Index 
Texts adopted
Tuesday, 24 October 2017 - StrasbourgFinal edition
EU-Morocco Euro-Mediterranean Aviation Agreement ***
 Authorising France to apply a reduced rate of certain indirect taxes on ‘traditional’ rum produced in Guadeloupe, French Guiana, Martinique and Réunion *
 Bio-based Industries Joint Undertaking: financial contributions *
 Subjecting furanylfentanyl to control measures *
 Control of spending and monitoring of EU Youth Guarantee schemes cost-effectiveness
 Criminal acts and penalties in the field of illicit drug trafficking ***II
 CE marked fertilising products ***I
 Information exchange on, and an early warning system and risk assessment procedure for, new psychoactive substances ***I
 Common Fisheries Policy: implementation of the landing obligation ***I
 Renewing the approval of the active substance glyphosate
 Genetically modified maize 1507
 Genetically modified soybean 305423 × 40-3-2
 Genetically modified oilseed rapes MON 88302 × Ms8 × Rf3
 Draft amending budget No 5/2017: financing for the European Fund for Sustainable Development and increasing the Emergency Aid Reserve
 Mobilisation of the Flexibility Instrument to provide the financing for the European Fund for Sustainable Development
 Reflection paper on the future of EU finances
 Legitimate measures to protect whistle-blowers acting in the public interest
 Minimum income policies as a tool for fighting poverty

EU-Morocco Euro-Mediterranean Aviation Agreement ***
PDF 114kWORD 42k
European Parliament legislative resolution of 24 October 2017 on the draft Council Decision on the conclusion, on behalf of the Union, of the Euro-Mediterranean Aviation Agreement between the European Community and its Member States, of the one part, and the Kingdom of Morocco, of the other part (15653/2016 – C8‑0094/2017 – 2006/0048(NLE))
P8_TA(2017)0386A8-0303/2017

(Consent)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the draft Council Decision (15653/2016),

–  having regard to the Euro-Mediterranean Aviation Agreement between the European Community and its Member States, on the one hand, and the Kingdom of Morocco, on the other hand(1)

–  having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Article 100(2) and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C8‑0094/2017),

–  having regard to Rule 99(1) and (4) and Rule 108(7) of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on Transport and Tourism (A8-0303/2017),

1.  Gives its consent to conclusion of the agreement;

2.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and Commission, and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and of the Kingdom of Morocco.

(1) OJ L 386, 29.12.2006, p. 57.


Authorising France to apply a reduced rate of certain indirect taxes on ‘traditional’ rum produced in Guadeloupe, French Guiana, Martinique and Réunion *
PDF 238kWORD 41k
European Parliament legislative resolution of 24 October 2017 on the proposal for a Council decision amending Council Decision No 189/2014/EU authorising France to apply a reduced rate of certain indirect taxes on ‘traditional’ rum produced in Guadeloupe, French Guiana, Martinique and Réunion and repealing Decision No 2007/659/EC (COM(2017)0297 – C8-0212/2017 – 2017/0127(CNS))
P8_TA(2017)0387A8-0304/2017

(Special legislative procedure – consultation)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to the Council (COM(2017)0297),

–  having regard to Article 349 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C8‑0212/2017),

–  having regard to Rule 78c of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Regional Development (A8-0304/2017),

1.  Approves the Commission proposal;

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, the Commission and the national parliaments.


Bio-based Industries Joint Undertaking: financial contributions *
PDF 348kWORD 44k
European Parliament legislative resolution of 24 October 2017 on the proposal for a Council regulation amending the Council Regulation (EU) No 560/2014 of 6 May 2014 establishing the Bio-based Industries Joint Undertaking (COM(2017)0068 – C8-0118/2017 – 2017/0024(NLE))
P8_TA(2017)0388A8-0293/2017

(Consultation)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to the Council (COM(2017)0068),

–  having regard to Article 187 and the first paragraph of 188 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C8‑0118/2017),

–  having regard to Rule 78c of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy and the opinions of the Committee on Budgetary Control and the Committee on Regional Development (A8-0293/2017),

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 and the Commission.

Text proposed by the Commission   Amendment
Amendment 1
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
(1)  Council Regulation (EU) No 560/201437 established the Bio-based Industries Joint Undertaking (‘BBI Joint Undertaking’).
(1)  Council Regulation (EU) No 560/201437 established the Bio-based Industries Joint Undertaking (‘BBI Joint Undertaking’) with the aim of contributing to the implementation of the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation (2014-2020) (‘Horizon 2020’) through increased investment in the development of a sustainable bio-based industry sector in the Union.
_________________
_________________
37 Council Regulation (EU) No 560/2014 of 6 May 2014 establishing the Bio-based Industries Joint Undertaking (OJ L 169, 7.6.2014, p. 130).
37 Council Regulation (EU) No 560/2014 of 6 May 2014 establishing the Bio-based Industries Joint Undertaking (OJ L 169, 7.6.2014, p. 130).
Amendment 2
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
(2)  Article 12(4) of the Statutes of the BBI Joint Undertaking, set out in the Annex to Regulation (EU) No 560/2014 ('the Statutes'), states that the financial contribution by the members of the BBI Joint Undertaking other than the Union to operational costs is to be at least EUR 182 500 000 over the period set out in Article 1 of Regulation (EU) No 560/2014, that is to say from the establishment of the BBI Joint Undertaking until 31 December 2024.
(2)  Article 12(4) of the Statutes of the BBI Joint Undertaking, set out in the Annex to Regulation (EU) No 560/2014 ('the Statutes'), states that the financial contribution by the members of the BBI Joint Undertaking other than the Union to operational costs is to be at least EUR 182 500 000 over the ten-year period set out in Article 1 of Regulation (EU) No 560/2014, that is to say from the establishment of the BBI Joint Undertaking until 31 December 2024.
Amendment 3
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2 a (new)
(2a)   This Regulation responds to a proposal made by the Bio-based Industries Consortium Aisbl (BIC) and mirrors best practice in other joint undertakings. Effective programme delivery by the BBI Joint Undertaking and better regulation overall should continue to be achieved through improved cooperation, collaboration and engagement with all stakeholders, in particular small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) within the bio-based chain.
Amendment 4
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
(3)  The Bio-based Industries Consortium Aisbl (‘BIC’), which is a member of the BBI Joint Undertaking other than the Union, continues to be ready to support the operational costs of the BBI Joint Undertaking for the amount set out in Article 12(4) of the Statutes. It has however proposed an alternative mode of financing through financial contributions made by its constituent entities at the indirect actions' level.
(3)  The Bio-based Industries Consortium Aisbl (‘BIC’), which is a member of the BBI Joint Undertaking other than the Union, remains obliged, and continues to be ready, to support the operational costs of the BBI Joint Undertaking for the amount set out in Article 12(4) of the Statutes. It has however proposed an alternative mode of financing through financial contributions made by its constituent entities at the indirect actions' level.
Amendment 5
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3 a (new)
(3a)   The alternative mode of financing proposed by the BIC has informed this Regulation, while recognising the unique features of the BBI Joint Undertaking. The Commission will examine how that alternative mode of financing could apply to other joint undertakings, and, in particular, to the Innovative Medicines Initiative Joint Undertaking.
Amendment 6
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
(4)  The objective of the BBI Initiative to carry out activities through collaboration of stakeholders along the entire bio-based value chains, including SMEs, research and technology centres and universities can be achieved only by enabling BIC and its constituent entities to deliver the financial contribution not only as payments to the BBI Joint Undertaking but also as financial contributions to indirect actions funded by the BBI Joint Undertaking.
(4)  The objective of the BBI Initiative to carry out, in line with the priorities of Horizon 2020, activities through collaboration of stakeholders along the entire bio-based value chains, including SMEs, research and technology centres and universities, and to make the Union a champion of research, demonstration, and deployment in the bio-based products and biofuels marketplace, can be achieved only by enabling BIC and its constituent entities to deliver the financial contribution not only as payments to the BBI Joint Undertaking. That new delivery mode is to ensure that the financial contributions become more commercially viable for BIC and its constituent entities, which in turn should facilitate the fulfilment of their financial obligations within the set deadline.
Amendment 7
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4 a (new)
(4a)   In its joint undertaking process, the Commission set out the impact and effectiveness of, and lessons learnt from, the proposed amendments. The Commission should submit a report to the European Parliament and to the Council assessing the effectiveness of this Regulation, in light of the BIC’s obligation to deliver its financial contribution by 31 December 2024.
Amendment 8
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 a (new)
(5 a)   In future cases the Commission should always carry out a public consultation in order to ensure that any proposed changes are accepted by all interested parties, and are developed in the most transparent and open manner possible. Similarly, the Commission should conduct impact assessments of the measures proposed unless the Better Regulation Guidelines clearly state otherwise.

Subjecting furanylfentanyl to control measures *
PDF 239kWORD 42k
European Parliament legislative resolution of 24 October 2017 on the draft Council implementing decision on subjecting N-phenyl-N-[1-(2-phenylethyl)piperidin-4-yl]furan-2-carboxamide (furanylfentanyl) to control measures (11212/2017 – C8-0242/2017 – 2017/0152(NLE))
P8_TA(2017)0389A8-0309/2017

(Consultation)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Council draft (11212/2017),

–  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 (C8‑0242/2017),

–  having regard to Council Decision 2005/387/JHA of 10 May 2005 on the information exchange, risk-assessment and control of new psychoactive substances(1), and in particular Article 8(3) thereof,

–  having regard to Rule 78c of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (A8-0309/2017),

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 127, 20.5.2005, p. 32.


Control of spending and monitoring of EU Youth Guarantee schemes cost-effectiveness
PDF 306kWORD 58k
European Parliament resolution of 24 October 2017 on control of spending and monitoring of EU Youth Guarantee schemes’ cost-effectiveness (2016/2242(INI))
P8_TA(2017)0390A8-0296/2017

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to Articles 145, 147, 165, 166 and 310(5) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU),

–  having regard to Protocol No 1 on the role of national parliaments in the European Union,

–  having regard to Protocol No 2 on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality,

–  having regard to the Council Recommendation of 22 April 2013 on establishing a Youth Guarantee(1),

–  having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1304/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 on the European Social Fund and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1081/2006(2), and Regulation (EU) 2015/779 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2015 amending Regulation (EU) No 1304/2013, as regards an additional initial pre-financing amount paid to operational programmes supported by the Youth Employment Initiative(3),

–  having regard to the European Court of Auditors (ECA) Special reports No 3/2015 entitled ‘EU Youth Guarantee: first steps taken but implementation risks ahead’, No 17/2015 entitled ‘Commission’s support of youth action teams: redirection of ESF funding achieved, but insufficient focus on results’ and No 5/2017 entitled ‘Youth unemployment – have EU policies made a difference?’,

–  having regard to the Commission communication of 4 October 2016 entitled ‘The Youth Guarantee and Youth Employment Initiative three years on’ (COM(2016)0646 and SWD(2016)0324),

–  having regard to the Commission’s White Paper on the Future of Europe,

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

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control and the opinions of the Committee on Budgets, the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs and the Committee on Culture and Education (A8-0296/2017),

A.  whereas youth unemployment has been and continues to be a serious problem in a number of Member States, with more than 4 million young people aged between 15 and 24 unemployed in the EU in 2016; whereas the situation in the Union is highly varied;

B.  whereas the fight against youth unemployment is a political priority which is shared by Parliament, the Commission and the Member States, and which contributes to achieving the Union’s objective of growth and jobs;

C.  whereas a high youth unemployment rate – 18,8 % in the EU in 2016 – is detrimental to society and the individuals concerned, with lasting negative effects on employability, income stability and career development; whereas the economic crisis disproportionately affected young people and in some Member States more than one quarter of young people are unemployed;

D.  whereas a large number of active employment policies have been put in place to tackle high youth unemployment, with varying results;

E.  whereas there is another group of young people, whose number and composition vary significantly between Member States, who are neither engaged in any form of education or professional training nor in work (NEETs), and who can be classified in two categories: unemployed NEETs, who are available to start work and are actively seeking a job, and inactive NEETs, young people who are not studying, are not receiving training and are not proactively seeking employment;

F.  whereas, on average across the EU, only 41,9 % of NEETs have access to the Youth Guarantee (YG);

G.  whereas since the introduction of the European employment strategy in 1997, the Commission has supported a number of measures designed to improve young people’s employment and education prospects(4) and, since the crisis, the EU’s efforts have placed particular emphasis on the YG, which was established by the Council in April 2013, and the Youth Employment Initiative (YEI), which was launched in late 2013;

H.  whereas the YG and YEI have already become established as the most effective and visible action at Union level aimed at combating youth unemployment;

I.  whereas the YG and YEI have significantly contributed to reducing the youth unemployment rate in the EU by boosting education and the labour market’s demand for young people, and supporting job creation measures; whereas an unacceptably high rate of 17,2 % of young people in the EU‑28 are still unemployed(5);

J.  whereas the YG requires the Member States to ensure that all young people under the age of 25 (or aged 30 and under in some Member States) receive a good-quality offer of employment, continued education, an apprenticeship or a traineeship within a period of four months after becoming unemployed or leaving formal education;

K.  whereas external factors, such as the particular economic situation or the production model of each region, influence the achievement of the goals set in the YG;

L.  whereas the YEI is an initiative to support NEETs, long-term unemployed youngsters and those not registered as job-seekers living in regions where youth unemployment was higher than 25 % in 2012;

M.  whereas the overall approved budget for the YEI for the 2014-2020 programme period is EUR 6,4 billion, comprising EUR 3,2 billion from a new specific EU budget line to be matched by at least EUR 3,2 billion from national allocations under the existing European Social Fund (ESF); whereas this will be supplemented by an additional EUR 1 billion for the YEI’s specific budget allocation over the 2017-2020 period, which will be matched by EUR 1 billion from the ESF in order to boost youth employment in the most affected regions; whereas EUR 500 million of this additional amount is due to be entered in 2017 via Draft Amending Budget 3/2017; whereas the final allocation for the programme will be determined in the course of the upcoming annual budgetary procedures;

N.  whereas the annual investment required for the implementation of the YG in Europe has been estimated at EUR 50,4 billion(6), which is significantly lower than the annual economic losses caused by the disengagement of young people from the labour market in Europe, which could reach at least EUR 153 billion(7);

O.  whereas in 2015, in order to speed up the mobilisation of YEI actions, a decision was taken to increase the resources made available to pre-finance the initiative by EUR 1 billion, which represented a rise from the initial 1-1,5 % to 30 % for eligible Member States;

P.  whereas the entire original allocation of YEI was frontloaded in the years 2014-2015, and no fresh appropriations were included for this purpose in the budget for 2016; whereas the discontinuity in YEI financing has undermined the success of the programme;

Q.  whereas the current level of funding, both from the EU budget and from the Member States, is insufficient to cover the needs involved;

R.  whereas the YG and YEI cover different actions, with the YG intended to encourage structural reform in education and serve as a short-term measure to combat youth unemployment, while the YEI is a funding instrument; whereas the YG is financed through the ESF, national budgets and the YEI, while the YEI can finance the direct provision of jobs, apprenticeships, traineeships or continued education for the YEI target group in the eligible regions; whereas while the YG applies to all 28 Member States, only 20 Member States are eligible for YEI support; whereas, finally, YEI intervention has no predefined duration, while the YG requires an offer to be made within four months;

S.  whereas from a quantitative perspective, the take-up of the YG has been uneven and varies considerably from country to country;

T.  whereas the implementation of the YG has not so far yielded uniform results, and in some circumstances it has been difficult to pinpoint and assess the contribution it has made;

U.  whereas there are substantial differences between the regions of Europe; whereas in some cases territories with high unemployment will not qualify as a region eligible for EU funding at NUTS level;

V.  whereas the implementation of integration services listed under the YG is often only partial, too narrow in the range of eligible participants, and dependent on the existing capacity and efficiency of public employment services (PES) and on the speed of European-level procedures; whereas Member States should continue their efforts to strengthen and reform their PES;

W.  whereas the role that the YEI may have, in particular in the Member States which have been affected to a much higher degree by the economic, financial and social crises since 2007, is worth highlighting; whereas the need to reinforce this programme and to develop further complementary measures, at both EU and national levels, which will be aimed at boosting integration and cohesion, while reinforcing gender parity and ensuring access to training programmes launched to face up to new technological labour challenges, should be underlined;

X.  whereas the YG, as an investment in young people, is an example of budgeting driven by results;

Y.  whereas the Commission’s White Paper on the Future of Europe recognises that there is indeed ‘a mismatch between expectations and the EU’s capacity to meet them’(8);

Z.  whereas the EU should improve its marketing and advertising of socio-political measures to the target group in order to ensure that its actions are more visible to the people of the EU;

AA.  whereas the audit carried out by the European Court of Auditors (ECA) has been premature as the period which is the subject of the investigation is too close to the launch of national guarantee schemes and limited only to certain Member States; whereas it would, for this purpose, have been more useful to perform an initial assessment of their implementation before proceeding with the audit;

General remarks

1.  Notes that in four years of the YG’s implementation, from 2013 to 2017, the youth unemployment rate in the EU has decreased by more than 7 percentage points, from 23,8 % in April 2013 to 16,6 % in April 2017, which means that almost 2 million young people have ceased to be unemployed; notes that, since the YG was implemented, more than 14 million young people have taken part in some kind of scheme; regrets that in many instances too much of this decrease is because so many young people have been forced to seek employment outside the EU, a loss that will be sorely felt in future decades; regrets, furthermore, that in mid-2016, 4,2 million young people in the EU were still unemployed (18,8 % of the demographic concerned); urges the Member States to utilise available EU support in order to tackle this longstanding issue; calls for the EU and the Member States to implement strategies that meet the requirements and needs of the labour market of each single Member State in order to create high-quality training opportunities and lasting employment;

2.  Stresses that the YG has an important role in supporting measures to provide unemployed young people with the skills, experience and knowledge needed to engage in employment with a view to the long-term and to become entrepreneurs, and also provides an opportunity to address skills mismatch;

3.  Highlights the important role of education and careers guidance in preparing young people with the work ethics and skills needed by the job market; points out, however, that education should not only provide skills and competences relevant to job market needs, but must also contribute to young people’s personal development and growth in order to make them proactive and responsible citizens; stresses, therefore, the need for a civic education within the whole educational system, including both formal and non-formal education methods;

4.  Notes that the younger people are and the less training they have, the higher the rate of youth unemployment, and this trend has been accentuated with the crisis, which has also affected young adults over 25 without qualifications, who form a group that may be pushed into a situation of serious economic vulnerability unless investment is made in their training;

5.  Notes that, despite the progress made, access for the most vulnerable unemployed young people to PES remains inadequate and this group, together with young graduates, are those least likely to register as jobseekers;

6.  Is strongly concerned that NEETs are disconnected from the education system and the labour market, in many cases through no fault of t own; understands that this demographic is the hardest to reach through existing operational programmes that implement youth unemployment funding schemes, too many of which do not offer proper sustainable remuneration or proper working conditions; considers that, for the 2017-2020 period, special focus should be on this demographic so as to ensure that the main YG objectives are achieved;

7.  Points out that measures supported by the YG also need to address the structural challenges faced by NEETs, in order to ensure that they have a long-term impact; expresses concern that YG schemes have not yet reached all young people who have left school or become unemployed; encourages the Member States to provide targeted financial commitments in national budgets to address these structural challenges; encourages the regions which do not qualify for EU co-financing to participate in the YG;

8.  Stresses that the integration of NEETs requires both enhancing the effectiveness of the resources available and increasing those resources, as well as greater Member State involvement and mobilisation;

9.  Calls for a diversification of funding channels at local, regional and national level, so as to better reach out to all young people; remarks, furthermore, that the local and regional authorities are already very active and should be supported in their youth action by integrating different policy lines;

10.  Emphasises that the YG has made a positive contribution to tackling youth unemployment since 2012 but that the youth unemployment rate remains unacceptably high; welcomes, therefore, the agreement reached by the co-legislators for the extension of the YEI until 2020; notes, however, that the issue of youth unemployment might persist and should therefore be taken into account in the next multiannual financial framework (MFF) in order to ensure continuity and cost-effectiveness;

