect as quickly as possible new cases of infectious disease which have the potential to develop into pandemics, in order to create a sentinel network in those countries;

13.  Recognises the need to support the establishment of cooperation between the EU and its Member States and developing countries, in particular those of West Africa, as far as training medical staff is concerned;

14.  Stresses the importance of strengthening protection and rapid evacuation systems for international health workers;

15.  Deplores the fact that past adjustments and reforms and inequitable development policies have contributed to ineffective health systems; urges the Commission to help the three countries affected to develop their own public health systems in order for them to be able to meet basic healthcare needs and to build up the infrastructure required to ensure that all their citizens have access to public healthcare; in particular, takes the view that building a resilient health system over the long term requires, inter alia, (i) investing resources in basic public health services, (ii) ensuring safe and quality care by increasing resources to train, supervise and pay health workers adequately and by giving access to safe drugs, (iii) engaging local stakeholders and communities in crisis response and development planning; calls on international donors to increase Official Development Assistance (ODA) to those countries through country systems such as budget support; calls on the Commission to establish, in cooperation with partner countries, the WHO, the World Bank and other donors, coherent needs-based health plans and monitoring procedures;

16.  Stresses that the responses should address the underlying gaps in women’s representation, access to health and services and the disruption to livelihoods; stresses in particular the need to offer high-quality basic services and healthcare, especially where maternity care and obstetric and gynaecological services are concerned;

17.  Welcomes the Commission communication on the EU Role in Global Health (COM(2010)0128) and its holistic vision on comprehensive health systems, its horizontal approach and its endeavour for universal health coverage; encourages the Commission to review this communication in the light of new insights gained during the Ebola crisis, while keeping the comprehensive and horizontal approach, and to present and implement a Programme for Action in a timely manner;

18.  Stresses, in general, the need for developing countries to give budgetary priority to setting up robust and resilient public social security and public health systems, building sufficient numbers of well-equipped, sustainable healthcare infrastructure (in particular laboratories, water and sanitation facilities) and offering high-quality basic services and healthcare; emphasises the need for a sufficient ratio of health workers to population, and calls on the governments of the affected countries to ensure that health workers are paid and that money for health reaches the people; acknowledges, nevertheless, that crises such as the current one cannot be solved by health systems alone, and that a comprehensive approach involving different sectors such as education and training, sanitation, food safety and drinking water, is needed to address the critical gaps in all essential services; stresses, at the same time, that education, covering cultural dimensions and beliefs, are also key in the recovery;

19.  Points out that investment in the health sector is an important driver of economic development and contributes to poverty reduction in developing countries; welcomes the inclusion of Goal 3 ‘Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages’ in the proposal for future Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs);

20.  Stresses that the long-term costed plans needed to build resilient and comprehensive health systems must further include an adequate number of trained health workers, access to sufficient medical supplies and robust health information systems;

21.  Calls for research infrastructure to be bolstered by the establishment of a regional public infectious disease research centre in West Africa, and for inter-university cooperation to be established with the participation of the EU and its Member States;

22.  Stresses the need to tackle social inequality in order to build a resilient, sustainable public health system; supports, to this end, the introduction of publicly funded universal health coverage free at the point of use, and urges the Commission, together with partner countries and other donors, to submit as soon as possible a programme for establishing universal health cover, which will guarantee the mutualisation of health risks;

23.  Calls on all countries to commit to Universal Health Coverage (UHC) and to develop a plan identifying domestic resources and potential international funding to meet this goal; supports the target of scaling-up healthcare spending in all countries to the recognised minimum of USD 86 per person for essential health services;

24.  Welcomes the high-level international conference on Ebola held on 3 March 2015 under the auspices of the EU and key partners with the aim of eradicating Ebola but also of assessing the impacts on the affected countries in order to make sure that development aid builds on humanitarian efforts;

25.  Supports the idea of a ‘Marshall Plan’ to help kick-start those countries’ economies; suggests offering technical assistance to the administration to enhance their capacity and to ensure that money reaches the people and is not lost to corruption or other purposes;