11.  Underlines the fact that the YEI is intended not only to boost job creation for young people, but also to assist Member States to establish proper systems for identifying young peoples’ needs and corresponding support; stresses, therefore, that the effectiveness of the YG and YEI should, in future, be assessed on the basis of achievements towards creating or improving Member States’ systems for supporting young people;

12.  Recalls that the YG benefits from EU financial support through the ESF and the YEI, which supplement national contributions; supports programming work undertaken as part of the Union’s Common Strategic Framework through peer learning, networking activities and technical assistance;

13.  Welcomes the fact that the YEI was frontloaded in the years 2014 and 2015 and the increase of the initial pre-financing designed to ensure a swift mobilisation of resources;

14.  Welcomes the fact that YEI measures have provided support to more than 1,4 million young people and led to Member States consolidating operations amounting to over EUR 4 billion;

15.  Recalls that the YEI’s success is related to good economic governance in the Member States because, without a favourable business environment encouraging small and medium-sized enterprises, and an educational and scientific system adapted to the requirements of the economy, there can be no job creation nor a long-term solution to the problem of high levels of youth unemployment;

16.  Acknowledges the ECA Special report on the impact of the YG and YEI on youth employment and notes that, three years on from the adoption of the Council recommendation, the YG has yet to fulfil expectations; notes the ECA’s comment that it is impossible to reach all NEETs by using EU budget resources alone; notes that the current situation does not reflect the expectations created by the introduction of the YG, namely to ensure that all NEETs receive, within four months, a good-quality offer of training or employment;

17.  Recalls the challenges and opportunities in attracting NEETs to the labour market; recommends that additional efforts by the Commission, the Member States and national PES are dedicated to including more inactive young people in YG schemes and to keeping them in the labour market following the expiration of the relevant support measures;

18.  Notes that the YEI is intended to support young NEETs under the age of 25 who do not normally receive any employment or education support; regrets the fact that YEI adoption affects the allocation of ESF commitments in other programmes, and stresses that the resources from the specific allocation of the YEI should at least be matched by the same amount of ESF funds;

19.  Calls on the Member States to ensure that the YEI/ESF funds available do not replace Member States’ public expenditure in conformity with Article 95 and recital 87 of the Common Provisions Regulation (Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013) and in line with the additionality principle; stresses that programmes such as the YG must not be a substitute for Member States’ own efforts to fight youth unemployment and sustainable integration into the labour market;

20.  Highlights the importance of strengthening cooperation between all relevant stakeholders, including at a regional and local level, such as public and, where relevant, private employment services, education and training institutions, employers, youth organisations and NGOs that work with young people in order to reach the entire NEET population; encourages stronger integration of stakeholders through a partnership approach in the design, implementation and evaluation of the YG; calls for enhanced cooperation between education institutions and entrepreneurs to tackle the skills mismatch; reiterates the idea that the partnership approach is aimed at better reaching the target population and ensuring the provision of quality offers;

21.  Recalls that, according to the International Labour Organisation (ILO), an efficient YG requires annual funding of approximately EUR 45 billion for the EU-28; considers that this funding should be viewed as an investment, given the significant reduction that it will produce, if effective, in the costs associated with youth employment;

22.  Calls on the Commission to provide an itemisation of the national contributions to the YEI that each Member State needs to make in order to implement the YG effectively, taking into consideration the ILO estimate;

23.  Notes the delay in the implementation of the YEI, which was caused by the late appointment of the relevant managing authorities, and considers this a shortcoming of the YEI legal basis which has undermined initial endeavours for speedy implementation through frontloaded financing;

24.  Believes that it is necessary to facilitate the diversity and accessibility of funding and to focus on effective spending, while implementing further policy and service reforms;

25.  Stresses the need to tailor measures to local context needs in order to increase their impact, for example through closer involvement of local employers’ representatives, local training providers and local authorities; calls for a diversification of funding channels involving local, regional and national levels, in order to better reach out to all NEETs;

26.  Recalls that, in the framework of the current MFF, the YEI should be financed with new appropriations and not through redeployments of the existing budgetary appropriations; expects an ambitious political commitment for the next MFF;

27.  Takes the view that, for the YG to function properly, local PES must also function effectively;

28.  Urges that specific expertise and capacity be developed in the Member States within PES in order to support people that cannot find a job within four months after becoming unemployed or leaving formal education; encourages greater involvement of businesses and industry associations in the implementation of the programme;

29.  Deplores the fact that the majority of NEETs in the EU do not yet have access to any YG scheme, inter alia because they are generally not registered with PES; asks the Council to consider continuing a learning exchange within the existing PES network with a view to developing strategies based on best practices to reach and support NEET youth;

30.  Welcomes the ECA’s Special report No 5/2017 and urges the Commission and the Member States to fully implement its recommendations in order to increase the coverage and effectiveness of YG schemes;

31.  Stresses that the development of one-stop-shops should be supported in order to boost the positive impact of the YG by ensuring that all services and guidance are available for young people at one location;

32.  Notes that a lack of visibility of YG schemes can make it difficult to reach out to all young people; recommends that the possibility of funding local campaigns organised in conjunction with all local partners, including youth organisations, be increased, and that the development of platforms for young people to register on the scheme be supported; recommends that the information related to the YG be accessible and understandable for everyone;

33.  Recommends that Member States ensure that what they are offering is of good quality; stresses, for example, that the proposals made should match participants’ profiles and meet employment demand so as to enable sustainable and potentially long-term integration into the job market itself;

34.  Notes with regret that most Member States have not established a definition of a ‘quality offer’; urges the Member States and the Commission, within the framework of the Employment Committee of the European Union (EMCO), to use the existing networks to work on the development of commonly agreed characteristics of this concept, taking into consideration the European Quality Framework for Traineeships, the joint statement of the European social partners entitled ‘Towards a Shared Vision of Apprenticeships’ and Court of Justice case law on precarious employment; urges the Member States and the Commission, moreover, to ensure that such characteristics are based on an offer that matches participants’ qualification level, profile and labour market needs, offering opportunities for work that enable them to earn a living income, to enjoy social protections and to be offered prospects for development, leading to sustainable, well-matched integration in the labour market; welcomes the ECA’s recommendation in its Special report No 5/2017 that more attention needs to be paid to improving the quality of offers;

35.  Calls on the Commission to propose, in collaboration with EMCO, quality criteria standards for prospective YG offers; highlights the need to define a quality framework with quality standards for such offers;

36.  Notes that in order to achieve the goal of securing an offer of quality and continuous employment for all young people aged 24 and under, considerably more resources are required at a human, technical and financial level; welcomes the fact that several Member States have raised the maximum age of young people eligible for YG support to 30;

37.  Advocates ensuring that the young people covered by the YG continue to contribute and have access to the social and labour protection systems in force in their Member State, thus reinforcing the shared responsibility of all involved, and young people and employers in particular;

38.  Stresses that measures under the YG are likely to be more efficient and cost-effective when young people are assisted in entering the labour market in a way that can provide them with sustainable employment opportunities and salary progression;

39.  Stresses that NEETs are a heterogeneous and diverse group and that schemes are more efficient and cost-effective when they are targeted to address identified challenges; highlights, in this respect, the need to set up comprehensive strategies with clear objectives designed to target all categories of NEETs; highlights the need to provide tailored solutions, by taking into account the local and regional context, for example by ensuring closer involvement of local employers’ representatives, local training providers and local authorities; calls on the Member States to design the individual pathway for each candidate, while giving national PES the flexibility that they need to adjust profiling models;

40.  Calls on the Member States to establish appropriate outreach strategies and to step up efforts to identify the NEET population, especially inactive NEETs not covered by existing systems, with the aim of registering them and monitoring the situation of young people leaving the YG schemes at specific intervals (after six, 12 and 18 months) in order to promote sustainable integration into the labour market; highlights the need for tailored solutions for a diverse group of young people and to make the non-registered a key target group; calls on the Member States to ensure that available ESF funds do not replace public spending and notes that sufficient economic growth is a pre-requisite for the effective integration of NEETs into the labour market;

41.  Calls on the Member States and the Commission to assess any shortcomings and conduct market analyses before rolling out the systems provided for under the YG, thereby avoiding worthless training courses and the exploitation of trainees on traineeships that will lead nowhere;

42.  Invites the Commission and the Council to consider proactive transitional initiatives, such as vocational orientation, careers guidance and information about the labour market, as well as support services in schools and careers services at universities, in order to facilitate young people’s transition into work by equipping them with transition and career management skills;

43.  Notes that the lack of visibility of YG schemes can make it difficult to reach out to all young people; recommends that action be taken to improve the possibility of funding local campaigns organised with all the relevant local partners, including youth organisations, and to support the development of platforms for young people to register for the schemes; recommends that the information related to the YG be accessible and understandable for everyone;

44.  Notes the persistent challenge of the mismatch between the skills available and labour-market demands; asks the Commission, within the framework of EMCO, to promote the exchange of best practices between the Member States and the relevant stakeholders therein in order to address this issue;

45.  Takes the view that problems related to the skills mismatch could be solved by better identifying individuals’ competences and by correcting the flaws in national training systems; emphasises that increased mobility of young people could improve their skill sets, and, together with the recognition of qualifications, could help to tackle the existing geographical skills mismatch; encourages the Member States to make greater use of EURES in this regard;

46.  Stresses that ICT skills could offer great potential for the creation of sustainable jobs, and therefore calls on the Member States to include effective measures for enhancing ICT/digital skills in their YG Implementation Plans;

47.  Notes that a more diversified and customised approach in the provision of services to different groups among the youth demographic is needed in order to avoid cherry-picking or creaming off and discriminatory selection; calls for a stronger, more barrier-free and dedicated outreach to young people facing multiple barriers and those furthest from the labour market; stresses, in this regard, the importance of coordinating the YG with other policies, such as anti-discrimination policies, effectively, and of broadening the range of interventions proposed within YG offers;

48.  Considers that youth unemployment should be dealt with as a priority issue from the outset of future European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF) operational programmes;

Implementation and Monitoring

49.  Notes that implementation of the YG is being monitored through the European Semester, the EMCO reviews, and a dedicated Indicator Framework developed by EMCO in conjunction with the Commission; calls on the Council to support the Member States in improving the reporting of data;

50.  Notes that a lack of information on the potential cost of implementing a scheme in a Member State can result in inadequate funding for implementing the scheme and achieving its objectives; calls on the Member States to establish an overview of the cost of implementing the YG, as recommended by the ECA’s Special report No 5/2017;

51.  Underlines the fact that allocating the necessary resources and assessing the overall funding is an important part of implementing the YG schemes successfully, bearing in mind that evaluating the overall funding can be hampered by difficulties in distinguishing between the different kinds of measures targeting young people at national level;

52.  Calls on the Commission to provide more precise information about the cost-effectiveness of the YG and how implementation of the programme is monitored in the Member States, and to provide comprehensive annual reporting on this;

53.  Stresses that effective mechanisms to discuss and resolve difficulties experienced when implementing YG schemes are needed; underlines the need for strong, yet realistic and achievable, political and financial commitment from the Member States in order to implement the scope of the YG in full, including by ensuring early intervention mechanisms, the quality of job, further education and training offers, clear eligibility criteria and partnership-building with the relevant stakeholders; stresses that this should be done by ensuring effective outreach, strengthening administrative capacity where needed, taking account of local conditions, facilitating skills enhancement and establishing proper monitoring and evaluation structures during and after the implementation of said measures;

54.  Calls for effective multilateral surveillance of compliance with the Council’s recommendation establishing a YG within the European Semester and for the specific country recommendations to be addressed where needed;

55.  Reiterates its commitment to monitor closely all Member State activities in order to make the YG a reality and invites youth organisations to keep Parliament updated on their analysis of Member State action; urges the Member States and the Commission to involve youth stakeholders in policymaking; recalls that the involvement of youth organisations in the communication, implementation and evaluation of the YG is crucial for its success;

56.  Notes the existence of some delays to implementation of the YEI in the Member States, chiefly for procedural and structural reasons; expresses concern at the level of take-up by the Member States of the pre-financing allocated for the implementation of the YEI; insists, therefore, that urgent actions are taken by the competent Member State authorities in order to utilise, both fully and in a timely manner, the resources available for combating youth unemployment; is of the opinion that Member States need to make additional financial commitments in their national budgets in order to address these structural challenges;

57.  Welcomes the Commission’s cooperation with the Member States in identifying and disseminating good monitoring and reporting practices on the basis of the existing systems across the Member States; reminds the Commission that the comparability of data remains fundamental for these purposes;

58.  Recommends that the Commission continues to identify and disseminate good monitoring and reporting practices, so that the results from the Member States can be communicated consistently and reliably, and assessed seamlessly, including as regards quality; recommends, in particular, that regular quality statistics should be provided, enabling Member States to frame more realistic and effective youth policies, including through the monitoring of participants leaving the YG system, so as to keep to a minimum the number of participants dropping out of the programme and not gaining from it;

59.  Calls on the Commission to strengthen the manner in which Member States implement schemes approved under the YG and to put in place a transparent, comprehensive and open-data monitoring system that covers cost-effectiveness and structural reforms and measures targeting individuals;

60.  Suggests ex-ante analysis in each Member State setting concrete objectives, goals and timelines for the expected outcome of the YG schemes, and suggests that duplicate funding be avoided;

61.  Encourages the sharing of best practices through EMCO and the Mutual Learning Programme of the European Employment Strategy; notes in this respect the importance of mutual learning aimed at activating the most vulnerable groups;

62.  Is concerned that data on the beneficiaries, outputs and results of the YEI are sparse and often inconsistent; calls on the Commission and the Member States to take the necessary measures to set up less administratively burdensome and more up-to-date monitoring systems for the remaining YEI funding;

63.  Calls for a focus on results achieved by the YEI programme, through the definition of concrete indicators in the form of reforms carried out in the Member States, knowledge and skills obtained from the programme, and the number of permanent contracts offered; suggests, moreover, that the experience of the mentors in the profession chosen match the skills needed by the respective applicants;

64.  Calls on the Member States to make monitoring and reporting systems more efficient in order to make the aims of the YG more quantifiable and facilitate the development of more evidence-based activating policies aimed at young people, and, in particular, to improve the capacity to follow up on participants that exit the YG in order to reduce the number of unknown exits as far as possible and to have data on all participants’ ongoing situations; calls on the Commission to revise its guidance on data collection and on the Member States to revise their baselines and targets in order to minimise the risk of overstating results;

65.  Acknowledges that for some Member States the YG has become a driver for policy changes and better coordination in the fields of employment and education; stresses the importance of: setting realistic and measurable targets in promoting policies and frameworks such as the YG, identifying the main challenges and the appropriate action that should be taken to overcome them and assessing those challenges with due regard for improving employability; notes that in some circumstances it has been difficult to pinpoint and assess the contribution the YG has made so far and that quality statistics should help the Member States to frame more realistic and effective youth policies without giving rise to false expectations;

66.  Recognises the significant efforts made by many Member States to implement the YG; observes, however, that most reforms have not yet been fully implemented, in particular in the forging of partnerships with social partners and young people in the design, implementation and assessment of the measures within the YG and in supporting those facing multiple barriers; concludes that considerable efforts and financial resources are needed in the long term to achieve the YG objectives;

67.  Takes the view that any repeated take-up of the YG must not go against the spirit of labour market activation and the aim of transition into permanent employment; calls on the Council to take advantage of the review of the MFF to allocate appropriate resources to the YG; calls on the Member States to ensure that young people, including those up to the age of 30, receive good-quality offers that match their profiles and qualification level, as well as the labour market demand, in order to create sustainable employment and prevent repeated take-up of the YG;

68.  Believes that, in order to assess the schemes’ effectiveness, all aspects need to be evaluated, including the value for money of the schemes; takes note of previous estimates provided by the ILO and Eurofound and asks the Commission to confirm or update these projections;

69.  Calls for an assessment of the effectiveness of the YG to be carried out in each participating Member State so as to prevent the exploitation of young people by certain companies which are using bogus training schemes to benefit from state-funded labour; proposes, to that end, that the job prospects of young people who have been beneficiaries of the programme be monitored and mechanisms established requiring participating employers, whether public or private, to convert a minimum percentage of traineeships into employment contracts as a condition for continuing to benefit from the programme;

70.  Notes that an evaluation of the YEI is to be concluded by the Commission by the end of 2017, and expects the swift incorporation of the necessary adjustments to ensure successful implementation; stresses the importance of a continued assessment of the performance of the YEI by the relevant stakeholders, including youth organisations;

71.  Stresses the need to set up a system of indicators and measures to assess and monitor the effectiveness of both public employment schemes and the YG, since even though provision was made for such a system from the start, there are still many shortcomings;

72.  Requests that programme participants be duly informed of the procedures to be followed in case of abuse of the instrument and that measures be taken to ensure that they receive the necessary protection, as planned;

73.  Calls for efficient and transparent scrutiny, reporting and monitoring of how funds allocated at European and national levels are spent so as to prevent abuses and the wasting of resources;

Improvements to be made

74.  Underlines the necessity of guaranteeing a long-term commitment through ambitious programming and stable financing from both the EU budget and the national budgets in order to offer full access to all young people who are NEETs in the EU;

75.  Recalls the importance of cooperation between all levels of governance (the EU, the Member States and local entities) and of the Commission’s technical assistance in implementing the YG effectively;

76.  Stresses the need to create and develop high-quality lifelong careers guidance with the active involvement of families in order to help young people make better choices about their education and professional careers;

77.  Notes that in its communication of October 2016, the Commission draws conclusions on the need to improve the effectiveness of the YEI; believes that this should be achieved by ensuring that NEETs are integrated into the labour market in a sustainable fashion and by setting objectives that reflect the diverse composition of NEETs, with specific, logical interventions for each of the sub-target groups; notes that additional use of other ESF programmes to ensure sustainability of the NEETs integration could improve efficiency;

78.  Calls on the Commission and the Member States to manage expectations by setting realistic and achievable goals and targets, to assess disparities, to analyse the market before implementing schemes, to improve supervision and notification systems, and to improve the quality of data so that the results can be measured effectively;

79.  Calls on the Commission and the Member States to ensure sufficient funding is available in order to ensure the successful integration of all young workers who are unemployed or do not have access to a suitable training or educational offer; stresses that in order to ensure sustainable outcomes, the YG should build on the existing evidence and experiences and be continued in the long term; underlines the fact that this requires an increase in the public funds available for active labour market policies at EU and Member State level;

80.  Calls on the Member States to properly assess the costs of their YG schemes, to manage expectations by setting realistic and achievable objectives and targets, to mobilise additional resources from their domestic budgets and to reinforce the financing of their PES in order to enable them to fulfil additional duties linked to YEI implementation;

81.  Calls on the Member States to ensure the provision of follow-up data to assess the long-term sustainability of outcomes from a quality and quantity perspective, and to facilitate the development of more evidence-based youth policies; calls for more transparency and consistency in data collection, including gender-disaggregated data collection, in all the Member States; notes with concern that the sustainability of ‘positive exits’ in the YG has been deteriorating(9);

82.  Calls on the Commission to carry out a detailed analysis of the effects of measures implemented in the Member States, to single out the most efficient solutions and, based on these, to provide recommendations to the Member States as to how to attain better results with a higher degree of efficiency;

o
o   o

83.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission and the Court of Auditors.

(1) OJ C 120, 26.4.2013, p. 1.
(2) OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 470.
(3) OJ L 126, 21.5.2015, p. 1.
(4) Other measures include the ‘Youth on the Move’ initiative launched in September 2010, the ‘Youth Opportunities Initiative’ launched in December 2011 and the ‘Youth Action Teams’ launched in January 2012.
(5) As of March 2017: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/2995521/8002525/3-02052017-AP-EN.pdf/94b69232-83a9-4011-8c85-1d4311215619
(6) Social inclusion of young people (Eurofound 2015).
(7) NEETs – Young people not in employment, education or training: Characteristics, costs and policy responses in Europe (Eurofound 2012).
(8) White Paper on the Future of Europe, p. 13.
(9) Paragraph 164 of ECA Special report No 5/2017.


Criminal acts and penalties in the field of illicit drug trafficking ***II
PDF 118kWORD 42k
European Parliament legislative resolution of 24 October 2017 on the Council position at first reading with a view to the adoption of a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Framework Decision 2004/757/JHA in order to include new psychoactive substances in the definition of 'drug' and repealing Council Decision 2005/387/JHA (10537/1/2017 – C8‑0325/2017 – 2013/0304(COD))
P8_TA(2017)0391A8-0317/2017

(Ordinary legislative procedure: second reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Council position at first reading (10537/1/2017 – C8‑0325/2017),

–  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 United Kingdom House of Commons and the United Kingdom House of Lords, 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 its position at first reading(2) on the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2013)0618),

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

–  having regard to the provisional agreement approved by the committee responsible under Rule 69f(4) of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to Rule 67a of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the recommendation for second reading of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (A8-0317/2017),

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. 52.
(2) Text adopted of 17.4.2014, P7_TA(2014)0454.


CE marked fertilising products ***I
PDF 1058kWORD 171k
Amendments adopted by the European Parliament on 24 October 2017 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down rules on the making available on the market of CE marked fertilising products and amending Regulations (EC) No 1069/2009 and (EC) No 1107/2009 (COM(2016)0157 – C8-0123/2016 – 2016/0084(COD))(1)
P8_TA(2017)0392A8-0270/2017