26.  Welcomes international efforts to alleviate the international debt burden of the countries affected by the Ebola virus;

27.  Believes that partnerships between the EU and the area affected by the crisis will be effective only if Liberia, Guinea and Sierra Leone are able to take ownership of their own development as quickly as possible;

28.  Believes that the programming of the 11th European Development Fund should be reviewed to ensure that investments in health and good governance become priority areas for all countries with fragile public infrastructure; is concerned that health and water and sanitation are not among the focal sectors in the National Indicative Programmes of Liberia and Sierra Leone; calls on the Commission to establish mechanisms to monitor aid more closely;

29.  Believes that the risk posed by the structural under-funding of EU humanitarian action cannot be ignored during the mid-term review of the multiannual financial framework;

30.  Congratulates the humanitarian aid workers and medical staff on the ground who have risked their lives in the efforts to contain this major health crisis;

31.  Congratulates the United Nations Mission for Ebola Emergency Response (UNMEER), partner organisations and non-governmental humanitarian organisations, such as Médecins Sans Frontières, the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, Emergency and others, for their work done on the ground, and warmly welcomes their extensive input and help in controlling this outbreak; regrets the cases of inappropriate treatment of medical staff and other staff involved in the fight against the Ebola outbreak following their return from Africa;

32.  Believes that access to medicines should, as a matter of principle, no longer be dependent on patients’ purchasing power but should instead be geared to patients’ needs, and that market forces should not be the sole determinant of which medicines to produce;

33.  Calls for the EU and its Member States to honour the EU’s ‘Policy Coherence for Development’ principle, set out in Article 208 TFEU though the promotion of fair and equitable international trade, medical research and innovation policies that foster and facilitate universal access to medicines;

34.  Calls on the Commission to explore alternative models to those based on patent monopolies when it comes to the development of drugs or vaccines produced by public-private partnerships, such as the Innovative Medicines Initiative, which can guarantee patient accessibility to treatments, sustainability of healthcare budgets and an efficient response to crises such as the one caused by the Ebola virus or similar threats;

35.  Stresses the importance of increasing global epidemiological research capacity, developing ‘quick tests’ and providing access to vaccines; welcomes, in this regard, the fact that many EU research funds have been mobilised to fight against the Ebola virus, including through the Innovative Medicines Initiative, the Horizon 2020 programme and the European & Developing Countries Clinical Trial Partnership (EDCTP) programme; underlines that, although vaccines are welcome, they are most probably not suitable to eradicate Ebola, as the virus is mutating; stresses, therefore, that funding priority has to be given to general health system strengthening, hygiene, containment, reliable quick testing in tropical settings and medication targeting the virus and the symptoms it causes;

36.  Urges all parties concerned to promote health training among the public by focusing on the issue of traditional customs that are incompatible with the fight against the spread of the disease among the population;

37.  Stresses that the EU should promote effective and fair financing of research that benefits the health of all and ensures that innovations and interventions lead to affordable and accessible solutions; reiterates, in particular, that models that dissociate the costs of research and development and the prices of medicines should be explored, including the opportunities for technology transfer to developing countries;

38.  Reiterates the need to invest in neglected diseases; calls, in this context, on the Commission to continue the discussions on this issue and to make arrangements for wide-ranging cooperation between the public and private sectors, provided that safeguards are introduced to prevent public-private partnerships from harming vulnerable people in an unregulated market, aiming at reinforcing national health systems and facilitating the transfer of results to the population concerned; welcomes in this regard the fact that, to address the urgent need for research into new treatments, the EU has made available EUR 138 million for projects developing clinical trials for new vaccines, rapid diagnostic tests and treatments under Horizon 2020 and the Innovative Medicines Initiative; commends the European pharmaceutical industry, which has also committed important resources to supporting the research efforts;

39.  Underlines that Ebola and other epidemics are transnational threats that call for international cooperation; calls on the WHO to revise the IHR with a view to incorporating interdependent responsibility and financial support, including for addressing root causes;

40.  Welcomes, in the light of sketchy IHR implementation and a lack of epidemiological surveillance, the French RIPOST ‘Network of Public Health Institutes in West Africa’ programme;

41.  Stresses that now that the outbreak is in decline, while the virus stays in the gonads for months after recovery, sexual counselling and family planning has to be made available as part of the health system and education measures;

42.  Stresses that a food crisis seems increasingly likely to follow in the wake of the epidemic, which has devastated small-scale farmers; calls on the Member States, the Commission and the international community to invest in their long-term development in order to ensure that farming households and West Africa’s future food security do not remain at risk;

43.  Calls on its relevant committee to monitor the crisis management measures being taken, in close cooperation with the EU Ebola Coordinator, and after Parliament’s mission to Sierra Leone, before submitting a final assessment based on well-defined criteria;

44.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the Vice-President of the Commission/High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, the governments and parliaments of the Member States, the governments and parliaments of the African Union countries, the Secretary-General of the United Nations and the World Health Organisation.

(1) Texts adopted, P8_TA(2014)0026.
(2) Customs which, for example, prohibit the burning of dead bodies.


Emission measurements in the automotive sector
PDF 191kWORD 84k
European Parliament resolution of 27 October 2015 on emission measurements in the automotive sector (2015/2865(RSP))
P8_TA(2015)0375RC-B8-1075/2015

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the question to the Commission on emission measurements in the automotive sector (O-000113/2015 – B8-0764/2015),

–  having regard to Regulation (EC) No 715/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2007 on type approval of motor vehicles with respect to emissions from light passenger and commercial vehicles (Euro 5 and Euro 6) and on access to vehicle repair and maintenance information(1),

–  having regard to Directive 2007/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 September 2007 establishing a framework for the approval of motor vehicles and their trailers, and of systems, components and separate technical units intended for such vehicles(2),

–  having regard to Directive 2001/81/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2001 on national emission ceilings for certain atmospheric pollutants(3),

–  having regard to Directive 2008/50/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2008 on ambient air quality and cleaner air for Europe(4),

–  having regard to Regulation (EU) No 333/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 amending Regulation (EC) No 443/2009 to define the modalities for reaching the 2020 target to reduce CO2 emissions from new passenger cars(5),

–  having regard to Rules 128(5) and 123(4) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.  whereas on 18 September 2015 the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and California Air Resources Board (CARB) both issued a notice of violation of the pollution rules applicable to Volkswagen AG, Audi AG and Volkswagen Group of America (collectively, VW); whereas the investigation began following research on nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions from diesel vehicles, conducted by a non-governmental organisation in cooperation with university researchers, and the results of this research were submitted to the EPA and the CARB in May 2014;

B.  whereas air pollution causes over 430 000 premature deaths in the EU yearly and costs up to an estimated EUR 940 billion annually as a result of its health impacts; whereas NOx is a major air pollutant which causes, inter alia, lung cancer, asthma and many respiratory diseases, as well environmental degradation such as eutrophication and acidification; whereas diesel vehicle exhausts are a principal source of NOx in urban areas in Europe; whereas up to a third of the EU’s urban population continues to be exposed to levels above the limits or target values set by the EU; whereas transport continues to be a main contributor to poor air quality levels in cities, and to the related health impacts; whereas over 20 Member States are currently failing to meet the EU air quality limits, in particular because of urban pollution;

C.  whereas since 2012 the WHO International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has classified diesel engine exhaust as a carcinogen, and has advised that, given the additional health impacts of diesel particulates, exposure to the mixture of chemicals emitted should be reduced worldwide;

D.  whereas the automotive industry is one of the key contributors to growth and innovation, and contributes to employment in a significant number of Member States; whereas unless decisive action is taken the present scandal risks undermining the reputation and competiveness of the whole sector;