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

Text proposed by the Commission   Amendment
Amendment 1
Proposal for a regulation
Title
Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL laying down rules on the making available on the market of CE marked fertilising products and amending Regulations (EC) No 1069/2009 and (EC) No 1107/2009
Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL laying down rules on the making available on the market of CE marked plant nutrition products and amending Regulations (EC) No 1069/2009 and (EC) No 1107/2009
(This amendment from "fertilising products" to "plant nutrition products" applies throughout the text. If agreed by the co-legislators, corresponding changes will apply throughout the text, including those parts reflected in the amendments below.)
Amendment 2
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
(1)  The conditions for making fertilisers available on the internal market have been partially harmonised through Regulation (EC) No 2003/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council15, which almost exclusively covers fertilisers from mined or chemically produced, inorganic materials. There is also a need to make use of recycled or organic materials for fertilising purposes. Harmonised conditions for making fertilisers made from such recycled or organic materials available on the entire internal market should be established in order to provide an important incentive for their further use. The scope of the harmonisation should therefore be extended in order to include recycled and organic materials.
(1)  The conditions for making fertilisers available on the internal market have been partially harmonised through Regulation (EC) No 2003/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council15, which almost exclusively covers fertilisers from mined or chemically produced, mineral materials. There is also a need to make use of recycled or organic materials for fertilising purposes. Harmonised conditions for making fertilisers made from such recycled or organic materials available on the entire internal market should be established in order to provide an important incentive for their further use. Promoting increased use of recycled nutrients would further aid the development of the circular economy and allow a more resource-efficient general use of nutrients, while reducing Union dependency on nutrients from third countries. The scope of the harmonisation should therefore be extended in order to include recycled and organic materials.
_________________
_________________
15 Regulation (EC) No 2003/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 October 2003 relating to fertilisers (OJ L 304, 21.11.2003, p. 1).
15 Regulation (EC) No 2003/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 October 2003 relating to fertilisers (OJ L 304, 21.11.2003, p. 1).
(This amendment also covers a horizontal technical amendment on the term “inorganic” being changed to “mineral”. If agreed by the co-legislators, corresponding changes will apply throughout the text, including those parts reflected in the amendments below.)
Amendment 3
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2 a (new)
(2a)  Nutrients in food originate from the soil; healthy and nutritious soil results in healthy and nutritious crops and food. Farmers need a wide range of fertilisers, organic and synthetic to be available, in order to enhance their soil. When soil nutrients are missing, or depleted, plants will be nutrient deficient and may either stop growing or not contain nutritional value for human consumption.
Amendment 4
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 a (new)
(5a)   To ensure effective use of animal manure and on-farm compost, farmers should use those products which follow the spirit of "responsible agriculture", favouring local distribution channels, good agronomic and environmental practice and in compliance with the Union environmental law, such as the Nitrates Directive or the Water Framework Directive. The preferential use of fertilisers produced on-site and in neighbouring agricultural undertakings should be encouraged.
Amendment 5
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6 a (new)
(6a)  A CE marked fertilising product might have more than one of the functions described in the product function categories of this Regulation. Where a claim is made in respect of only one of those functions, it should be sufficient for the product to comply with the requirements of the product function category describing that claimed function. By contrast, where a claim is made in respect of more than one of those functions, the CE marked fertilising product in question should be regarded as a combination of two or more component fertilising products, and compliance should be required for each of the component fertilising products with respect to its function. Therefore, there should be a specific product function category to cover such combinations.
Amendment 6
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6 b (new)
(6b)  A manufacturer using one or more CE marked fertilising products that have already been subject to a conformity assessment, carried out by that manufacturer or another manufacturer, might wish to rely on that conformity assessment. For the purpose of reducing the administrative burden to a minimum, the resulting CE marked fertilising product should also be regarded as a combination of two or more component fertilising products, and the additional conformity requirements for the combination should be reduced to the aspects warranted by the mixing.
Amendment 7
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
(8)  Contaminants in CE marked fertilising products, such as cadmium, can potentially pose a risk to human and animal health and the environment as they accumulate in the environment and enter the food chain. Their content should therefore be limited in such products. Furthermore, impurities in CE marked fertilising products derived from bio-waste, in particular polymers but also metal and glass, should be either prevented or limited to the extent technically feasible by detection of such impurities in separately collected bio-waste before processing.
(8)  Contaminants in CE marked fertilising products, if the latter are not used correctly, such as cadmium, can potentially pose a risk to human and animal health and the environment as they accumulate in the environment and enter the food chain. Their content should therefore be limited in such products. Furthermore, impurities in CE marked fertilising products derived from bio-waste, in particular polymers but also metal and glass, should be either prevented or limited to the extent technically feasible by detection of such impurities in separately collected bio-waste before processing.
Amendment 8
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8 a (new)
(8a)  Member States which already have more stringent national limit values for cadmium in fertilisers should be allowed to maintain those limit values until the rest of the Union reaches an equivalent level of ambition.
Amendment 9
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8 b (new)
(8b)   In order to facilitate the compliance of the phosphate fertilising products with the requirements of this Regulation and to boost innovation, it is necessary to provide sufficient incentives for the development of relevant technologies, particularly decadmiation technology, and for the management of cadmium-rich hazardous waste by means of the financial resources available under Horizon 2020, LIFE programmes, the Circular Economy Finance Support Platform, through the European Investment Bank (EIB) and other financial instruments where relevant. The Commission should report annually to the European Parliament and the Council on the incentives and the Union funding provided for decadmiation.
Amendment 395
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8 c (new)
(8c)  As from [date of application of this Regulation] the Commission should establish a mechanism further facilitating access to finance for research and innovation into decadmiation technologies and their implementation in the production process in the Union for all phosphate fertilisers, and into possible cadmium removal solutions that are economically viable on an industrial scale and allow the treatment of the waste generated.
Amendment 10
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
(9)  Products complying with all the requirements of this Regulation should be allowed to move freely on the internal market. Where one or more of the component materials in a CE marked fertilising product falls within the scope of Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council18, but reaches a point in the manufacturing chain beyond which it no longer poses any significant risk to public or animal health (the 'end point in the manufacturing chain'), it would represent an unnecessary administrative burden to continue subjecting the product to the provisions of that Regulation. Such fertilising products should therefore be excluded from the requirements of that Regulation. Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009 should therefore be amended accordingly.
(9)  CE marked fertilising products complying with all the requirements of this Regulation should be allowed to move freely on the internal market. Where one or more of the component materials is a derived product within the scope of Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council18, but has reached a point in the manufacturing chain beyond which it no longer poses a risk to public or animal health (the 'end point in the manufacturing chain'), it would represent an unnecessary administrative burden to continue subjecting the product to the provisions of that Regulation. Such fertilising products should therefore be excluded from the requirements of that Regulation. Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009 should therefore be amended accordingly.
_________________
_________________
18 Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 laying down health rules as regards animal by-products and derived products not intended for human consumption and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1774/2002 (Animal by-products Regulation) (OJ L 300, 14.11.2009, p. 1).
18 Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 laying down health rules as regards animal by-products and derived products not intended for human consumption and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1774/2002 (Animal by-products Regulation) (OJ L 300, 14.11.2009, p. 1).
Amendment 11
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
(10)  The end point in the manufacturing chain should be determined for each relevant component material containing animal by-products in accordance with the procedures laid down in Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009. Where a manufacturing process regulated under this Regulation starts already before that end point has been reached, the process requirements of both Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009 and this Regulation should apply cumulatively to CE marked fertilising products, which means application of the stricter requirement in case both Regulations regulate the same parameter.
(10)  For each component material category which includes derived products within the meaning of Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009, the end point in the manufacturing chain should be determined for each relevant component material containing animal by-products in accordance with the procedures laid down in that Regulation. To take advantage of technical developments, create more opportunities for producers and businesses, and unlock the potential to make more use of nutrients from animal by-products such as animal manure, the setting of processing methods and recovery rules for animal by-products for which an end-point in the manufacturing chain has been determined should start immediately after the entry into force of this Regulation. When it concerns fertilising products containing or consisting of processed animal manure end-of-livestock-manure criteria should be defined. In order to expand or add component material categories to include more animal by-products, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be delegated to the Commission. Where such an end point is reached before the CE marked fertilising product is placed on the market but after the manufacturing process regulated under this Regulation has started, the process requirements of both Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009 and this Regulation should apply cumulatively to CE marked fertilising products, which means application of the stricter requirement in case both Regulations regulate the same parameter.
Amendment 12
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10 a (new)
(10a)   For animal by-products already widely used in Member States for the production of fertilisers the end point should be determined without undue delay, and at the latest one year after the date of entry into force of this Regulation.
Amendment 13
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
(12)  Where one or more of the component materials for a CE marked fertilising product fall within the scope of Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009 and has not reached the end point in the manufacturing chain, it would be misleading to provide for the product's CE marking under this Regulation, since the making available on the market of such a product is subject to the requirements of Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009. Therefore, such products should be excluded from the scope of this Regulation.
(12)  The making available on the market of an animal by-product or a derived product for which no end point in the manufacturing chain has been defined, or for which the defined end point has not been reached at the time of making available on the market, is subject to the requirements of Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009. Therefore, it would be misleading to provide for the product's CE marking under this Regulation. Any product containing or consisting of such an animal by-product or derived products should therefore be excluded from the scope of this Regulation.
Amendment 14
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
(13)  For certain recovered wastes within the meaning of Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council20, a market demand for their use as fertilising products has been identified. Furthermore, certain requirements are necessary for the waste used as input in the recovery operation and for the treatment processes and techniques, as well as for fertilising products resulting from the recovery operation, in order to ensure that the use of those products does not lead to overall adverse environmental or human health impacts. For CE marked fertilising products, those requirements should be laid down in this Regulation. Therefore, as of the moment of compliance with all the requirements of this Regulation, such products should cease to be regarded as waste within the meaning of Directive 2008/98/EC.
(13)  For certain recovered wastes, such as struvite, biochar, and ash-based products, within the meaning of Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council20 a market demand for their use as fertilising products has been identified. Furthermore, certain requirements are necessary for the waste used as input in the recovery operation and for the treatment processes and techniques, as well as for fertilising products resulting from the recovery operation, in order to ensure that the use of those products does not lead to overall adverse environmental or human health impacts. For CE marked fertilising products, those requirements should be laid down in this Regulation. Therefore, as of the moment of compliance with all the requirements of this Regulation, such products should cease to be regarded as waste within the meaning of Directive 2008/98/EC, and accordingly it should be possible for products containing or consisting of such recovered waste materials to access the internal market. To ensure legal clarity, take advantage of technical developments, and further stimulate the incentive among producers to make more use of valuable waste streams, the scientific analyses and the setting of recovery requirements at Union level for such products should start immediately after the entry into force of this Regulation. Accordingly, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be delegated to the Commission in respect of defining, without unnecessary delay, larger or additional categories of component materials eligible for use in the production of CE marked fertilising products.
_________________
_________________
20 Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on waste and repealing certain Directives (OJ L 312, 22.11.2008, p. 3).
20 Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on waste and repealing certain Directives (OJ L 312, 22.11.2008, p. 3).
Amendment 15
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13 a (new)
(13a)  Certain industry by-products, co-products or recycled products coming from specific industrial processes are currently used by manufacturers as a component of a CE marked fertilising product. For components of CE marked fertilising products, requirements related to component material categories should be laid down in this Regulation. If applicable, as of the moment of compliance with all the requirements of this Regulation, such products should cease to be regarded as waste within the meaning of Directive 2008/98/EC.
Amendment 16
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
(14)  Certain substances and mixtures, commonly referred to as agronomic additives, improve the nutrient release pattern of a nutrient in a fertiliser. Substances and mixtures made available on the market with the intention of them being added to CE marked fertilising products for that purpose should fulfil certain efficacy criteria at the responsibility of the manufacturer of those substances or mixtures, and should therefore as such be considered as CE marked fertilising products under this Regulation. Furthermore, CE marked fertilising products containing such substances or mixtures should be subject to certain efficacy and safety criteria. Such substances and mixtures should therefore also be regulated as component materials for CE marked fertilising products.
(14)  Certain substances and mixtures, referred to as agronomic additives, improve the nutrient release pattern of a nutrient in a fertiliser. Substances and mixtures made available on the market with the intention of them being added to CE marked fertilising products for that purpose should fulfil certain efficacy, safety and environmental criteria at the responsibility of the manufacturer of those substances or mixtures, and should therefore as such be considered as CE marked fertilising products under this Regulation. Furthermore, CE marked fertilising products containing such substances or mixtures should be subject to certain efficacy, safety and environmental criteria. Such substances and mixtures should therefore also be regulated as component materials for CE marked fertilising products.
Amendment 17
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14 a (new)
(14a)   As products made up of substances and mixtures in addition to the fertilising elements are intended to be added to soil and released in to the environment, conformity criteria should apply to all materials in the product, in particular where they are small or break down into small fragments that can be dispersed throughout soil and into water systems and carried to the wider environment. Therefore biodegradability criteria and conformity testing should also be under realistic in-vivo conditions that take into consideration differential rates of decomposition under anaerobic conditions, in aquatic habitats or under water, in waterlogged conditions or in frozen soil.
Amendment 18
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
(15)  Certain substances, mixtures and micro-organisms, commonly referred to as plant biostimulants, are not as such nutrients, but nevertheless stimulate plants' nutrition processes. Where such products aim solely at improving the plants' nutrient use efficiency, tolerance to abiotic stress, or crop quality traits, they are by nature more similar to fertilising products than to most categories of plant protection products. Such products should therefore be eligible for CE marking under this Regulation and excluded from the scope of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council21. Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 should therefore be amended accordingly.
(15)  Certain substances, mixtures and micro-organisms, referred to as plant biostimulants, are not as such inputs of nutrients, but nevertheless stimulate plants' natural nutrition processes. Where such products aim solely at improving the plants' nutrient use efficiency, tolerance to abiotic stress, or crop quality traits, degradation of soil organic compounds, or increasing the availability of nutrients in the rhizosphere, they are by nature more similar to fertilising products than to most categories of plant protection products. Therefore, they act in addition to fertilisers, with the aim of optimising their efficiency and reducing the nutrient application rates. Such products should therefore be eligible for CE marking under this Regulation and excluded from the scope of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council21. Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 should therefore be amended accordingly.
_________________
_________________
21 Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market and repealing Council Directives 79/117/EEC and 91/414/EEC (OJ L 309, 24.11.2009, p. 1).
21 Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market and repealing Council Directives 79/117/EEC and 91/414/EEC (OJ L 309, 24.11.2009, p. 1).
Amendment 19
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15 a (new)
(15a)  For micro-organisms, component material categories should be expanded or added in order to guarantee and enhance the innovative potential concerning the development and discovery of new microbial plant biostimulant products. In order to stimulate innovation and to create legal certainty for producers concerning the requirements which have to be fulfilled for the use of micro-organisms as component materials for CE marked fertilising products, harmonized methods for the safety evaluation of micro-organisms have to be clearly identified. The preparatory work for defining these safety evaluation methods should start immediately after the entry into force of this Regulation. The power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty should be delegated to the Commission to define, without any unnecessary delay, the requirements which producers have to comply with when demonstrating the safety of micro-organisms in order to be used in CE marked fertilising products.
Amendment 20
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
(16)  Products with one or more functions, one of which is covered by the scope of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009, should remain under the control tailored for such products and provided for by that Regulation. Where such products also have the function of a fertilising product, it would be misleading to provide for their CE marking under this Regulation, since the making available on the market of a plant protection product is contingent on a product authorisation valid in the Member State in question. Therefore, such products should be excluded from the scope of this Regulation.
(16)  Products with one or more functions, one of which is covered by the scope of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009, are plant protection products covered by the scope of that Regulation. Those products should remain under the control tailored for such products and provided for by that Regulation. Where such products also have the function or the action of a fertilising product, it would be misleading to provide for their CE marking under this Regulation, since the making available on the market of a plant protection product is contingent on a product authorisation valid in the Member State in question. Therefore, such products should be excluded from the scope of this Regulation.
Amendment 21
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
(17)  This Regulation should not prevent the application of existing Union legislation relating to aspects of protection of health, safety and the environment not covered by this Regulation. This Regulation should therefore apply without prejudice to Council Directive 86/278/EEC22 , Council Directive 89/391/EEC23 , Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council24 , Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council25 , Commission Regulation (EC) No 1881/200626 , Council Directive 2000/29/EC27 , Regulation (EU) No 98/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council28 , and Regulation (EU) No 1143/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council29 .
(17)  Regardless the type of the CE marked plant nutrition product, this Regulation should not prevent the application of existing Union legislation relating to aspects of protection of health, safety and the environment not covered by this Regulation. This Regulation should therefore apply without prejudice to Council Directive 86/278/EEC22 , Council Directive 89/391/EEC23 , Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council24 , Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council25 , Commission Regulation (EC) No 1881/200626 , Council Directive 2000/29/EC27 , Regulation (EU) No 98/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council28 , Regulation (EU) No 1143/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council29 , Council Directive 91/676/EEC29a, and Directive 2000/60/EC29b
_________________
_________________
22 Council Directive 86/278/EEC of 12 June 1986 on the protection of the environment, and in particular of the soil, when sewage sludge is used in agriculture (OJ L 181, 4.7.1986, p. 6).
22 Council Directive 86/278/EEC of 12 June 1986 on the protection of the environment, and in particular of the soil, when sewage sludge is used in agriculture (OJ L 181, 4.7.1986, p. 6).
23 Council Directive 89/391/EEC of 12 June 1989 on the introduction of measures to encourage improvements in the safety and health of workers at work (OJ L 183, 29.6.1989, p. 1).
23 Council Directive 89/391/EEC of 12 June 1989 on the introduction of measures to encourage improvements in the safety and health of workers at work (OJ L 183, 29.6.1989, p. 1).
24 Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) (OJ L 396, 30.12.2006, p. 1).
24 Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) (OJ L 396, 30.12.2006, p. 1).
25 Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on classification, labelling and packaging of substances and mixtures (OJ L 353, 31.12.2008, p. 1).
25 Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on classification, labelling and packaging of substances and mixtures (OJ L 353, 31.12.2008, p. 1).
26 Commission Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006 of 19 December 2006 setting maximum levels for certain contaminants in foodstuffs (OJ L 364, 20.12.2006, p. 5).
26 Commission Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006 of 19 December 2006 setting maximum levels for certain contaminants in foodstuffs (OJ L 364, 20.12.2006, p. 5).
27 Council Directive 2000/29/EC of 8 May 2000 on protective measures against the introduction into the Community of organisms harmful to plants or plant products and against their spread within the Community (OJ L 169, 10.7.2000, p. 1).
27 Council Directive 2000/29/EC of 8 May 2000 on protective measures against the introduction into the Community of organisms harmful to plants or plant products and against their spread within the Community (OJ L 169, 10.7.2000, p. 1).
28 Regulation (EU) No 98/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 January 2013 on the marketing and use of explosives precursors (OJ L 39, 9.2.2013, p. 1).
28 Regulation (EU) No 98/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 January 2013 on the marketing and use of explosives precursors (OJ L 39, 9.2.2013, p. 1).
29 Regulation (EU) No 1143/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2014 on the prevention and management of the introduction and spread of invasive alien species (OJ L 317, 4.11.2014, p. 35).
29 Regulation (EU) No 1143/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2014 on the prevention and management of the introduction and spread of invasive alien species (OJ L 317, 4.11.2014, p. 35).
29a Council Directive 91/676/EEC of 12 December 1991 concerning the protection of waters against pollution caused by nitrates from agricultural sources (OJ L 375, 31.12.1991, p. 1).
29b Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy (OJ L 327, 22.12.2000, p. 1)
Amendment 22
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17 a (new)
(17a)   The traceability of products which are vulnerable to organic pollution from certain potentially problematic sources (or perceived as such) back to the source of the organic material should be ensured. This is necessary in order to secure consumer confidence and to limit damage if local contamination occurs. As a result, businesses which use fertilising products containing organic material from these sources may be identified. This should be compulsory for products containing material from waste or from by-products which have not undergone any processing that destroys organic pollutants, pathogens and genetic material. The aim is not only to reduce risks to health and the environment but also to reassure public opinion and cater for the concerns of farmers regarding pathogens, organic pollutants and genetic material. In order to protect land owners against pollution for which they themselves are not to blame, Member States are called upon to establish appropriate liability rules.
Amendment 23
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17 b (new)
(17b)   Untreated by-products of animal production should not be subject to this Regulation.
Amendment 24
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19 a (new)
(19a)   In line with the circular economy, certain industry by-products or co-products from specific industrial processes are already used by manufacturers as components of CE marked fertilising products. Requirements related to such component material categories should be laid down in Annex II.
Amendment 25
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
(20)  A blend of different CE marked fertilising products, each of which has been subject to a successful assessment of conformity with the applicable requirements for that material, can itself be expected to be suitable for use as a CE marked fertilising product, subject only to certain additional requirements warranted by the blending. Therefore, in order to avoid an unnecessary administrative burden, such blends should belong to a separate category, for which the conformity assessment should be limited to the additional requirements warranted by the blending.
(20)  A combination of products from different product function categories, each of which has been subject to a successful assessment of conformity with the applicable requirements for that material, can itself be expected to be suitable for use as a CE marked fertilising product, subject only to certain additional requirements warranted by the mixing. Therefore, in order to avoid an unnecessary administrative burden, such combinations should belong to a separate category, for which the conformity assessment should be limited to the additional requirements warranted by the mixing.
(This amendment also covers a horizontal amendment on the term “blend” (in plural or singular) being changed to “combination” (in plural or singular). If agreed by the co-legislators, corresponding changes will apply throughout the text, including those parts reflected in the amendments below.)
Amendment 26
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
(25)  When placing a CE marked fertilising product on the market, the importer should indicate on the packaging of the fertilising product his or her name, registered trade name or registered trade mark and the postal address at which he or she can be contacted, in order to enable market surveillance.
(25)  When placing a CE marked product on the market, the importer should indicate on the packaging of the product his or her name, registered trade name or registered trade mark and the postal address at which he or she can be contacted, as well as the third-country manufacturer, in order to enable market surveillance.
Amendment 27
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
(31)  Where harmonised standards have not been adopted, or do not with sufficient detail cover all elements of the quality and safety requirements laid down in this Regulation, uniform conditions for implementing those requirements may be needed. The Commission should therefore be empowered to adopt implementing acts setting out those conditions in common specifications. For reasons of legal certainty, it should be clarified that CE marked fertilising products must comply with such specifications even if they are considered to be in conformity with harmonised standards.
(31)  Where harmonised standards have not been adopted, or do not with sufficient detail cover all elements of the quality and safety requirements laid down in this Regulation, and where there are undue delays in the process of adopting or updating standards to reflect those requirements, interim measures may be needed to lay down uniform conditions for implementing those requirements. The Commission should therefore be empowered to adopt implementing acts setting out those conditions in common specifications. For reasons of legal certainty, it should be clarified that CE marked fertilising products must comply with such specifications even if they are considered to be in conformity with harmonised standards.
Amendment 28
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 47
(47)  CE-marked fertilising products should be placed on the market only if they are sufficiently effective and do not present unacceptable risks to human, animal or plant health, to safety or to the environment when properly stored and used for their intended purpose, and under conditions of use which can be reasonably foreseen, that is when such use could result from lawful and readily predictable human behaviour. Therefore, requirements for safety and quality, as well as appropriate control mechanisms, should be established. Furthermore, the intended use of CE marked fertilising products should not lead to food or feed becoming unsafe.
(47)  CE-marked fertilising products should be placed on the market only if they are sufficiently effective and do not present a risk to human, animal or plant health, to safety or to the environment when properly stored and used for their intended purpose, and under conditions of use which can be reasonably foreseen, that is when such use could result from lawful and readily predictable human behaviour. Therefore, requirements for safety and quality, as well as appropriate control mechanisms, should be established. Furthermore, the intended use of CE marked fertilising products should not lead to food or feed becoming unsafe.
Amendment 29
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 49
(49)  The existing system should be supplemented by a procedure under which interested parties are informed of measures intended to be taken with regard to CE marked fertilising products presenting an unacceptable risk to human, animal or plant health, to safety or to the environment. It should also allow market surveillance authorities, in cooperation with the relevant economic operators, to act at an early stage in respect of such fertilising products.
(49)  The existing system should be supplemented by a procedure under which all interested parties, including health and consumers stakeholders, are informed of measures intended to be taken with regard to CE marked fertilising products presenting a risk to human, animal or plant health, to safety or to the environment. It should also allow market surveillance authorities, in cooperation with the relevant economic operators, to act at an early stage in respect of such fertilising products.
Amendment 30
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 55
(55)  Promising technical progress is being made in the field of recycling of waste, such as phosphorus recycling from sewage sludge, and fertilising product production from animal by-products, such as biochar. It should be possible for products containing or consisting of such materials to access the internal market without unnecessary delay when the manufacturing processes have been scientifically analysed and process requirements have been established at Union level. For that purpose, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be delegated to the Commission in respect of defining larger or additional categories of CE marked fertilising products or component materials eligible for use in the production of such products. For animal by-products, component material categories should be expanded or added only to the extent an end point in the manufacturing chain has been determined in accordance with the procedures laid down in Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009, since animal by-products for which no such end point has been determined are in any event excluded from the scope of this Regulation.
(55)  Promising technical progress is being made in the field of recycling of waste, such as phosphorus recycling from sewage sludge, such as struvite, fertilising product production from animal by-products, such as biochar, and phosphorus recovery after incineration, such as ash-based products. It should be possible for products containing or consisting of such materials to access the internal market without unnecessary delay when the manufacturing processes have been scientifically analysed and process requirements have been established at Union level. For that purpose, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be delegated to the Commission in respect of the eligibility of such materials for use in production. For products derived from animal by-products, component material categories should be expanded or added only to the extent an end point in the manufacturing chain has been determined in accordance with the procedures laid down in Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009.
Amendment 31
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 55 a (new)
(55a)  A CE marked fertilising product may contain other polymers than nutrient polymers, however this should be limited to the cases where the purpose of the polymer is that of controlling the release of nutrients or increasing the water retention capacity of the CE marked fertilising product. It should be possible for innovative products containing such polymers to access the internal market. In order to minimise risks to human health, to safety or to the environment that may be posed by other polymers than nutrient polymers, the criteria for their biodegradation so that they are capable of undergoing physical and biological decomposition should be established. For that purpose, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be delegated to the Commission in respect of defining the criteria of the conversion of polymeric carbon to be converted into carbon dioxide (CO2) and a respective testing method for biodegradation.
Amendment 32
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 56
(56)  Furthermore, it should be possible to react immediately to new findings regarding the conditions for CE marked fertilising products to be sufficiently effective and to new risk assessments regarding human, animal or plant health, safety or the environment. For that purpose, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty should be delegated to the Commission to amend the requirements applicable to various categories of CE marked fertilising products.
(56)  Furthermore, it should be possible to react immediately to new findings regarding the conditions for CE marked fertilising products to be sufficiently effective and to new risk assessments regarding human, animal or plant health, safety or the environment, taking into account assessments made by or in cooperation with authorities in the Member States. For that purpose, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty should be delegated to the Commission to amend the requirements applicable to various categories of CE marked fertilising products.
Amendment 33
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 57
(57)  In exercising those powers, it is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level. The Commission, when preparing and drawing up delegated acts, should ensure a simultaneous, timely and appropriate transmission of relevant documents to the European Parliament and to the Council.
(57)  When adopting delegated acts provided for in this Regulation, it is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level, and that those consultations be conducted in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement of 13 April 2016 on Better Law-Making. In particular, to ensure equal participation in the preparation of delegated acts, the European Parliament and the Council receive all documents at the same time as Member States' experts, and their experts systematically have access to meetings of Commission expert groups dealing with the preparation of delegated acts.
Amendment 34
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 59 a (new)
(59a)  Due to the high level of dependency on phosphate rock imports in the Union, the Commission has classified that material as a critical raw material. It is therefore necessary to monitor the impact of this Regulation on access to raw material supplies in general, on the availability of phosphate rock in particular, and, in both cases, on prices. After such evaluation, and in the case of negative impact, the Commission should take any measures that it deems to be appropriate in order to remedy those disturbances to trade.
Amendment 35
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point a
(a)  animal by-products which are subject to the requirements of Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009,
(a)  animal by-products or derived products which are made available on the market subject to the requirements of Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009,
Amendment 36
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
(ba)   Directive 91/676/EEC;
Amendment 37
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point b b (new)
(bb)  Directive 2000/60/EC;
Amendment 38
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1
(1)  ‘fertilising product’ means a substance, mixture, micro‑organism or any other material, applied or intended to be applied, either on its own or mixed with another material, on plants or their rhizosphere for the purpose of providing plants with nutrient or improving their nutrition efficiency;
(1)  ‘plant nutrition product’ means a substance, mixture, micro-organism or any other material, applied or intended to be applied, either on its own or mixed with another material, on fungi or their mycosphere or on plants at any growth stage, including seeds, and/or rhizosphere, for the purpose of providing plants or fungi with nutrients or of improving their physical or biological growth conditions or their general vigour, yields and quality, including by increasing the ability of the plant to take up nutrients (with the exception of plant protection products covered by Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009);
Amendment 39
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3
(3)  ‘substance’ means a substance within the meaning of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006;
(3)  'substance' means a chemical element and its compounds in the natural state or obtained by any manufacturing process, including any additive necessary to preserve its stability and any impurity deriving from the process used, but excluding any solvent which may be separated without affecting the stability of the substance or changing its composition;
Amendment 40
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 13
(13)  'technical specification' means a document that prescribes technical requirements to be fulfilled by a CE marked fertilising product;
(13)  'technical specification' means a document that prescribes technical requirements to be fulfilled by a CE marked fertilising product or by its production process;
Amendment 41
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1
Member States shall not impede the making available on the market of CE marked fertilising products which comply with this Regulation.