E.  whereas small and medium-sized enterprises dominate the automotive supply industry and contribute 50 % to sector specific research and development; whereas the economic strength of many regions in Europe derives from the automotive industry and the automotive supply industry;

F.  whereas fair competition, including among car manufacturers, implies that the customer is able to choose the product basing his choice on the comprehensive and unbiased technical characteristics provided;

G.  whereas the EU has made a number of efforts to remedy the effects of the economic crisis on the automotive industry using the available tools on state aid;

H.  whereas the Regulation on type approval of motor vehicles with respect to emissions from light vehicles (Regulation (EC) No 715/2007, agreed by Parliament and the Council in December 2006), which sets the Euro 5/6 emission standards, requires manufacturers to equip their vehicles so that they meet the emission requirements ‘in normal use’ (Article 5(1));

I.  whereas Regulation (EC) No 715/2007 (Article 5(2)) explicitly prohibits the use of defeat devices, defined as ‘any element of design which senses temperature, vehicle speed, engine speed (RPM), transmission gear, manifold vacuum or any other parameter for the purpose of activating, modulating, delaying or deactivating the operation of any part of the emission control system, that reduces the effectiveness of the emission control system under conditions which may reasonably be expected to be encountered in normal vehicle operation and use’; whereas the Member States have an obligation to enforce this ban; whereas the regulation also explicitly invites the Commission to introduce tests and to adopt measures concerning the use of defeat mechanisms;

J.  whereas, under the Directive on certain aspects of the sale of consumer goods and associated guarantees (1999/44/EC), consumers have the right to a minimum two‑year guarantee period after purchasing a product, and whereas the seller is required to deliver goods to the consumer which are in conformity with the contract of sale; whereas, if there is no such conformity, the consumer is entitled to a free-of-charge repair or replacement, or to have a price reduction;

K.  whereas the Consumer Rights Directive (2011/83/EU) requires information on the main characteristics of a product to be provided prior to the conclusion of on- or off‑premises or distance contracts, and requires the Member States to have rules on effective, proportionate and dissuasive penalties if the provisions of the directive are not fulfilled;

L.  whereas the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive (2005/29/EC) prohibits, in particular, any practice that ‘materially distorts or is likely to materially distort the economic behaviour with regard to the product of the average consumer whom it reaches or to whom it is addressed’, provides that commercial practices which are in all circumstances considered to be unfair include ‘claiming that a trader (including his commercial practices) or a product has been approved, endorsed or authorised by a public or private body when he/it has not or making such a claim without complying with the terms of the approval, endorsement or authorisation’, and requires the Member States to adopt effective, proportionate and dissuasive penalties;

M.  whereas the Euro 5 limit value for NOx emissions from diesel vehicles is 180 mg/km, applicable to vehicles type-approved between 1 September 2009 and 1 September 2014 and to all vehicles sold between 1 January 2011 and 1 September 2015, and whereas the corresponding Euro 6 value is 80 mg/km, applicable to new types since 1 September 2014 and to all vehicles sold since 1 September 2015; whereas Euro 6 vehicles registered before the standard was introduced as a legal limit have benefited from tax rebates in many Member States; whereas independent test results confirm significant discrepancies between the limits and actual vehicle emissions in normal use for both standards;

N.  whereas an analysis by the Commission Joint Research Centre(6) in 2011 came to the conclusion that NOx emissions of diesel vehicles measured with Portable Emission Measurement Systems (PEMS) substantially exceed respective Euro 3-5 emission limits, ranging from a factor of 2-4 for average NOx emissions over entire test routes up to a factor of 14 in individual test windows; whereas another JRC report(7) published in 2013 referred to conclusions that Euro 6 vehicles may even exceed the emission levels of Euro 5 vehicles; whereas independent analyses undertaken in 2014 documented, on average, on-road NOx emissions from tested diesel vehicles about seven times higher than the limits set by the Euro 6 standard;