Member States shall not impede, for the aspects and risks covered by this Regulation, the making available on the market of CE marked fertilising products which comply with this Regulation.
Amendment 42
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 a (new)
This Regulation does not prevent Member States from maintaining or adopting provisions which are in compliance with the Treaties, concerning the use of CE marked fertilising products for the purpose of protecting human health and the environment, provided that those provisions do not require modification of CE marked fertilising products which are in compliance with this Regulation and provided that they do not influence the conditions for making them available on the market.
Amendment 44
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a.   Commission shall simultaneously with the publication of this Regulation in the Official Journal of the European Union publish a guidance document giving clear information and examples to manufacturers and market surveillance authorities about how the label should look like. This guidance document shall also specify other relevant information as referred to in point (d) of paragraph 2 of Part 1 of Annex III.
Amendment 45
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 3
3.  Manufacturers shall keep the technical documentation and the EU declaration of conformity for 10 years after the CE marked fertilising product covered by those documents has been placed on the market.
3.  Manufacturers shall keep the technical documentation and the EU declaration of conformity for five years after the CE marked fertilising product covered by those documents has been placed on the market.
(This is a horizontal amendment on the term for keeping all the technical documentation. If agreed by the co-legislators, corresponding changes will apply throughout the text, including those parts reflected in the amendments below.)
Amendment 46
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Manufacturers shall ensure that procedures are in place for CE marked fertilising products that are part of a series production to remain in conformity with this Regulation. Changes in production method or characteristics of those fertilising products and changes in the harmonised standards, common specifications referred to in Article 13 or other technical specifications by reference to which conformity of a CE marked fertilising product is declared shall be adequately taken into account.
Manufacturers shall ensure that procedures are in place for CE marked fertilising products that are part of a series production to remain in conformity with this Regulation. Changes in the characteristics of those fertilising products and changes in the harmonised standards, common specifications referred to in Article 13 or other technical specifications by reference to which conformity of a CE marked fertilising product is declared shall be adequately taken into account.
Amendment 47
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
When deemed appropriate with regard to the performance of, or the risks presented by, a CE marked fertilising product, manufacturers shall carry out sample testing of such fertilising products made available on the market, investigate, and, if necessary, keep a register of complaints, of non-conforming CE marked fertilising products and recalls of such products, and shall keep distributors informed of any such monitoring.
When deemed appropriate with regard to the performance of, or the risks presented by, a CE marked fertilising product, manufacturers shall, to protect the health and safety of consumers and the environment,  carry out sample testing of such fertilising products made available on the market, investigate, and keep a register of complaints, of non-conforming CE marked fertilising products and recalls of such products, and shall keep distributors and market surveillance authorities informed of any such monitoring.
Amendment 48
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 6
6.  Manufacturers shall indicate their name, registered trade name or registered trade mark and the postal address at which they can be contacted on the packaging of the CE marked fertilising product or, where the fertilising product is supplied without packaging, in a document accompanying the fertilising product. The postal address shall indicate a single point at which the manufacturer can be contacted. The contact details shall be in a language easily understood by end-users and market surveillance authorities.
6.  Manufacturers shall indicate their name, registered trade name or registered trade mark and the postal address at which they can be contacted on the packaging of the CE marked fertilising product or, where the fertilising product is supplied without packaging, in a document accompanying the fertilising product. The postal address shall indicate a single point at which the manufacturer can be contacted. Such information shall be in a language easily understood by end-users and market surveillance authorities as determined by the Member State concerned, and shall be clear, understandable and legible.
Amendment 49
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 7
7.  Manufacturers shall ensure that CE marked fertilising products are labelled in accordance with Annex III, or where the fertilising product is supplied without packaging, that the labelling statements are provided in a document accompanying the fertilising product and accessible for inspection purposes when the product is placed on the market. The labelling statement shall be in a language which can be easily understood by end-users, as determined by the Member State concerned, and shall be clear, understandable and intelligible.
7.  Manufacturers shall ensure that CE marked fertilising product is labelled in accordance with Annex III, or where the package is too small for the label to contain all the information, or where the CE marked fertilising product is supplied without packaging, that the required information is provided in a document accompanying the CE marked fertilising product. The information required in accordance with Annex III shall be in a language which can be easily understood by end-users, as determined by the Member State concerned, and shall be clear, understandable and intelligible.
Amendment 50
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 10 – introductory part
10.  The manufacturer shall submit to the competent authority of the Member State of destination a report of the detonation resistance test prescribed in Annex IV for the following CE marked fertilising products:
10.  The manufacturer shall submit to the competent authority of the Member State of destination a report of the detonation resistance test prescribed in Annex IV, and guarantee that the following CE marked fertilising products are capable of passing that test:
Amendment 51
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 10 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b)  fertilising product blends, as specified in product function category 7 in Annex I, containing a fertiliser referred to in point (a).
(b)  combinations from different product function categories, as specified in product function category 7 in Annex I, containing a fertiliser referred to in point (a).
Amendment 52
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 10 – subparagraph 2
The report shall be submitted at least five days in advance of placing those products on the market.
The report shall be submitted at least five working days in advance of placing those products on the market. The list of the competent authorities of Member States shall be provided by the Commission on its website.
Amendment 53
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1
1.  Importers shall place only compliant CE marked fertilising products on the market.
1.  Only compliant CE marked fertilising products can be imported into the Union and placed on the Union market.
Amendment 54
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2
2.  Before placing a CE marked fertilising product on the market importers shall ensure that the appropriate conformity assessment procedure referred to in Article 14 has been carried out by the manufacturer. They shall ensure that the manufacturer has drawn up the technical documentation, that the CE marked fertilising product is accompanied by the EU declaration of conformity and the required documents, and that the manufacturer has complied with the requirements set out in Article 6(5) and (6). Where an importer considers or has reason to believe that a CE marked fertilising product is not in conformity with the applicable requirements set out in Annex I, Annex II or Annex III, he or she shall not place the fertilising product on the market until it has been brought into conformity. Furthermore, where the CE marked fertilising product presents an unacceptable risk to human, animal or plant health, to safety or to the environment, the importer shall inform the manufacturer and the market surveillance authorities to that effect.
2.  Before placing a CE marked fertilising product on the market importers shall ensure that the appropriate conformity assessment procedure referred to in Article 14 has been carried out by the manufacturer. They shall ensure that the manufacturer has drawn up the technical documentation, that the CE marked fertilising product is accompanied by the EU declaration of conformity and the required documents, and that the manufacturer has complied with the requirements set out in Article 6(5) and (6). Where an importer considers or has reason to believe that a CE marked fertilising product is not in conformity with the applicable requirements of this Regulation, he or she shall not place the fertilising product on the market until it has been brought into conformity. Furthermore, where the CE marked fertilising product presents an unacceptable risk to human, animal or plant health, to safety or to the environment, the importer shall inform the manufacturer and the market surveillance authorities to that effect.
Amendment 55
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3
3.  Importers shall indicate their name, registered trade name or registered trade mark and the postal address at which they can be contacted on the packaging of the CE marked fertilising product or, where the CE marked fertilising product is supplied without packaging, in a document accompanying the fertilising product. The contact details shall be in a language easily understood by end-users and market surveillance authorities.
3.  Importers shall indicate their name, registered trade name or registered trade mark and the postal address at which they can be contacted as well as the third-country manufacturers, on the packaging of the CE marked fertilising product or, where the CE marked fertilising product is supplied without packaging, in a document accompanying the fertilising product. The contact details shall be in a language easily understood by end-users and market surveillance authorities.
Amendment 56
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 4
4.  Importers shall ensure that the CE marked fertilising product is labelled in accordance with Annex III in a language which can be easily understood by end-users, as determined by the Member State concerned.
4.  Importers shall ensure that the CE-marked fertilising product is labelled in accordance with Annex III, or where the package is too small for the label to contain all the information, or where the CE marked fertilising product is supplied without packaging, that the required information is provided in a document accompanying the CE marked fertilising product. The information required in accordance with Annex III shall be in a language which can be easily understood by end-users, as determined by the Member State concerned.
Amendment 57
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 6
6.  When deemed appropriate with regard to the performance of or the risks presented by a CE marked fertilising product, importers shall carry out sample testing of such fertilising products made available on the market, investigate, and, if necessary, keep a register of complaints, of non-conforming CE marked fertilising products and recalls of such products, and shall keep distributors informed of any such monitoring.
6.  When deemed appropriate with regard to the performance of or the risks presented by a CE marked fertilising product, importers shall, to protect the health and safety of consumers and the environment, carry out sample testing of such fertilising products made available on the market, investigate, and keep a register of complaints, of non-conforming CE marked fertilising products and recalls of such products, and shall keep distributors informed of any such monitoring.
Amendment 58
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 8
8.  Importers shall, for 10 years after the CE marked fertilising product has been placed on the market, keep a copy of the EU declaration of conformity at the disposal of the market surveillance authorities and ensure that the technical documentation can be made available to those authorities, upon request.
8.  Importers shall, for five years after the CE marked fertilising product has been placed on the market, keep a copy of the EU declaration of conformity at the disposal of the market surveillance authorities and ensure that the technical documentation can be made available to those authorities, upon request. On request, importers shall make a copy of the EU declaration of conformity available to other economic operators concerned.
Amendment 59
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Before making a CE marked fertilising product available on the market distributors shall verify that it is accompanied by the EU declaration of conformity and by the required documents, that it is labelled in accordance with Annex III in a language which can be easily understood by end-users in the Member State in which the CE marked fertilising product is to be made available on the market, and that the manufacturer and the importer have complied with the requirements set out in Article 6(5) and (6) and Article 8(3) respectively.
Before making a CE marked fertilising product available on the market distributors shall verify that it is accompanied by the required documents, that it is labelled in accordance with Annex III in a language which can be easily understood by end-users in the Member State in which the CE marked fertilising product is to be made available on the market, and that the manufacturer and the importer have complied with the requirements set out in Article 6(5) and (6) and Article 8(3) respectively. Where the package is too small for the label to contain all the information, or where the CE marked fertilising product is supplied without packaging, market distributors shall verify that the required information is provided in a document accompanying the CE marked fertilising product.
Amendment 60
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Where a distributor considers or has reason to believe that a CE marked fertilising product is not in conformity with the applicable requirements set out in Annex I, Annex II or Annex III, he or she shall not make the fertilising product available on the market until it has been brought into conformity. Furthermore, where the CE marked fertilising product presents an unacceptable risk to human, animal or plant health, to safety or to the environment, the distributor shall inform the manufacturer or the importer to that effect as well as the market surveillance authorities.
Where a distributor considers or has reason to believe that a CE marked fertilising product is not in conformity with the applicable requirements of this Regulation, he or she shall not make the fertilising product available on the market until it has been brought into conformity. Furthermore, where the CE marked fertilising product presents an unacceptable risk to human, animal or plant health, to safety or to the environment, the distributor shall inform the manufacturer or the importer to that effect as well as the market surveillance authorities.
Amendment 61
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Without prejudice to the common specifications referred to in Article 13, CE marked fertilising products which are in conformity with harmonised standards or parts thereof the references of which have been published in the Official Journal of the European Union shall be presumed to be in conformity with the requirements set out in Annexes I, II and III covered by those standards or parts thereof.
CE marked fertilising products which are in conformity with, or have been tested in conformity with, harmonised standards or parts thereof the references of which have been published in the Official Journal of the European Union shall be presumed to be in conformity with the respective requirements set out in Annexes I, II and III covered by those standards or parts thereof.
Amendment 62
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1
The Commission may adopt implementing acts laying down common specifications, the compliance with which shall ensure conformity with the requirements set out in Annexes I, II and III covered by those specifications or parts thereof. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 41(3).
Where a requirement set out in Annexes I, II or III is not covered by harmonised standards or parts thereof, the references of which have been published in the Official Journal of the European Union, and where following a request to one or several European standardisation organisations to draft harmonised standards for that requirement the Commission observes undue delays in the adoption of that standard, the Commission may adopt implementing acts laying down common specifications for that requirement. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 41(3).
Amendment 63
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1
1.  The CE marking shall be affixed visibly, legibly and indelibly to the accompanying documents and, where the CE marked fertilising product is supplied in a packaged form, to the packaging.
1.  The CE marking shall be affixed visibly, legibly and indelibly to the packaging of the CE marked fertilising product or, where the CE marked fertilising product is supplied without packaging, to the documents accompanying the CE marked fertilising product.
Amendment 64
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
The CE marking shall be followed by the identification number of the notified body involved in the conformity assessment referred to in Annex IV, Module D1.
The CE marking shall be followed by the identification number of the notified body, where required by Annex IV.
Amendment 65
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1
A CE marked fertilising product that has undergone a recovery operation and complies with the requirements laid down in this Regulation shall be considered to comply with the conditions laid down in Article 6(1) of Directive 2008/98/EC and shall, therefore, be considered as having ceased to be waste.
Where a material that was waste has undergone a recovery operation and a CE marked fertilising product compliant with this Regulation contains or consists of that material, the material shall be considered to comply with the conditions laid down in Article 6(1) of Directive 2008/98/EC and shall, therefore, be considered as having ceased to be waste from the moment the EU declaration of conformity is drawn up.
Amendment 66
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 2
2.  The notifying Member State shall provide the Commission, on request, with all information relating to the basis for the notification or the maintenance of the competence of the notified body concerned.
2.  The notifying authorities shall provide the Commission, on request, with all information relating to the basis for the notification or the maintenance of the competence of the notified body concerned.
Amendment 67
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 3
3.  Where a notified body finds that the requirements set out in Annex I, Annex II or Annex III, or corresponding harmonised standards, common specifications referred to in Article 13 or other technical specifications, have not been met by a manufacturer, it shall require that manufacturer to take appropriate corrective measures and shall not issue a certificate.
3.  Where a notified body finds that the requirements set out in Annex I, Annex II or Annex III, or corresponding harmonised standards, or common specifications referred to in Article 13, have not been met by a manufacturer, it shall require that manufacturer to take appropriate corrective measures and shall not issue a conformity certificate or approval decision.
Amendment 68
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 4
4.  Where, in the course of the monitoring of conformity following the issue of a certificate, a notified body finds that a CE marked fertilising product no longer complies, it shall require the manufacturer to take appropriate corrective measures and shall suspend or withdraw the certificate if necessary.
4.  Where, in the course of the monitoring of conformity following the issue of a certificate or approval decision, a notified body finds that a CE marked fertilising product no longer complies, it shall require the manufacturer to take appropriate corrective measures and shall suspend or withdraw the certificate or approval decision if necessary.
Amendment 69
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 5
5.  Where corrective measures are not taken or do not have the required effect, the notified body shall restrict, suspend or withdraw any certificates, as appropriate.
5.  Where corrective measures are not taken or do not have the required effect and a CE marked fertilising product thus remains non-compliant with the requirements of this Regulation, the notified body shall restrict, suspend or withdraw any certificates or approval decisions, as appropriate.
Amendment 70
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a)  any refusal, restriction, suspension or withdrawal of a certificate;
(a)  any refusal, restriction, suspension or withdrawal of a certificate or approval decision;
Amendment 71
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – title
Procedure for dealing with CE marked fertilising products presenting a risk at national level
Procedure at national level for dealing with CE marked fertilising products presenting a risk
Amendment 72
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Where the market surveillance authorities of one Member State have sufficient reason to believe that a CE marked fertilising product presents an unacceptable risk to human, animal or plant health, to safety or to the environment, they shall carry out an evaluation in relation to the fertilising product concerned covering the requirements laid down in this Regulation. The relevant economic operators shall cooperate as necessary with the market surveillance authorities for that purpose.
Where the market surveillance authorities of one Member State have sufficient reason to believe that a CE marked fertilising product presents a risk to human, animal or plant health, to safety or to the environment or to other aspects of public interest protection covered by this Regulation, they shall carry out an evaluation in relation to the fertilising product concerned covering all the requirements laid down in this Regulation. The relevant economic operators shall cooperate as necessary with the market surveillance authorities for that purpose.
(This amendment also covers a horizontal amendment on the term “unacceptable risk” (in plural or singular) being changed to “risk” (in singular). If agreed by the co-legislators, corresponding changes will apply throughout the text, including those parts reflected in the amendments below.)
Amendment 73
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Where, in the course of the evaluation, the market surveillance authorities find that the CE market fertilising product does not comply with the requirements laid down in this Regulation, they shall without delay require the economic operator to take all appropriate corrective actions within a reasonable period to bring the fertilising product into compliance with those requirements, to withdraw the fertilising product from the market, to recall it, or to remove the CE marking.
Where, in the course of the evaluation, the market surveillance authorities find that the CE market fertilising product does not comply with the requirements laid down in this Regulation, they shall without delay require the economic operator to take all appropriate corrective actions to bring the fertilising product into compliance with those requirements, to withdraw the fertilising product from the market or to recall it within a reasonable period, commensurate with the nature of the risk, as they may prescribe, and to remove the CE marking.
Amendment 74
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Where the relevant economic operator does not take adequate corrective action within the period referred to in the second subparagraph of paragraph 1, the market surveillance authorities shall take all appropriate provisional measures to prohibit or restrict the CE marked fertilising product being made available on their national market, to withdraw the fertilising product from that market or to recall it.
Where the relevant economic operator does not take adequate corrective action within the period referred to in the second subparagraph of paragraph 1, the market surveillance authorities shall take all appropriate provisional measures to prohibit or restrict the CE marked fertilising product being made available on their national market, to withdraw the fertilising product from that market or to recall it. Market surveillance authorities' obligations in this respect shall be without prejudice to Member States' possibility to regulate fertilising products which are not CE marked when made available on the market.
Amendment 75
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 5 – point b
(b)  shortcomings in the harmonised standards referred to in Article 12 conferring a presumption of conformity.
(b)  shortcomings in the harmonised standards referred to in Article 12;
Amendment 76
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 5 – point b a (new)
(ba)   shortcomings in the common specifications referred to in Article 13.
Amendment 77
Proposal for a regulation
Article 38 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a.  Where the national measure is considered to be justified and the non-compliance of the CE marked fertilising product is attributed to shortcomings in the common specifications referred to in point (ba) of Article 37(5), the Commission shall, without delay, adopt implementing acts amending or repealing the common specification concerned. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 41(3).
Amendment 78
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 1
1.  Where, having carried out an evaluation under Article 37(1), a Member State finds that although a CE marked fertilising product is in compliance with this Regulation it presents an unacceptable risk to human, animal or plant health, to safety or to the environment, it shall require the relevant economic operator to take all appropriate measures within a reasonable period to ensure that the fertilising product concerned, when placed on the market, no longer presents that risk, to withdraw the fertilising product from the market or to recall it.
1.  Where, having carried out an evaluation under Article 37(1), a Member State finds that although a CE marked fertilising product is in compliance with this Regulation it presents a risk to human, animal or plant health, to safety or to the environment or to other aspects of public interest protection covered by this Regulation, it shall without delay require the relevant economic operator to take all appropriate measures, within a reasonable period prescribed by the market surveillance authority and commensurate with the nature of the risk, to ensure that the fertilising product concerned, when made available on the market, no longer presents that risk, to withdraw the fertilising product from the market or to recall it.
Amendment 79
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c)  the EU declaration of conformity does not accompany the CE marked fertilising product;
(c)  the EU declaration of conformity has not been drawn up;
Amendment 80
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 1
1.  The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 43 to amend Annexes I to IV for the purposes of adapting them to technical progress and facilitating internal market access and free movement for CE marked fertilising products.
1.  The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 43 to amend Annexes I to IV for the purposes of adapting them to technical progress, taking into account products and materials already authorised in Member States, and in particular in the fields of fertilising product production from animal by-products and waste recovery, and for the purpose of facilitating internal market access and free movement for CE marked fertilising products:
(a)  which are likely to be subject of significant trade on the internal market, and
(a)  which have the potential to be subject of significant trade on the internal market, and
(b)  for which there is scientific evidence that the they do not present an unacceptable risk to human, animal or plant health, to safety or to the environment, and that they are sufficiently effective.
(b)  for which there is scientific evidence that the they do not present a risk to human, animal or plant health, to safety or to the environment, and that they are sufficiently effective.
Amendment 81
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a.  Without undue delay after … [date of the entry into force of this Regulation], the Commission shall adopt delegated acts, in accordance with paragraph 1, to amend the component material categories set out in Annex II to add in particular animal by-products for which the end-point has been determined, struvite, biochar and ash-based products to those component material categories, as well as to lay down the requirements for the inclusion of those products in those categories. When adopting those delegated acts, the Commission shall specifically take into account technological progress in the recovery of nutrients.
Amendment 345
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 1 b (new)
1b.  The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 43 to extend the date of entry into force of the 20mg/kg limit referred to in Annex I, part II, PFC1(B), point 3, point (a), point 2 and Annex I, part II, PFC1(C)I, point 2, point (a), point 2, if, based on a thorough impact assessment, it has evidence to consider that the introduction of a stricter limit would seriously jeopardise the supply of fertilising products to the Union.
Amendment 82
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2.  Where the Commission amends Annex II in order to add new micro-organisms to the component material category for such organisms pursuant to paragraph 1, it shall do so on the basis of the following data:
2.  Where the Commission amends Annex II in order to add new strains of micro-organisms to the component material category for such organisms, it shall do so, after verifying that all concerned strains of the additional microorganism comply with the requirements in point (b) of paragraph 1 of this Article, on the basis of the following data:
Amendment 83
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a)  name of the micro-organism;
(a)  name of the micro-organism at strain level;
Amendment 84
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c)  historical data of safe production and use of the micro-organism
(c)  scientific literature reporting about safe production and use of the micro-organism
Amendment 85
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 2 – point d
(d)  taxonomic relation to micro-organism species fulfilling the requirements for a Qualified Presumption of Safety as established by the European Food Safety Agency;
(d)  taxonomic relation to micro-organism species fulfilling the requirements for a Qualified Presumption of Safety as established by the European Food Safety Authority, or reference of declared conformity to the relevant harmonised standards on safety of micro-organisms used which have been published in the Official Journal of the European Union, or conformity with the requirements for the safety evaluation of micro-organisms as adopted by the Commission if such harmonised standards are not in place;
Amendment 86
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
To reflect the rapid technological progress in that field, the Commission shall, by … [one year after the date of entry into force of this Regulation], adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 43 to define criteria for the evaluation of micro-organisms that may be used in plant nutrition products without being inscribed nominally in a positive list.
Amendment 87
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
By … [six months after the date of entry into force of this Regulation], the Commission shall adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 43 to amend Annex II in order to insert the end-points in the manufacturing chain that have been determined in accordance with the second subparagraph of Article 5(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009, with regard to the animal by-products listed in CMC 11 of Annex II.
Amendment 88
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a.   When adopting delegated acts referred to in paragraph 1, the Commission shall amend the component material category setting the requirement for polymers other than nutrient polymers in Annex II in order to reflect the latest scientific evidence and technological development, and by … [three years after the date of application of this Regulation] shall define the criteria of the conversion of polymeric carbon to be converted into carbon dioxide (CO2) and a respective testing method for biodegradation.
Amendment 89
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 3 b (new)
3b.  When adopting delegated acts referred to in paragraph 1, the Commission shall amend the component material category setting the criteria for other industry by-products in Annex II in order to reflect the present product manufacturing practices, technological development and the latest scientific evidence, and by … [one year after the date of entry into force of this Regulation] shall define the criteria for industrial by-products for their inclusion to the component material category.
Amendment 91
Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a.  Before adopting a delegated act, the Commission shall consult experts designated by each Member State in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement of 13 April 2016 on Better Law-Making.
Amendment 92
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 1
Member States shall lay down rules on penalties applicable to infringements of this Regulation and shall take all measures necessary to ensure that they are implemented. The penalties provided for shall be effective, proportionate and dissuasive. Member States shall, without delay, notify the Commission of those rules and of those measures and shall notify it, without delay, of any subsequent amendment affecting them.
Member States shall lay down rules on penalties applicable to infringements of this Regulation and shall take all measures necessary to ensure that they are implemented. The penalties provided for shall be effective, proportionate and dissuasive. Member States shall, without delay, notify the Commission of those rules and of those measures and shall notify it, without delay, of any subsequent amendment affecting them. Member States shall take all measures necessary to ensure that their rules on penalties are enforced.
Amendment 93
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new)
Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
(1a)  in paragraph 2, the following subparagraph is inserted after the first subparagraph:
“For derived products falling under the scope of Article 32 that are already widely used in Member States for the production of fertilisers, the Commission shall determine such an end-point by … [six months after the date of entry into force of the Fertilisers Regulation]".
Amendment 94
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009
Article 3 – point 34 – introductory part
(3)   "34. "plant biostimulant" means a product stimulating plant nutrition processes independently of the product's nutrient content with the sole aim of improving one or more of the following characteristics of the plant:
“34. "plant biostimulant’ means a product containing any substance or micro-organism stimulating plant nutrition processes independently of its nutrient content, or any combination of such substances and/or micro-organisms, with the sole aim of improving one or more of the following characteristics of the plant or the plant rhizosphere:
Amendment 95
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009
Article 3 – point 34 – point c
(c)  crop quality traits.
(c)  crop quality.
Amendment 96
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009
Article 3 – point 34 – point c a (new)
(ca)   availability of confined nutrients in soil or rhizosphere;
Amendment 97
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009
Article 3 – point 34 – point c b (new)
(cb)   degradation of organic compounds in the soil;
Amendment 98
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009
Article 3 – point 34 – point c c (new)
(cc)  humification;
Amendment 99
Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – title
Transitional provisions
Transitional provisions, reporting and review
Amendment 100
Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 1
Member States shall not impede the making available on the market of products which were placed on the market as fertilisers designated "EC fertiliser" in conformity with Regulation (EC) No 2003/2003 before [Publications office, please insert the date of application of this Regulation]. However, Chapter 5 shall apply mutatis mutandis to such products.
Member States shall not impede the making available on the market of products which were placed on the market as fertilisers designated "EC fertiliser" in conformity with Regulation (EC) No 2003/2003 before ... [twelve months after the date of application of this Regulation]. However, Chapter 5 shall apply mutatis mutandis to such products.
Amendment 101
Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a.  Member States which have already implemented a lower limit for cadmium (Cd) content in organo-mineral fertilisers and inorganic fertilisers, set out in PFC 1 (B)(3)(a) and PFC 1 (C)(I)(2)(a) of Part II of Annex I may maintain that stricter limit until the limit established according to this Regulation is equal or lower. Member States shall notify such existing national measures to the Commission by ... [six months after the date of entry into force of this Regulation].
Amendment 102
Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 1 b (new)
1b.  By … [42 months after the date of application of this Regulation], the Commission shall submit to the European Parliament and to the Council a report assessing the application of this Regulation and its overall impact as to the attainment of its objectives, including the impact on SMEs. That report shall in particular include:
(a)  an assessment of the functioning of the internal market for fertilising products, including the conformity assessment and market surveillance effectiveness, an analysis of the effects of partial harmonization on production, use patterns and trade flows of CE marked fertilising products and fertilising products placed on the market under national rules;
(b)  an assessment of application of restrictions on levels of contaminants as laid out in Annex I of this Regulation, any new relevant scientific information as regards the toxicity and carcinogenicity of contaminants if it becomes available, including the risks from uranium contamination in fertilising products;
(c)  an assessment of the developments in decadmiation technologies and their impact, scale and costs across the value chain, as well as related cadmium waste management; and
(d)  an assessment of the impacts on trade in raw material sourcing, including the availability of phosphate rock.
The report shall take due account of technological progress and innovation as well as standardisation processes affecting production and use of fertilising products. It shall be accompanied, if necessary, by a legislative proposal by … [five years after the date of application of this Regulation].
By ...[12 months after the entry into force of this Regulation] the Commission shall submit an evaluation of the scientific data to set the agronomic and environmental criteria to define end-of-livestock-manure criteria in order to qualify the performance of products that contain or consist of processed livestock manure.
Amendment 103
Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 1 c (new)
1c.  By … [five years after the date of entry into force of this Regulation], the Commission shall carry out a review of the conformity assessment procedure of micro-organisms.
Amendment 104
Proposal for a regulation
Article 49 – paragraph 2
It shall apply from 1 January 2018.
It shall apply from … [two years after the date of entry into force of this Regulation], with the exception of Articles 19 to 35, which shall apply from … [one year after the date of entry into force of this Regulation] and Articles 13, 41, 42, 43 and 45, which shall apply from … [the date of entry into force of this Regulation].
Amendment 105
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part I – point 1 – point C a (new)
Ca.  Low carbon fertiliser
Amendment 106
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part I – point 5 – point A – point I a (new)
Ia.  Denitrification inhibitor
Amendment 107
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – point 4
4.  Where the CE marked fertilising product contains a substance for which maximum residue limits for food and feed have been established in accordance with
deleted
(a)  Council Regulation (EEC) No 315/9332 ,
(b)  Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 of the European Parliament and of the Council33 ,
(c)  Regulation (EC) No 470/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council34 or
(d)  Directive 2002/32/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council35 ,
the use of the CE marked fertilising product as specified in the use instructions must not lead to the exceedance of those limits in food or feed.
__________________
32 Council Regulation (EEC) No 315/93 of 8 February 1993 laying down Community procedures for contaminants in food (OJ L 37, 13.2.1993, p. 1).
33 Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 February 2005 on maximum residue levels of pesticides in or on food and feed of plant and animal origin and amending Council Directive 91/414/EEC (OJ L 70, 16.3.2005, p. 1).
34 Regulation (EC) No 470/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 May 2009 laying down Community procedures for the establishment of residue limits of pharmacologically active substances in foodstuffs of animal origin, repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 2377/90 and amending Directive 2001/82/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ L 152, 16.6.2009, p. 11).
35 Directive 2002/32/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 May 2002 on undesirable substances in animal feed (OJ L 140, 30.5.2002, p. 10).
Amendment 108
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – point 4 a (new)
4a.  Ingredients submitted for approval or re-approval under Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 but not included in Implementing Regulation (EU) No 540/2011 shall not be used in fertilising products when non-inclusion is justified by paragraph 4 of Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009.
Amendment 109
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(A) – point 1
1.  An organic fertiliser shall contain
1.  An organic fertiliser shall contain
—  carbon (C) and
—  organic carbon (Corg) and
—  nutrients
—  nutrients
of solely biological origin, excluding material which is fossilized or embedded in geological formations.
of solely biological origin, such as peat, including leonardite, lignite and substances obtained from those materials, but excluding other materials which are fossilized or embedded in geological formations.
Amendment 110
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(A) – point 2 – indent 1
—  Cadmium (Cd) 1,5 mg/kg dry matter,
—  Cadmium (Cd) 1,0 mg/kg dry matter,
Amendment 112
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(A) – point 2 – indent 6
—  Biuret (C2H5N3O2) 12 g/kg dry matter.
—  Biuret (C2H5N3O2) under detection limit.
Amendment 113
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(A) – point 3