O.  whereas VW has admitted to having installed defeat devices in at least 11 million of the diesel vehicles it has sold worldwide; whereas VW has announced that it will recall 8.5 million VW diesel vehicles in the EU following a decision of the German Federal Motor Transport Authority;

P.  whereas this documented emissions gap can be due to both the inadequacy of the current test procedure used in the EU, which does not represent normal driving conditions, and to the use of defeat devices; whereas the reliability and robustness of the test procedure for vehicles is of crucial importance for the attainment of the emission limits and hence for the protection of public health and the environment in the EU;

Q.  whereas Article 14(3) of Regulation (EC) No 715/2007 obliges the Commission to keep under review the test cycles used to measure emissions and, if the tests are found to be no longer adequate, to adapt them so as to adequately reflect the emissions generated by real driving on the road; whereas such adaptation has not yet taken place; whereas the Commission is, however, currently preparing the adoption of a new test cycle based on Real Driving Emissions (RDE);

R.  whereas the tests for conformity of production and in-service conformity have not been subject to common standards at EU level, despite the mandate given to the Commission to establish specific requirements for such procedures through comitology; whereas, as a result, the requirements for conformity of production and in‑service conformity are generally not adequately enforced; whereas there is no requirement for disclosure of information to the Commission, other Member State Type Approval Authorities or other interested parties regarding any tests applied by the competent Type Approval Authorities and results thereof;

S.  whereas the current EU type-approval regime does not allow the Commission or other Member States’ authorities to reassess vehicles’ type approvals or certificates of conformity, to recall vehicles or to suspend their placement on the market if they are type-approved by another Member State; whereas under the current system there is no oversight of testing performed by national Type Approval Authorities to ensure that all authorities respect the common EU rules and do not engage in unfair competition by lowering standards;

T.  whereas the Commission is in the process of reviewing the type-approval framework; whereas this review is of the utmost importance in order to restore consumer trust in emissions and fuel consumption tests;

U.  whereas current systems for controlling NOx emissions from diesel passenger cars rely on three main technologies: inner-engine modifications coupled with exhaust gas recirculation (EGR), lean-burn NOx absorbers (lean NOx traps, or LNTs), and selective catalytic reduction (SCR); whereas, in order to meet Euro 6 limit values, most vehicles are equipped with at least two of the three technologies; whereas all of these technologies can be de-activated with software defeat devices;

V.  whereas, in order to ensure compliance with emission standards, vehicles equipped with defeat devices will require the removal of the device, emission control system software modifications and, depending on the engine technology, hardware interventions; whereas it could be possible to improve the performance of emission control systems already installed in vehicles through the removal of defeat devices, reprogramming and recalibration;

W.  whereas discrepancies between test results and vehicle performance in normal use are not limited to NOx, but also exist for other pollutants and for CO2; whereas according to independent studies the gap between official and real-world CO2 emissions from passenger cars in Europe stood at 40 % in 2014;

X.  whereas the change to the Worldwide Harmonised Light Vehicles Test Procedure (WLTP) in the EU requires the existing fleet average CO2 emission targets for manufacturers to be adapted to the new test;

1.  Strongly condemns any fraud by automobile manufacturers and urges companies to take full responsibility for their actions and to cooperate fully with the authorities in any investigations; deplores the fact that millions of consumers have been deceived and misled by false information regarding emissions from their vehicles;

2.  Believes that, where evidence of wrong-doing is confirmed, redress to the consumer should be well communicated and undertaken swiftly and should not be to the further detriment of the consumer;

3.  Considers it regrettable that excess emissions cause premature deaths, harmful effects on human health, and environmental damage;

4.  Considers it imperative that the Commission and Member States quickly restore the confidence of consumers through concrete actions and make every possible effort to de‑escalate the situation; emphasises its solidarity with the employees concerned, and is concerned about the impact along the supply chain, especially on SMEs, which currently are innocently facing huge challenges caused by the fraud; stresses that employees should not ultimately be the ones who pay the price for emission measurement manipulation;

5.  Stresses that before considering any redundancies the manufacturers must use their own financial resources, including by retaining profits rather than distributing dividends, to cover as much as possible of the cost arising from the infringement of applicable law;

6.  Is deeply concerned about the delay on the part of Member State authorities and the Commission to act upon the evidence of serious and persistent exceedances of emissions limit values prescribed in EU law for vehicles in normal use;

7.  Recalls that diesel cars have lower CO2 emissions per kilometre than equivalent petrol-powered vehicles and that they are an important means of enabling manufacturers to reach the EU’s 2021 fleet average CO2 emission targets; recalls that they will also continue to be an essential contributor to meeting post-2021 targets, but stresses that manufacturers need to use available clean technology to reduce NOx, PM and other pollutants;

8.  Urges full transparency on the part of the Commission and the Member States about their knowledge of these breaches and the actions they have taken to address them; calls for a thorough investigation regarding the role and responsibility of the Commission and of Member State authorities, bearing in mind inter alia the problems established in the 2011 report of the Commission’s Joint Research Centre;

9.  Calls on the Commission to strengthen the implementation of the EU strategy for sustainable, resource-efficient transport systems for road and other modes of transport, progressively abandoning the current system based on fossil fuels and using new technologies and energy sources such as hydrogen, electricity and compressed air;

10.  Welcomes the investigations being undertaken in several Member States and other countries globally regarding vehicle emissions test results manipulation; supports the Commission’s call to national surveillance authorities to proceed with extensive checks on a wide variety of makes and models of vehicles; considers that any such investigation should involve the Commission; insists that investigations be conducted in a transparent and effective manner, with due consideration for the need for consumers affected directly by any lack of conformity that is discovered to be kept well informed;

11.  Demands that the Commission report back to Parliament on the results of these investigations, in writing, by 31 March 2016;

12.  Demands that where defeat devices are found, Member State authorities take all necessary action to remedy the situation and apply the appropriate sanctions in accordance with Article 30 of Directive 2007/46/EC and Article 10 of Regulation (EC) No 715/2007;

13.  Draws attention to the Girling report (on National Emission Ceilings for certain pollutants) (A8-0249/2015), adopted by its Committee on the Environment on 15 July 2015, and in particular the request to the Commission and the Member States to urgently finalise the new Euro 6 Real Driving Emissions (RDE) regulation proposal currently under consideration;

14.  Urges the Commission to adopt and implement the new Real Driving Emissions test cycle without any further delay, and to bring it into force for regulatory purposes; welcomes the report on the reduction of pollutant emissions from road vehicles (the Deß report, A8‑0270/2015) adopted by Parliament’s Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety on 23 September 2015, and in particular the requirement that the Commission ‘introduce a real driving emissions test for all vehicles type-approved or registered from 2015 to ensure the effectiveness of emission control systems and enable the vehicle to comply with this Regulation and its implementing measures, with a conformity factor reflecting only the possible tolerances of the emissions measurement procedure in place by 2017’; urges the Member States and the Commission to swiftly come to an agreement on a framework for the test cycle on that basis;

15.  Notes that according to the Commission’s current plans the Real Driving Emissions tests would be used only for NOx emissions; calls for the RDE tests to be implemented for all pollutants;

16.  Deplores the lack of transparency of the deliberations under comitology on the proposal for an RDE test, and in particular the Commission’s failure to forward information to Parliament at the same time as to Member State representatives; calls on the Commission to disclose all relevant documentation to Parliament on an equal footing with Member States, and in particular to publish the preparatory documents for the Technical Committee on Motor Vehicles relating to the adoption of the new RDE test;

17.  Stresses the need for significant strengthening of the current EU type-approval regime, including greater EU oversight, in particular as regards the market surveillance, coordination and follow-up regime for vehicles sold in the Union, the power to require Member States to launch control procedures based on evidence, and the ability to adopt appropriate measures in the event of breaches of EU law;