Text proposed by the Commission

3.  Salmonella spp. shall be absent in a 25 g sample of the CE marked fertilising product.

Amendment

3.  Pathogens must not be present in the organic fertiliser in a concentration of more than the respective limits outlined in the table below:

Micro-organism to be tested

Sampling plans

Limit

 

n

c

m

M

Salmonella spp

5

0

0

Absence in 25g or 25ml

Escherichia coli or Enterococcaceae

5

5

0

1000 in 1g or 1ml

where n = number of samples to be tested

c = number of samples where the number of bacteria expressed in CFU may be between m and M

m = threshold value for the number of bacteria expressed in CFU that is considered satisfactory

M = maximum value of the number of bacteria expressed in CFU

Parasites Ascaris spp. and Toxocara spp. in all stages of their development must not be present in 100g or 100ml of the organic fertiliser.

Amendment 114
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(A)(I) – point 1 a (new)
1a.  The CE marked fertilising product shall contain at least one of the following declared nutrients: nitrogen (N), phosphorus pentoxide (P2O5) or potassium oxide (K2O).
Amendment 115
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(A)(I) – point 2 a (new)
2a.  Where the CE marked fertilising product contains more than one nutrient the product shall contain the primary declared nutrients in the minimum quantities stated below: □
2,5 % by mass of total nitrogen (N), or 2 % by mass of total phosphorus pentoxide (P2O5), or2 % by mass of total potassium oxide (K2O), and
6,5 % by mass of total sum of nutrients.
Amendment 116
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(A)(II) – point 1 a (new)
1a.  The CE marked fertilising product shall contain at least one of the following declared nutrients: nitrogen (N), phosphorus pentoxide (P2O5) or potassium oxide (K2O).
Amendment 117
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(A)(II) – point 2 – introductory part
2.  The CE marked fertilising product shall contain at least one of the following declared nutrients in the minimum quantities stated:
2.  The CE marked fertilising product shall contain at least one of the following declared primary nutrients in the minimum quantities stated:
Amendment 118
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(A)(II) – point 2 – indent 1
—  2% by mass of total nitrogen (N),
—  1% by mass of total nitrogen (N), and/or
Amendment 119
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(A)(II) – point 2 – indent 2
–  1% by mass of total phosphorus pentoxide (P2O5), or
–  2 % by mass of total phosphorus pentoxide (P2O5), or
Amendment 120
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(A)(II) – point 2 – indent 3
–  2% by mass of total potassium oxide (K2O).
–  1 % by mass of total potassium oxide (K2O) and
Amendment 121
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(A)(II) – point 2 – indent 3 a (new)
–  6,5 % by mass of total sum of nutrients.
Amendment 122
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(A)(II) – point 2 a (new)
2a.  Where the CE marked fertilising product contains more than one nutrient the product shall contain the primary declared nutrients in the minimum quantities stated below: □
2 % by mass of total nitrogen (N), or 1 % by mass of total phosphorus pentoxide (P2O5), or2 % by mass of total potassium oxide (K2O), and
5 % by mass of total sum of primary nutrients.
Amendment 123
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(B) – point 1
1.  An organo-mineral fertiliser shall be a co-formulation of
1.  An organo-mineral fertiliser shall be a co-formulation of
–  one or more inorganic fertilisers, as specified in PFC 1(C) below, and
–  one or more mineral fertilisers, as specified in PFC 1(C) below, and
–  a material containing organic carbon (C) and
–  one or more materials containing organic carbon (Corg) and
–  nutrients of solely biological origin, excluding material which is fossilized or embedded in geological formations.
–  nutrients of solely biological origin, such as peat, including leonardite, lignite and substances obtained from those materials, but excluding other materials which are fossilized or embedded in geological formations.
Amendment 343
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC1(B) – point 3 – point a – point 2 – indents 2 and 3
–  As of [Publications office, please insert the date occurring three years after the date of application of this Regulation]: 40 mg/kg phosphorus pentoxide (P2O5), and
–  As of [Publications office, please insert the date occurring six years after the date of application of this Regulation]: 40 mg/kg phosphorus pentoxide (P2O5), and
–  As of [Publications office, please insert the date occurring twelve years after the date of application of this Regulation]: 20 mg/kg phosphorus pentoxide (P2O5),
–  As of [Publications office, please insert the date occurring sixteen years after the date of application of this Regulation]: 20 mg/kg phosphorus pentoxide (P2O5),
Amendment 126
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(B) – point 4

Text proposed by the Commission

4.  Salmonella spp. shall be absent in a 25 g sample of the CE marked fertilising product.

Amendment

4.  Pathogens must not be present in the organo-mineral fertiliser in a concentration of more than the respective limits outlined in the table below:

Micro-organism to be tested

Sampling plans

Limit

 

n

c

m

M

Salmonella spp

5

0

0

Absence in 25g or 25ml

Escherichia coli or Enterococcaceae

5

5

0

1000 in 1g or 1ml

where n = number of samples to be tested

c = number of samples where the number of bacteria expressed in CFU may be between m and M

m = threshold value for the number of bacteria expressed in CFU that is considered satisfactory

M = maximum value of the number of bacteria expressed in CFU

Parasites Ascaris spp. and Toxocara spp. in all stages of their development must not be present in 100g or 100ml of the organo-mineral fertiliser.

Amendment 127
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(B)(I) – point 2 – indent 2
—  2 % by mass of total phosphorus pentoxide (P2O5), or
—  1 % by mass of Phosphorus pentoxide (P2O5) soluble in neutral ammonium citrate and water, or
Amendment 128
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(B)(I) – point 2 a (new)
2a.  Where the CE marked fertilising product contains more than one nutrient the product shall contain the primary declared nutrients in the minimum quantities stated below:
2,5 % by mass of total nitrogen (N), out of which 1% by mass of the CE marked fertilising product shall be organic nitrogen (N), or2 % by mass of total phosphorus pentoxide (P2O5), or 2 % by mass of total potassium oxide (K2O), and
6,5 % by mass of total sum of primary nutrients.
Amendment 129
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(B)(I) – point 4
4.  In the CE marked fertilising product, each unit shall contain the organic matter and the nutrients in their declared content.
4.  In the CE marked fertilising product, each unit shall contain organic carbon and all the nutrients in their declared content. A unit refers to one of the component pieces of product such as granules, pellets, etc.
Amendment 130
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(B)(II) – point 2 a (new)
2a.  Where the product contains more than one nutrient, the following minimum quantities shall be present:
–  1 % by mass of total nitrogen (N), or
–  1 % by mass of total phosphorus pentoxide (P2O5), or
–  1 % by mass of total potassium oxide (K2O),
and where the sum of the nutrients is minimum 4 %.
Amendment 131
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(B)(II) – point 3
3.  Organic carbon (C) shall be present in the CE marked fertilising product by at least 3 % by mass.
3.  Organic carbon (C) shall be present in the CE marked fertilising product by at least 1 % by mass.
Amendment 132
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(C) – point 1
1.   An inorganic fertiliser shall be a fertiliser other than an organic or organo-mineral fertiliser.
1.   A mineral fertiliser shall be a fertiliser containing nutrients in a mineral form, or processed into a mineral form from animal or plant origin. Organic carbon (Corg) in the CE marked fertilising product shall not exceed 1 % by mass. That excludes carbon which comes from coatings complying with the requirements of CMC 9 and 10 and agronomic additives complying with the requirements of PFC 5 and CMC 8.
Amendment 133
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(C) - point 1 a (new)
1a.  Phosphorus fertilisers have to fulfil at least one of the following minimum solubility levels to be plant-available, otherwise they cannot be declared as phosphorus fertiliser:
–  Water solubility: minimum level 40% of total P, or
–  Solubility in neutral ammonium citrate: minimum level 75 % of total P, or
–  Solubility in formic acid (only for soft rock phosphate): minimum level 55 % of total P.
Amendment 134
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(C) - point 1 b (new)
1b.  The total declarable nitrogen content is given by the sum of ammoniacal N, nitric N, ureic N, N from methylene-urea, N from isobutylidene diurea, N from crotonylidene diurea. The declarable phosphorus content is given by the phosphatic P form. New forms can be added after a scientific examination in accordance with Article 42(1).
Amendment 135
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1 (C)(I) – point 1
1.  An inorganic macronutrient fertiliser shall be aimed at providing plants with one or more of the following macronutrients: nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), potassium (K), magnesium (Mg), calcium (Ca), sulphur (S) or sodium (Na).
1.  An mineral macronutrient fertiliser shall be aimed at providing plants with one or more of the following macronutrients:
(a)  Primary: nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), and potassium (K);
(b)  Secondary: magnesium (Mg), calcium (Ca), sulphur (S) or sodium (Na).
Amendment 344
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(C)(I) – point 2 – point a – point 2 – indents 2 and 3
–  As of [Publications office, please insert the date occurring three years after the date of application of this Regulation]: 40 mg/kg phosphorus pentoxide (P2O5), and
–  As of [six years after the date of application of this Regulation]: 40 mg/kg phosphorus pentoxide (P2O5), and
–  As of [Publications office, please insert the date occurring twelve years after the date of application of this Regulation]: 20 mg/kg phosphorus pentoxide (P2O5),
–  As of [sixteen years after the date of application of this Regulation]: 20 mg/kg phosphorus pentoxide (P2O5),
Amendment 139
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(C)(I)(a)(i) – point 1
1.  A straight solid inorganic macronutrient fertiliser shall have a declared content of not more than one nutrient.
1.  A straight solid mineral macronutrient fertiliser shall have a declared content of:
(a)   not more than one primary nutrient (nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), and potassium (K)), or
Amendment 140
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(C)(I)(a)(i) – point 1 – point b (new)
(b)   not more than one secondary nutrient (Magnesium (Mg), Calcium (Ca), sulphur (S) and sodium (Na)).
Amendment 141
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(C)(I)(a)(i) – point 1 a (new)
1a.   A straight solid mineral macronutrient fertiliser with a declared content of not more than one primary nutrient, can contain one or more secondary nutrients.
Amendment 142
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(C)(I)(a)(i) – point 2 – introductory part
2.  The CE marked fertilising product shall contain one of the following declared nutrients in the minimum quantity stated:
2.  The CE marked fertilising product shall contain primary and/or secondary declared nutrients in the minimum quantity stated:
Amendment 143
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(C)(I)(a)(i) – point 2 – indent 2
–  12% by mass of total phosphorus pentoxide (P2O5),
–  12 % by mass of phosphorus pentoxide (P2O5) soluble in neutral ammonium citrate and water,
Amendment 144
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(C)(I)(a)(i) – point 2 – indent 7
–  1% by mass of total sodium oxide (Na2O).
–  3 % by mass of total sodium oxide (Na2O),
Amendment 145
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(C)(I)(a)(ii) – point 1
1.  A compound solid inorganic macronutrient fertiliser shall have a declared content of more than one nutrient.
1.  A compound solid mineral macronutrient fertiliser shall have a declared content of more than one primary and/or secondary nutrient.
Amendment 146
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(C)(I)(a)(ii) – point 2 – introductory part
2.  The CE marked fertilising product shall contain more than one of the following declared nutrients in the minimum quantities stated:
2.  The CE marked fertilising product shall contain more than one of the primary and/or secondary declared nutrients in the minimum quantities stated:
Amendment 147
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(C)(I)(a)(ii) – point 2 – indent 2
–  3% by mass of total phosphorus pentoxide (P2O5),
–  5 % by mass of total phosphorus pentoxide (P2O5) soluble in neutral ammonium citrate and water,
Amendment 148
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(C)(I)(a)(ii) – point 2 – indent 3
–  3% by mass of total potassium oxide (K2O),
–  5 % by mass of total potassium oxide (K2O),
Amendment 149
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(C)(I)(a)(ii) – point 2 – indent 4
–  1,5% by mass of total magnesium oxide (MgO),
–  2 % by mass of total magnesium oxide (MgO),
Amendment 150
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(C)(I)(a)(ii) – point 2 – indent 5
–  1,5% by mass of total calcium oxide (CaO),
–  2 % by mass of total calcium oxide (CaO),
Amendment 151
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(C)(I)(a)(ii) – point 2 – indent 6
–  1,5% by mass of total sulphur trioxide (SO3), or
–  5 % by mass of total sulphur trioxide (SO3),
Amendment 152
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(C)(I)(a)(ii) – point 2 – indent 7
–  1% by mass of total sodium oxide (Na2O).
–  3 % by mass of total sodium oxide (Na2O).
Amendment 153
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(C)(I)(a)(i-ii)(A) – point 5 – indent 1
—  following five thermal cycles as described under Heading 4.2 in Module A1 in Annex IV,
—  following five thermal cycles as described under Heading 4.2 in Module A1 in Annex IV, for testing before placing on the market,
Amendment 154
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(C)(I)(b)(i) – point 1
1.  A straight liquid inorganic macronutrient fertiliser shall have a declared content of not more than one nutrient.
1.  A straight liquid mineral macronutrient fertiliser shall have a declared content of:
(a)   not more than one primary nutrient,
Amendment 155
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(C)(I)(b)(i) – point 1 – point b (new)
(b)   not more than one secondary nutrient.
Amendment 156
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(C)(I)(b)(i) – point 1 a (new)
1a.   A straight liquid mineral macronutrient fertiliser with a declared content of not more than one primary nutrient, can contain one or more secondary nutrient.
Amendment 157
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(C)(I)(b)(i) – point 2 – introductory part
2.  The CE marked fertilising product shall contain one of the following declared nutrients in the minimum quantity stated:
2.  The CE marked fertilising product shall contain primary and/or secondary declared nutrients in the minimum quantity stated:
Amendment 158
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(C)(I)(b)(i) – point 2 – indent 2
–  5% by mass of total phosphorus pentoxide (P2O5),
–  5 % by mass of total phosphorus pentoxide (P2O5) soluble in neutral ammonium citrate and water,
Amendment 159
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(C)(I)(b)(i) – point 2 – indent 6
–  5% by mass of total sulphur trioxide (SO3), or
–  5 % by mass of total sulphur trioxide (SO3),
Amendment 160
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(C)(I)(b)(i) – point 2 – indent 7
–  1% by mass of total sodium oxide (Na2O).
–  from 0,5 % to 5 % by mass of total sodium oxide (Na2O).
Amendment 161
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(C)(I)(b)(ii) – point 1
1.  A compound liquid inorganic macronutrient fertiliser shall have a declared content of more than one nutrient.
1.  A compound liquid mineral macronutrient fertiliser shall have a declared content of more than one primary and/or secondary nutrient.
Amendment 162
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(C)(I)(b)(ii) – point 2 – introductory part
2.  The CE marked fertilising product shall contain more than one of the following declared nutrients in the minimum quantities stated:
2.  The CE marked fertilising product shall contain more than one of the primary and/or secondary declared nutrients in the minimum quantities stated:
Amendment 163
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(C)(I)(b)(ii) – point 2 – indent 1
—  1,5% by mass of total nitrogen (N),
—  3 % by mass of total nitrogen (N), or
Amendment 164
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(C)(I)(b)(ii) – point 2 – indent 2
–  1,5% by mass of total phosphorus pentoxide (P2O5),
–  1,5 % by mass of total phosphorus pentoxide (P2O5) soluble in neutral ammonium citrate and water,
Amendment 165
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(C)(I)(b)(ii) – point 2 – indent 3
–  1,5% by mass of total potassium oxide (K2O),
–  3 % by mass of total potassium oxide (K2O), or
Amendment 166
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(C)(I)(b)(ii) – point 2 – indent 4
–  0,75% by mass of total magnesium oxide (MgO),
–  1,5 % by mass of total magnesium oxide (MgO), or
Amendment 167
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(C)(I)(b)(ii) – point 2 – indent 5
–  0,75% by mass of total calcium oxide (CaO),
–  1,5 % by mass of total calcium oxide (CaO), or
Amendment 168
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(C)(I)(b)(ii) – point 2 – indent 6
–  0,75% by mass of total sulphur trioxide (SO3), or
–  1,5 % by mass of total sulphur trioxide (SO3), or
Amendment 169
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(C)(II) – point 1
1.  An inorganic micronutrient fertiliser shall be an inorganic fertiliser other than a macronutrient fertiliser aimed at providing one or more of the following nutrients: boron (B), cobalt (Co), copper (Cu), iron (Fe), manganese (Mn), molybdenum (Mo) or zinc (Zn).
1.  An inorganic micronutrient fertiliser shall be an inorganic fertiliser other than a macronutrient fertiliser aimed at providing one or more of the following nutrients: boron (B), cobalt (Co), copper (Cu), iron (Fe), manganese (Mn), molybdenum (Mo), selenium (Se), silicon (Si) or zinc (Zn).
Amendment 170
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 1(C) a (new)
PFC 1(C)a: LOW CARBON FERTILISER
1.  A CE marked fertilising product shall be termed low carbon fertilizer if it contains more than 1 % organic carbon (Corg) and up to 15 % organic carbon (Corg).
2.  Carbon present in calcium cyanamide and in urea and its condensation and association products will not be included in organic carbon for the purpose of that definition.
3.  The specifications of solid/liquid, straight/compound, macronutrient/micronutrient fertilisers of PFC1(C) will apply for the purpose of this category.
4.  Products sold under PFC 1(C)a shall comply with contaminant levels as specified in Annex I defined for organic or organo-mineral fertilisers in any case where PFC 1(C) does not contain any limit values for those contaminants.
Amendment 171
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 2 – point 1
1.  A liming material shall be a CE marked fertilising product aimed at correcting soil acidity, and containing oxides, hydroxides, carbonates or silicates of the nutrients calcium (Ca) or magnesium (Mg).
1.  A liming material shall be a CE marked fertilising product aimed at correcting soil acidity, and containing oxides, hydroxides, carbonates or/and silicates of the nutrients calcium (Ca) or magnesium (Mg).
Amendment 398
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 2 – point 3
3.  The following parameters determined on dry matter shall be met:
3.  The following parameters determined on dry matter shall be met:
–  Minimum neutralising value: 15 (equivalent CaO) or 9 (equivalent HO-), and
–  Minimum neutralising value: 15 (equivalent CaO) or 9 (equivalent HO-), and
–  Minimum reactivity: 10% or 50% after 6 months (incubation test).
–  Minimum reactivity: 10% or 50% after 6 months (incubation test), and
–  Minimum grain size: 70 % < 1 mm, except for burnt limes, granulated liming material and chalk (=70 % of the grain size shall pass through a 1 mm sieve)
Amendment 175
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 3 – point 1
A soil improver shall be a CE marked fertilising product aimed at being added to the soil for the purpose of maintaining, improving or protecting the physical or chemical properties, the structure or the biological activity of soil.
A soil improver shall be a material, including mulch, added to soil in situ primarily to maintain or improve its physical properties, and which may improve its chemical and/or biological properties or activity.
Amendment 176
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 3 – point 1 a (new)
1a.  The CE marked fertilising product shall contain 15 % or more material of biological origin.
Amendment 177
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 3(A) – point 1
1.  An organic soil improver shall consist exclusively of material of solely biological origin, excluding material which is fossilized or embedded in geological formations.
1.  An organic soil improver shall consist exclusively of material of solely biological origin, including peat, leonardite, lignite and humic substances obtained from them, but excluding other materials which are fossilized or embedded in geological formations.
Amendment 179
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 3(A) – point 2 – indent 2
—  Hexavalent chromium (Cr VI) 2 mg/kg dry matter,
—  Hexavalent chromium (Cr VI) 1 mg/kg dry matter,
Amendment 181
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 3(A) – point 3 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission

(a)  Salmonella spp. shall be absent in a 25 g sample of the CE marked fertilising product.

Amendment

(a)  Pathogens must not be present in the organic soil improver in a concentration of more than the respective limits outlined in the table below:

Micro-organism to be tested

Sampling plans

Limit

 

n

c

m

M

Salmonella spp

5

0

0

Absence in 25g or 25ml

Escherichia coli or Enterococcaceae

5

5

0

1000 in 1g or 1ml

where n = number of samples to be tested

c = number of samples where the number of bacteria expressed in CFU may be between m and M

m = threshold value for the number of bacteria expressed in CFU that is considered satisfactory

M = maximum value of the number of bacteria expressed in CFU

Parasites Ascaris spp. and Toxocara spp. in all stages of their development must not be present in 100g or 100ml of the organic soil improver.

Amendment 182
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 3(B) – point 1
1.  An inorganic soil improver shall be a soil improver other than an organic soil improver.
1.  An inorganic soil improver shall be a soil improver other than an organic soil improver, and shall include mulch films. A biodegradable mulch film shall be a biodegradable polymer film complying in particular with the requirements of points 2a and 3 of CMC 10 in Annex II and intended to be placed on the soil in situ to protect its structure, suppress weed growth, reduce soil moisture loss, or prevent erosion.
Amendment 184
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 4 – point 1
1.  A growing medium shall be a material other than soil intended for use as a substrate for root development.
1.  A growing medium shall be a material other than soil in situ in which plants and mushrooms are grown.
Amendment 187
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 4 – point 3

Text proposed by the Commission

3.   Salmonella spp. shall be absent in a 25 g sample of the CE marked fertilising product.

Amendment

3.   Pathogens must not be present in the growing medium in a concentration of more than the respective limits outlined in the table below:

Micro-organism to be tested

Sampling plans

Limit

 

n

c

m

M

Salmonella spp

5

0

0

Absence in 25g or 25ml

Escherichia coli or Enterococcaceae

5

5

0

1000 in 1g or 1ml

where n = number of samples to be tested

c = number of samples where the number of bacteria expressed in CFU may be between m and M

m = threshold value for the number of bacteria expressed in CFU that is considered satisfactory

M = maximum value of the number of bacteria expressed in CFU

Parasites Ascaris spp. and Toxocara spp. in all stages of their development must not be present in 100g or 100ml of the growing medium.

Amendment 188
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 5 – point 1
An agronomic additive shall be a CE marked fertilising product intended to be added to a product providing plants with nutrient, with the intention to improve that product's nutrient release patterns.
An agronomic additive shall be a CE marked fertilising product, intended to be added to a product, which has a proven effect on the transformation or plant-availability of different forms of mineral or mineralized nutrients, or both, or which is to be added to the soil with the intention to improve that nutrient uptake by plants or to reduce nutrient losses.
Amendment 193
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 5(A)(I a) (new)
PFC 5(A)(Ia): Denitrification inhibitor
1.  A denitrification inhibitor shall be an inhibitor that reduces the formation of nitrous oxide (N2O) by slowing down or blocking the conversion of nitrate (NO3-) to dinitrogen (N2) without influencing the nitrification process as described in PFC 5(A)(I). It shall contribute to increase the availability of nitrate to the plant and to reduce N2O emissions.
2.  The effectiveness of this method can be assessed by measuring nitrous oxide emissions in gas samples collected in a suitable measuring device and measuring the amount of N2O of that sample in a gas chromatograph. The assessment shall also record the water content of the soil.
Amendment 202
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 6 – point 1 – introductory part
1.  A plant biostimulant shall be a CE marked fertilising product stimulating plant nutrition processes independently of the product's nutrient content with the sole aim of improving one or more of the following characteristics of the plant:
1.  A plant biostimulant shall be a CE marked fertilising product stimulating plant nutrition processes independently of the product's nutrient content with the sole aim of improving one or more of the following characteristics of the plant and the plant rhizophere or phyllosphere:
Amendment 203
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 6 – point 1 – point c a (new)
(ca)  availability of confined nutrients in the soil and rhizosphere,
Amendment 204
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 6 – point 1 – point c b (new)
(cb)  humification,
Amendment 205
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 6 – point 1 – point c c (new)
(cc)  degradation of organic compounds in the soil.
Amendment 206
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 6 – point 2 – indent 1
—  Cadmium (Cd) 3 mg/kg dry matter,
—  Cadmium (Cd) 1,5 mg/kg dry matter,
Amendment 208
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 6(A) – point 1
1.  A microbial plant biostimulant shall consist solely of a micro-organism or a consortium of micro-organisms referred to in Component Material Category 7 of Annex II.
1.  A microbial plant biostimulant shall consist:
(a)   of a micro-organism or a consortium of microorganisms referred to in Component Material Category 7 of Annex II;
(b)  of microorganisms or a consortium of microorganisms different from those provided under point (a) of this point. They can be used as component material categories as long as they comply with the requirements set out in the Component Material Category 7 of Annex II.
Amendment 209
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 6(A) – point 3

Text proposed by the Commission

3.   Salmonella spp. shall be absent in a 25 g or 25 ml sample of the CE marked fertilising product.

Amendment

3.   Pathogens must not be present in the microbial plant biostimulant in a concentration of more than the respective limits outlined in the table below:

Micro-organisms/their toxins, metabolites

Sampling plans

Limit

 

n

c

 

Salmonella spp

5

0

Absence in 25g or 25 ml

Escherichia coli

5

0

Absence in 1g or 1ml

Listeria monocytogenes

5

0

Absence in 25g or 25 ml

Vibrio spp

5

0

Absence in 25g or 25 ml

Shigella spp

5

0

Absence in 25g or 25 ml

Staphylococcus aureus

5

0

Absence in 25g or 25 ml

Enterococcaceae

5

2

10 CFU/g

Anaerobic plate count unless the microbial biostimulant is an aerobic bacterium

5

2

105 CFU/g or ml

Yeast and mould count unless the microbial biostimulant is a fungus

5

2

1000 CFU/g or ml

where n= number of units comprising the sample; c= number of sample units giving values over the defined limit.

Amendment 210
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 6(A) – point 4
4.  Escherichia coli shall be absent in a 1 g or 1 ml sample of the CE marked fertilising product.
deleted
Amendment 211
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 6(A) – point 5
5.  Enterococcaceae must not be present in the CE marked fertilising product by more than 10 CFU/g fresh mass.
deleted
Amendment 212
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 6(A) – point 6
6.  Listeria monocytogenes shall be absent in a 25 g or 25 ml sample of the CE marked fertilising product.
deleted
Amendment 213
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 6 (A) – point 7
7.  Vibrio spp shall be absent in a 25 g or 25 ml sample of the CE marked fertilising product.
deleted
Amendment 214
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 6 (A) – point 8
8.  Shigella spp shall be absent in a 25 g or 25 ml sample of the CE marked fertilising product.
deleted
Amendment 215
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 6 (A) – point 9
9.  Staphylococcus aureus shall be absent in a 1 g or 1 ml sample of the CE marked fertilising product.
deleted
Amendment 216
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 6 (A) – point 10
10.  Aerobic plate count shall not exceed 105 CFU/g or ml sample of the CE marked fertilising product, unless the microbial biostimulant is an aerobic bacterium.
deleted
Amendment 217
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 6(A) – point 12 – subparagraph 2
the plant biostimulant shall have a pH superior or equal to 4.
deleted
Amendment 218
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 6(A) – point 13
13.  The shelf-life of the microbial plant biostimulant shall be at least 6 months under the storage conditions specified on the label.
deleted
Amendment 219
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – PFC 7 – point 3 – introductory part
3.  The blending shall not change the nature of each component fertilising product
3.  The blending shall not change the function of each component fertilising product
Amendment 220
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part I – CMC 11 a (new)
CMC 11a: Other industry by-products
Amendment 221
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part II – CMC 1 – point 1 – introductory part
1.  A CE marked fertilising product may contain substances and mixtures, other than39
1.  A CE marked fertilising product may contain substances and mixtures, including technical additives, other than39
__________________
__________________
39 The exclusion of a material from CMC 1 does not prevent it from being an eligible component material by virtue of another CMC stipulating different requirements. See, for instance, CMC 11 on animal by-products, CMCs 9 and 10 on polymers, and CMC 8 on agronomic additives.
39 The exclusion of a material from CMC 1 does not prevent it from being an eligible component material by virtue of another CMC stipulating different requirements. See, for instance, CMC 11 on animal by-products, CMCs 9 and 10 on polymers, and CMC 8 on agronomic additives.
Amendment 222
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part II – CMC 1 – point 1 – point b
(b)  by-products within the meaning of Directive 2008/98/EC,
(b)  by-products within the meaning of Directive 2008/98/EC, except by-products registered pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 other than those covered by one of the registration obligation exemptions provided for by point 5 of Annex V to that Regulation,
Amendment 223
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part II – CMC 1 - point 1 – point e
(e)  polymers, or
(e)  polymers with the exception of those used in growing media not in contact with the soil, or
Amendment 228
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part II – CMC 2 – point 1
1.  A CE marked fertilising product may contain plants, plant parts or plant extracts having undergone no other processing than cutting, grinding, centrifugation, pressing, drying, freezedrying or extraction with water.
1.  A CE marked fertilising product may contain plants, plant parts or plant extracts having undergone no other processing than cutting, grinding, centrifugation, sieving, milling, pressing, drying, freeze-drying, buffering, extrusion, radiation, frost-treatment, sanitation by using heat, extraction with water or any other preparation/processing that does not render the final substance subject to registration under Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006.
Amendment 229
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part II – CMC 2 – point 2
2.  For the purpose of paragraph 1, plants are understood to include algae and exclude blue-green algae.
2.  For the purpose of paragraph 1, plants are understood to include algae except for blue-green algae that produce cyanotoxins classified as hazardous in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 on classification, labelling and packaging of substances and mixtures.
Amendment 230
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part II – CMC 3 – point 1 – introductory part
1.  A CE marked fertilising product may contain compost obtained through aerobic composting of exclusively one or more of the following input materials:
1.  A CE marked plant nutrition product may contain compost, a liquid or non-liquid microbial or non-microbial extract made out of compost, obtained through aerobic composting, and the possible ensuing multiplication of the naturally occurring microbials of exclusively one or more of the following input materials:
Amendment 231
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part II – CMC 3 – point 1 – point b
(b)  Animal by-products of categories 2 and 3 according to Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009;
(b)  Products derived from animal by-products referred to in Article 32 of Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009 for which the end point in the manufacturing chain has been reached in accordance with Article 5 of that Regulation;
Amendment 232
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part II – CMC 3 – point 1 – point c – introductory part
(c)  Living or dead organisms or parts thereof, which are unprocessed or processed only by manual, mechanical or gravitational means, by dissolution in water, by flotation, by extraction with water, by steam distillation or by heating solely to remove water, or which are extracted from air by any means, except
(c)  Living or dead organisms or parts thereof, which are unprocessed or processed only by manual, mechanical or gravitational means, by dissolution in water, by flotation, by extraction with water, except
Amendment 233
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part II – CMC 3 – point 1 – point c – indent 2
–  sewage sludge, industrial sludge or dredging sludge, and
–  sewage sludge, industrial sludge (apart for non-consumable food residues, fodder and plantations linked to agrofuels) or dredging sludge, and
Amendment 238
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part II – CMC 3 – point 1 – point e a (new)
(ea)  Unprocessed and mechanically processed residues from food production industries, except from industries using animal by-products according to Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009.
Amendment 239
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part II – CMC 3 – point 1 – point e b (new)
(eb)  Materials that conform to CMC 2, CMC 3, CMC 4, CMC 5, CMC 6 and CMC 11.
Amendment 240
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part II – CMC 3 – point 2 – indent 1
–  which only processes input materials referred to in paragraph 1 above, and
–  in which production lines for the processing of input materials referred to in point 1 above are clearly separated from production lines for the processing of input materials other than referred to in point 1, and
Amendment 241
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part II – CMC 3 – point 6 – point a – indent 2
—  Criterion: maximum 25 mmol O2/kg organic matter/h; or
—  Criterion: maximum 50 mmol O2/kg organic matter/h; or
Amendment 242
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part II – CMC 4 – title
CMC 4: Energy crop digestate
CMC 4: Energy crop digestate and plant-based bio-waste
Amendment 247
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part II – CMC 4 – point 1 – point c
(c)  Any material referred to in points (a)-(b) that has previously been digested.
(c)  Any material referred to in points (a)-(b) that has previously been digested without any traces of aflatoxins.
Amendment 248
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part II – CMC 4 – point 2 – indent 1
–  which only processes input materials referred to in paragraph 1 above, and
–  in which production lines for the processing of input materials referred to in point 1 above are clearly separated from production lines for the processing of input materials other than referred to in point 1, and
Amendment 249
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part II – CMC 4 – point 3 – point b
(b)  Thermophilic anaerobic digestion at 55°C with a treatment process including a pasteurisation step (70°C – 1h);
(b)  Thermophilic anaerobic digestion at 55°C with a treatment process including pasteurisation as described in point 1 of section 1 of Chapter I of Annex V to Commission Regulation (EU) No 142/20111a;
_________________
1a Commission Regulation ((EU) No 142/2011 of 25 February 2011 implementing Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down health rules as regards animal by-products and derived products not intended for human consumption and implementing Council Directive 97/78/EC as regards certain samples and items exempt from veterinary checks at the border under that Directive ((OJ L 54, 26.2.2011, p. 1).
Amendment 250
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part II – CMC 4 – point 3 – point d
(d)  Mesophilic anaerobic digestion at 37-40°C with a treatment process including a pasteurisation step (70°C – 1h); or
(d)  Mesophilic anaerobic digestion at 37-40°C with a treatment process including pasteurisation as described in point 1 of section 1 of Chapter I of Annex V to Regulation (EU) No 142/2011; or
Amendment 251
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part II – CMC 5 – point 1 – point c – indent 2
–  sewage sludge, industrial sludge or dredging sludge,
–  sewage sludge, industrial sludge other than those specified in point (ea) or dredging sludge, and
Amendment 255
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part II – CMC 5 – point 1 – point e – introductory part
(e)  Any material listed in points (a)-(d) that
(e)  Any material without aflatoxins listed in points (a)-(d) that
Amendment 256
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part II – CMC 5 – point 1 – point e a (new)
(ea)  Unprocessed and mechanically processed residues from food production industries, except from industries using animal by-products in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009.
Amendment 257
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part II – CMC 5 – point 1 – point e b (new)
(eb)  Materials that conform to CMC 2, CMC 3, CMC 4, CMC5 , CMC 6 and CMC 11.
Amendment 258
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part II – CMC 5 – point 2 – indent 1
–  which only processes input materials referred to in paragraph 1 above, and
–  in which production lines for the processing of input materials referred to in point 1 above are clearly separated from production lines for the processing of input materials other than referred to in point 1, and
Amendment 259
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part II – CMC 5 – point 3 – point a
(a)  Thermophilic anaerobic digestion at 55°C during at least 24h and a hydraulic retention time of at least 20 days;
(a)  Thermophilic anaerobic digestion at 55°C during at least 24h and a hydraulic retention time of at least 20 days, followed by an analysis to verify that the digestion process successfully destroyed the pathogens;
Amendment 260
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part II – CMC 5 – point 3 – point b
(b)  Thermophilic anaerobic digestion at 55°C with a treatment process including a pasteurisation step (70°C – 1h);
(b)  Thermophilic anaerobic digestion at 55°C with a treatment process including pasteurisation as described in point 1 of section 1 of Chapter I of Annex V to Regulation (EU) No 142/2011;
Amendment 261
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part II – CMC 5 – point 3 – point d
(d)  Mesophilic anaerobic digestion at 37-40°C with a treatment process including a pasteurisation step (70°C – 1h); or
(d)  Mesophilic anaerobic digestion at 37-40°C with a treatment process including pasteurisation as described in point 1 of section 1 of Chapter I of Annex V to Regulation (EU) No 142/2011; or
Amendment 262
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part II – CMC 6 – point 1 – point c a (new)
(ca)  olive pomace, i.e. a viscous by-product of olive milling obtained by treating the wet pomace with organic solvents in two (2-phase pomace) or three phases (3-phase pomace);
Amendment 263
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part II – CMC 6 – point 1 – point c b (new)
(cb)   by-products of the feed industry which are listed in the catalogue of individual feed materials in Regulation (EU) No 68/2013,
Amendment 264
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part II – CMC 6 – point 1 – point c c (new)
(cc)  any other material or substance that has been approved for incorporation in food or animal feed.
Amendment 269
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part II – CMC 6 – point 2 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
All substances shall contain aflatoxins under the detection limit.
Amendment 270
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part II – CMC 7 – point 1 – indent 1
–  have undergone no other processing than drying or freeze-drying and
deleted
Amendment 271
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part II – CMC 8 – point 1
1.  A CE marked fertilising product may contain a substance or a mixture intended to improve the fertilising product's nutrient release patterns, only if that substance's or mixture's compliance with the requirements of this Regulation for a product in PFC 5 of Annex I has been demonstrated in accordance with the conformity assessment procedure applicable to such an agronomic additive.
1.  A CE marked fertilising product may contain a substance or a mixture (including technological additives, for example: anti-caking agents, defoaming agents, anti-dust agents, dyes and rheological agents) intended to improve the fertilising product's nutrient release patterns, only if that substance's or mixture's compliance with the requirements of this Regulation for a product in PFC 5 of Annex I has been demonstrated in accordance with the conformity assessment procedure applicable to such an agronomic additive.
Amendment 272
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part II – CMC 8 – point 3 a (new)
3a.  A CE marked fertilising product may contain a compliant denitrification inhibitor as referred to in PFC 5(A)(Ia) of Annex I, only if it contains nitrogen in some form.
Amendment 273
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part II – CMC 8 – point 4
4.  A CE marked fertilising product may contain a compliant urease inhibitor, as referred to in PFC 5(A)(II) of Annex I, only if at least 50% of the total nitrogen (N) content of the fertilising product consists of the nitrogen (N) form urea (CH4N2O).
4.  A CE marked fertilising product may contain a compliant urease inhibitor, as referred to in PFC 5(A)(II) of Annex I, only if at least 50% of the total nitrogen (N) content of the fertilising product consists of the nitrogen (N) form ammonium (NH4+) or ammonium (NH4+) and urea (CH4N2O).
Amendment 274
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part II – CMC 9 – point 3
3.  The polymers shall not contain formaldehyde.
3.  The polymers shall contain a maximum of 600 ppm free formaldehyde.
Amendment 275
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part II – CMC 10 – point 1
1.  A CE marked fertilising product may contain other polymers than nutrient polymers only in cases where the purpose of the polymer is that of
1.  A CE marked fertilising product may contain other polymers than nutrient polymers only in cases where the purpose of the polymer is that of
(a)  controlling the water penetration into nutrient particles and thus the release of nutrients (in which case the polymer is commonly referred to as a 'coating agent'), or
(a)  controlling the water penetration into nutrient particles and thus the release of nutrients (in which case the polymer is commonly referred to as a 'coating agent'), or
(b)  increasing the water retention capacity of the CE marked fertilising product.
(b)  increasing the water retention capacity of the CE marked fertilising product, or
(ba)  improving the soil as a biodegradable mulch film, which complies in particular with the requirements of points 2a and 3 of CMC 10, or
(bb)  binding components of the fertilising product, without any contact with the soil, or
(bc)  improving the stability of the CE marked fertilising products, or
(bd)   improving water penetration into soil.
Amendment 276
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part II – CMC 10 – point 2
2.  As of [Publications office, please insert the date occurring three years after the date of application of this Regulation], the following criterion shall be complied with: The polymer shall be capable of undergoing physical, biological decomposition, such that most of it ultimately decomposes into carbon dioxide (CO2), biomass and water. It shall have at least 90 % of the organic carbon converted into CO2 in maximum 24 months, in a biodegradability test as specified points (a)-(c) below.
2.  As of ... [five years after the date of application of this Regulation], the following criterion shall be complied with: The polymer shall be capable of undergoing physical, biological decomposition, such that most of it ultimately decomposes into carbon dioxide (CO2), biomass and water. It shall have at least 90 % of the organic carbon converted into CO2 in maximum 48 months after the end of the claimed functionality period of the fertilising product indicated on the label, and as compared to an appropriate standard in the biodegradation test. The biodegradability criteria, and the development of an appropriate testing method for biodegradation shall be evaluated in the light of the latest scientific evidence and laid down in delegated acts referred to in Article 42 of this Regulation.
(a)  The test shall be conducted at 25°C ± 2°C.
(b)  The test shall be conducted in accordance with a method for determining the ultimate aerobic biodegradability of plastic materials in soils by measuring oxygen demand or the amount of carbon dioxide evolved.
(c)  A micro-crystalline cellulose powder with the same dimension as the test material shall be used as a reference material in the test.
(d)  Prior to the test, the test material shall not be subject to conditions or procedures designed to accelerate the degradation of the film, such as exposure to heat or light.
Amendment 277
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part II – CMC 10 – point 2 a (new)
2a.  The biodegradable mulch films referred to in PFC 3(B), shall comply with the following criterion:
The polymer shall be capable of undergoing physical, biological decomposition, such that it ultimately decomposes into carbon dioxide (CO2), biomass and water and it shall have at least 90 %, absolute or relative to the reference material, of the organic carbon converted into CO2 in a maximum of 24 months, in a biodegradability test in accordance with Union standards for biodegradation of polymers in soil.
Amendment 278
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part II – CMC 10 – point 3 a (new)
3a.  As the product is intended to be added to soil and released in to the environment, these criteria shall apply to all materials in the product.
Amendment 279
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part II – CMC 10 – point 3 b (new)
3b.   A CE marked product containing polymers other than nutrient polymers shall be exempted from the requirements set out in points 1, 2 and 3 under the condition that the polymers are solely used as binding material for the fertilising product and they are not in contact with the soil.
Amendment 280
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part II – CMC 11