18.  Calls on the Commission to redesign the current type-approval regime in order to guarantee that type approvals and certificates by national competent authorities can be checked independently and reassessed by the Commission, if appropriate, and to ensure an EU-wide level playing field, and that the implementation of the EU regulations can be effectively enforced, and the shortcomings of implementing measures corrected, without unnecessarily increasing the administrative burden;

19.  Calls, therefore, for consideration to be given to the establishment of an EU-level surveillance authority;

20.  Finds it of utmost importance that the Commission and all Member State competent authorities have the right to reassess type approval and certificates of conformity, to require recalls and stop the placing on the market of vehicles when they have evidence of non-compliance with the EU emissions limit values under the Euro 5 and 6 Regulation or any other requirement provided for by the type-approval regime;

21.  Considers that the upcoming review of the Type Approval Framework Directive must consider expanding and specifying the conformity-of-production requirements in order to ensure that a sufficient and representative sample of new models taken off production lines at random are tested on an annual basis, using RDE tests to check their compliance with EU pollutant and CO2 limit values; calls, furthermore, for improved in-service testing of vehicles already in use on the road, also on the basis of the RDE procedure, in order to verify the in-service conformity of vehicles at different mileages as required under the regulation; calls for the improvement of on-road surveillance through periodic technical inspections to identify and repair vehicles which are found not to be in compliance with EU law;

22.  Calls on national authorities to show no tolerance towards so-called ‘vehicle testing optimisation’, whereby practices such as the over-inflation of tyres, the removal of side-mirrors, taping up of gaps between body panels to reduce aerodynamic drag, the use of special engine and gearbox lubricants that are otherwise not used in engines, the removal of auxiliary equipment such as stereos, and testing at the maximum allowed ambient temperature are common, thus unacceptably accentuating the difference between in-lab testing and the consumer’s experience on the road;

23.  Stresses that consumers must be able to exercise their rights easily, as provided for in Directives 1999/44/EC, 2005/29/EC and 2011/83/EU;

24.  Calls on the Commission, being responsible for competition in the EU internal market, in cooperation with national surveillance authorities, to ensure a level playing field among competitors serving the market;

25.  Recalls the need to fully and thoroughly transpose and implement European rules concerning the functioning of the internal market in all Member States and furthermore calls on European and national market surveillance authorities to investigate all claims of fraud vigorously;

26.  Asks for the Commission to ensure that information provided to consumers under the EU car labelling Directive (1999/94/EC) is accurate, relevant and comparable; considers that the labels should be based on the emission values and fuel efficiency that correspond to real-life driving;

27.  Is concerned about the discrepancy of the CO2 emissions declared in official test results and those measured in real driving conditions; calls, therefore, for swift agreement on the WLTP correlation for fleet average CO2 targets, with due respect for the principle of ‘comparable stringency’ but without credit being given for unfair flexibilities in the current test procedure, in order not to weaken the 2021 target;

28.  Calls on the Commission to take the present revelations into account when formulating new policies in the field of sustainable transport; asks the Commission to take further action to strengthen the EU strategy for sustainable, resource-efficient systems for road and other modes of transport; refers to the approach set out in the 2011 Commission White Paper ‘Roadmap to a Single European Transport Area – Towards a competitive and resource efficient transport system’ and points out its potentially large contribution to effectively reducing the real emissions from transport and improving urban mobility; urges the Commission to put a greater effort into bringing forward the suggested measures covered by the White Paper and encourages the Member States to support this;

29.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States.

(1) OJ L 171, 29.6.2007, p. 1.
(2) OJ L 263, 9.10.2007, p. 1.
(3) OJ L 309, 27.11.2001, p. 22.
(4) OJ L 152, 11.6.2008, p. 1.
(5) OJ L 103, 5.4.2014, p. 15.
(6) Analysing on-road emissions of light-duty vehicles with Portable Emission Measurement Systems (PEMS), JRC 2011.
(7) A complementary emissions test for light-duty vehicles: Assessing the technical feasibility of candidate proce dures, JRC 2013.

Legal notice