Text proposed by the Commission

A CE marked fertilising product may contain animal by-products within the meaning of Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009 having reached the end point in the manufacturing chain as determined in accordance with that Regulation, which are listed in the table below and as specified therein:

Amendment

Subject to the adoption by the Commission of the delegated acts pursuant to Article 42, a CE marked fertilising product may contain animal by-products within the meaning of Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009 having reached the end point in the manufacturing chain as determined in accordance with that Regulation, which are listed in the table below and as specified therein

 

Derived product

Processing standards to reach the end point in the manufacturing chain

1

Meat meal

Determined in accordance with the second subparagraph of Article 5(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009

2

Bone meal

Determined in accordance with the second subparagraph of Article 5(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009

3

Meat-and-bone meal

Determined in accordance with the second subparagraph of Article 5(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009

4

Blood of animals

Determined in accordance with the second subparagraph of Article 5(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009

5

Hydrolysed proteins of Category III – according to Regulation (EC) 1069/2009

Determined in accordance with the second subparagraph of Article 5(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009

6

Processed manure

Determined in accordance with the second subparagraph of Article 5(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009

7

Compost (1)

Determined in accordance with the second subparagraph of Article 5(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009

8

Biogas digestion residues(1)

Determined in accordance with the second subparagraph of Article 5(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009

9

Feather meal

Determined in accordance with the second subparagraph of Article 5(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009

10

Hides and skins

Determined in accordance with the second subparagraph of Article 5(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009

11

Hoofs and horns

Determined in accordance with the second subparagraph of Article 5(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009

12

Guano of bats

Determined in accordance with the second subparagraph of Article 5(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009

13

Wool and hair

Determined in accordance with the second subparagraph of Article 5(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009

14

Feather and downs

Determined in accordance with the second subparagraph of Article 5(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009

15

Pig bristles

Determined in accordance with the second subparagraph of Article 5(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009

16

Glycerine and other products of Category 2 and 3 materials derived from the biodiesel and renewable fuels production

Determined in accordance with the second subparagraph of Article 5(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009

17

Petfood and dog chews that have been refused for commercial reasons or technical failures

Determined in accordance with the second subparagraph of Article 5(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009

(1)   derived from Category 2 and 3 materials other than Meat-and-bone meal and Processed animal protein

Amendment 281
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part II – CMC 11 a (new)
CMC 11a: Other industry by-products
1.  A CE marked fertilising product may contain other industry by-products such as ammonium sulfate from caprolactam production, sulfuric acid from refining natural gas and oils as well as other materials coming from specific industrial processes, which are excluded from CMC 1 and are listed in the table below, under the conditions specified therein:
2.  From … [one year after the date of entry into force of this Regulation], the criteria for industrial by-products that have been used in compliance with Regulation (EC) No 2003/2003 as components of CE marked fertilising products, for their inclusion to the component material category shall be established in the light of the latest scientific evidence and laid down in delegated acts referred to in Article 42 of this Regulation.
Amendment 282
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – part 1 – point 2 – point e
(e)  A description of all components above 5% by product weight in descending order of magnitude by dry weight, including an indication of the relevant component material categories ('CMC') as referred to in Annex II.
(e)  A description of all components above 1% by product weight in descending order of magnitude by dry weight, including an indication of the relevant component material categories ('CMC') as referred to in Annex II and including the content as percentage by the dry matter;
Amendment 283
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – part 1 – point 2 – point e a (new)
(ea)  In the case of any product containing material originating from organic wastes or by-products, which has not been through a process which has destroyed all organic materials, the label shall specify which wastes and by-products have been used and a batch number or production time series number. That number shall refer to the traceability data held by the producer and which identifies the individual sources (farms, factories, etc.) of each organic waste/by-product used in the batch/time series. The Commission shall publish, after a public consultation and by … [two years after the date of entry into force of this Regulation], specifications for the implementation of this provision, which will enter into force by … [three years after the publication of the specifications]. In order to minimise the administrative burden for operators and for market surveillance authorities, the Commission specifications shall take into account both the requirements of paragraphs 5 to 7 of Article 6 and Article 11 and existing traceability systems (e.g. for animal by-products or industry systems) as well as Union waste classification codes.
Amendment 284
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – part 1 – point 2 a (new)
2a.  Short instructions for intended use, including intended application rate and timing, intended target plants and storage shall be made available by the manufacturers.
Amendment 285
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – part 1 – point 7 a (new)
7a.  No product can make claims related to another PFC without meeting the full requirements of that additional PFC, nor are any direct or implied claims of plant protection effects allowed.
Amendment 286
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – part 2 – PFC 1 – point 2 – point b
(b)  The nitrification inhibitor content shall be expressed as a percentage by mass of the total nitrogen (N) present as ammonium nitrogen (NH4+) and urea nitrogen (CH4N2O).
(b)  The nitrification inhibitor content shall be expressed as a percentage by mass of the total nitrogen (N) present as ammonium nitrogen (NH4+) or ammonium nitrogen (NH4+) and urea nitrogen (CH4N2O).
Amendment 287
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – part 2 – PFC 1(A) – point 1 – point a
(a)  the declared nutrients nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P) or potassium (K), by their chemical symbols in the order N-P-K;
(a)  the declared nutrients nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P) or potassium (K), by their chemical symbols in the order N-P-K; the declared nitrogen content is given by the sum of ammoniacal N, nitric N, ureic N, N from urea formaldehyde, N from isobutylidene diurea, N from crotonylidene diurea and N from cyanamide.
Phosphorus fertilisers must fulfil the following minimum solubility levels to be plant-available, otherwise they cannot be declared as phosphorus fertilisers:
–  water solubility: minimum level 25 % of total P,
–  solubility in neutral ammonium citrate: minimum level 30 % of total P,
–  solubility in formic acid (only for soft rock phosphate): minimum level 35 % of total P.
Amendment 288
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – part 2 – PFC1 (A) – point 1 – point b
(b)  the declared nutrients magnesium (Mg), calcium (Ca), sulphur (S) or sodium (Na), by their chemical symbols in the order Mg-Ca-S-Na;
(b)  the declared nutrients calcium (Ca), magnesium (Mg), sodium (Na) or sulphur (S) by their chemical symbols in the order Ca- Mg - Na - S;
(This amendment applies throughout the text. If agreed by the co-legislators, corresponding changes will apply throughout the text, including those parts reflected in the amendments below.)
Amendment 289
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – part 2 – PFC 1(A) – point 1 – point c
(c)  numbers indicating the total content of the declared nutrients nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P) or potassium (K), followed by numbers in brackets indicating the total content of magnesium (Mg), calcium (Ca), sulphur (S) or sodium (Na),
(c)  numbers indicating the average content of the declared nutrients nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P) or potassium (K), followed by numbers in brackets indicating the total content of magnesium (Mg), calcium (Ca), sulphur (S) or sodium (Na),
Amendment 290
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – part 2 – PFC 1(A) – point 1 – point d – indent 6
–  Organic carbon (C); and
–  Organic carbon (C) and C/N ratio;
Amendment 291
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – part 2 – PFC 1(A) – point 1 – point d – indent 7 a (new)
–  In a form such as powder or pellets.
Amendment 292
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – part 2 – PFC 1(B) – point 1 – point d – indent 2
–  Total Phosphorus pentoxide (P2O5);
–  Phosphorus pentoxide (P2O5) soluble in neutral ammonium citrate and water;
Amendment 293
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – part 2 – PFC 1(B) – point 1 – point d – indent 2 – subindent 3
–   where soft ground phosphate is present, phosphorous pentoxide (P2O5) soluble in formic acid;
–   Phosphorus pentoxide (P2O5) only soluble in mineral acids;
Amendment 294
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – part 2 – PFC 1(B) – point 1 a (new)
1a.   The total declared nitrogen content is given by the sum of ammoniacal N, nitric N, ureic N, N from methylene-urea, N from isobutylidene diurea, N from crotonylidene diurea and N from cyanamide.
Amendment 295
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – part 2 – PFC 1(C)(I) – point 1 – point d – indent 2
–  Total Phosphorus pentoxide (P2O5);
–  Phosphorus pentoxide (P2O5) soluble in neutral ammonium citrate and water;
Amendment 296
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – part 2 – PFC 1(C)(I) – point 1 – point d – indent 2 – subindent 3
–  Where soft ground phosphate is present, phosphorous pentoxide (P2O5) soluble in formic acid;
–  Phosphorus pentoxide (P2O5) only soluble in mineral acids;
Amendment 297
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – part 2 – PFC 1(C)(I) – point 1 – point d – indent 4 – subindent 1 a (new)
–  in a form such as powder or pellets;
Amendment 298
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – part 2 – PFC 1(C)(I) – point 1 – point d a (new)
(da)  pH
Amendment 299
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – part 2 – PFC 1(C)(I) – point 1 a (new)
1a.  Fertilising products that contain less than 5ppm of cadmium, arsenic, lead, chromium VI and mercury, respectively, shall be eligible to use a visible “Green Label” in their packaging and label. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 43, supplementing this Regulation to set the technical standards of such labels.
Amendment 300
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – part 2 – PFC 1(C)(I)(a) – point 3 – point c
(c)  powder, where at least 90% of the product can pass through a sieve with a mesh of 10 mm, or
(c)  powder, where at least 90 % of the product can pass through a sieve with a mesh of 1 mm, or
Amendment 301
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – part 2 – PFC 1(C)(I)(a) – point 4 a (new)
4a.   For CE marked fertilising products referred to in point (bb) of point 1 of CMC 10 of Annex II where polymers are solely used as binding material, the following marking shall be present: “The fertilising product is not intended to be in contact with the soil.”
Amendment 302
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – part 2 – PFC 1(C)(II) – point 1
1.  The declared micronutrients in the CE marked fertilising product shall be listed by their names and chemical symbols in the following order: boron (B), cobalt (Co), copper (Cu), iron (Fe), manganese (Mn), molybdenum (Mo) and zinc (Zn), followed by the name(s) of their counter-ion(s),
1.  The declared micronutrients in the CE marked fertilising product shall be listed by their names and chemical symbols in the following order: boron (B), cobalt (Co), copper (Cu), iron (Fe), manganese (Mn), molybdenum (Mo), selenium (Se), silicon (Si) and zinc (Zn), followed by the name(s) of their counter-ion(s),
Amendment 303
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – part 2 – PFC 1(C) a (new)
PFC 1(C)a: Low carbon fertiliser
1.  The following information elements relating to macronutrients shall be present:
(a)  the declared nutrients nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P) or potassium (K), by their chemical symbols in the order N-P-K;
(b)  the declared nutrients magnesium (Mg), calcium (Ca), sulphur (S) or sodium (Na), by their chemical symbols in the order Mg-Ca-S-Na;
(c)  numbers indicating the total content of the declared nutrients nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P) or potassium (K), followed by numbers in brackets indicating the total content of magnesium (Mg), calcium (Ca), sulphur (S) or sodium (Na);
(d)  the content of the following declared nutrients, in the following order and as a percentage of the fertiliser by mass:
▪  Total Nitrogen (N)
minimum amount of organic nitrogen (N), followed by a description of the origin of the organic matter used;
Nitrogen (N) in the form of nitric nitrogen;
Nitrogen (N) in the form of ammoniacal nitrogen;
Nitrogen (N) in the form of urea nitrogen;
▪  Total phosphorus pentoxide (P2O5);
Water-soluble phosphorus pentoxide (P2O5);
phosphorus pentoxide (P2O5) soluble in neutral ammonium citrate;
where soft ground phosphate is present, phosphorus pentoxide (P2O5) soluble in formic acid;
▪  Total potassium oxide (K2O);
Water soluble potassium oxide (K2O);
▪  magnesium oxide (MgO), calcium oxide (CaO), sulphur trioxide (SO3) and sodium oxide (Na2O), expressed
–  where those nutrients are totally soluble in water, only as the content soluble in water;
–  where the soluble content of those nutrients is at least a quarter of the total content of those nutrients, the total content and the content soluble in water;
–  in other cases, as the total content.
(e)  where urea (CH4N2O) is present, information about the possible air quality impacts of the release of ammonia from the fertiliser use, and an invitation to users to apply appropriate remediation measures.
2.  The following other elements shall be indicated as a percentage by mass of the CE marked fertilising product:
–  Organic carbon (C) content; and
–  Dry matter content.
3.  Where one or more of the micronutrients boron (B), cobalt (Co), copper (Cu), iron (Fe), manganese (Mn), molybdenum (Mo) and zinc (Zn), are present in the minimum content indicated as a percentage by mass in the table below, they
–  shall be declared if they are intentionally added to the CE marked fertilising product, and
–  may be declared in other cases:
Micronutrient
Percentage by mass

Boron (B)
0,01

Cobalt (Co)
0,002

Copper (Cu)
0,002

Manganese (Mn)
0,01

Molybdenum (Mo)
0,001

Zinc
0,002

They shall be declared after the information on macronutrients. The following information elements shall be present:
(a)  indication of the names and chemical symbols of the declared micronutrients, listed in the following order: boron (B), cobalt (Co), copper (Cu), iron (Fe), manganese (Mn), molybdenum (Mo) and zinc (Zn), followed by the name(s) of their counter-ion(s);
(b)  the total micronutrient content expressed as a percentage of the fertiliser by mass
where those nutrients are totally soluble in water, only as the content soluble in water;
where the soluble content of those nutrients is at least a quarter of the total content of those nutrients, the total content and the content soluble in water; and
in other cases, as the total content;
(c)  where the declared micronutrient(s) are chelated by chelating agent(s), the following qualifier after the name and the chemical identifier of the micronutrient:
‘chelated by…’ name of the chelating agent or its abbreviation, and the amount of chelated micronutrient as a percentage of the CE marked fertilising product by mass;
(d)  where the CE marked fertilising product contains micronutrient(s) complexed by complexing agent(s):
the following qualifier after the name and the chemical identifier of the micronutrient: ‘complexed by …', and the amount of complexed micronutrient as a percentage of the CE marked fertilising product by mass; and
the name of the complexing agent or its abbreviation;
(e)  the following statement: ‘To be used only where there is a recognised need. Do not exceed the appropriate rate’.
Amendment 399
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – part 2 – PFC 2 – indent 2
—   Granulometry, expressed a percentage of product passing through a determined sieve;
—  Granulometry, expressed as the percentage of product passing through the sieves of 1,0 mm and 3,15 mm;
Amendment 304
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – part 2 – PFC 3 – point 1 – indent 3
–   Total nitrogen (N) content;
deleted
Amendment 305
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – part 2 – PFC 3 – point 1 – indent 4
–   Total phosphorus pentoxide (P2O5) content;
deleted
Amendment 306
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – part 2 – PFC 3 – point 1 – indent 5
–   Total potassium oxide (K2O) content;
deleted
Amendment 307
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – part 2 – PFC 6 – point e
(e)  dose, timing (plant development stage) and frequency of application;
(e)  dose, timing (plant development stage), placement and frequency of application (in line with the empirical evidence justifying the biostimulant claim(s));
Amendment 308
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – part 2 – PFC 6 – point f a (new)
(fa)  statement that the product is not a plant protection product;
Amendment 309
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – part 3 –PFC 1(A)

Permissible tolerance for the declared nutrient content and other declared parameter


Permissible tolerance for the declared nutrient content and other declared parameter

Organic carbon (C)
± 20 % relative deviation of the declared value up to a maximum of 2,0 percentage point in absolute terms

Organic carbon (C)
± 15 % relative deviation of the declared value up to a maximum of 2,0 percentage point in absolute terms

Dry matter content
± 5,0 percentage point in absolute terms

Dry matter content
± 5,0 percentage point in absolute terms

Total nitrogen (N)
± 50 % relative deviation of the declared value up to a maximum of 1,0 percentage point in absolute terms

Total nitrogen (N)
± 15 % relative deviation of the declared value up to a maximum of 1,0 percentage point in absolute terms

Organic nitrogen (N)
± 50 % relative deviation of the declared value up to a maximum of 1,0 percentage point in absolute terms

Organic nitrogen (N)
± 15 % relative deviation of the declared value up to a maximum of 1,0 percentage point in absolute terms

Total phosphorus pentoxide (P2O5)
± 50 % relative deviation of the declared value up to a maximum of 1,0 percentage point in absolute terms

Total phosphorus pentoxide (P2O5)
± 15 % relative deviation of the declared value up to a maximum of 1,0 percentage point in absolute terms

Total potassium oxide (K2O)
± 50 % relative deviation of the declared value up to a maximum of 1,0 percentage point in absolute terms

Total potassium oxide (K2O)
± 15 % relative deviation of the declared value up to a maximum of 1,0 percentage point in absolute terms

Total and water-soluble magnesium oxide, calcium oxide, sulphur trioxide or sodium oxide
± 25% of the declared content of those nutrients up to a maximum of 1,5 percentage points in absolute terms.

Total and water-soluble magnesium oxide, calcium oxide, sulphur trioxide or sodium oxide
± 25% of the declared content of those nutrients up to a maximum of 1,5 percentage points in absolute terms.

Total copper (Cu)
± 50 % relative deviation of the declared value up to a maximum of 2,5 percentage points in absolute terms

Total copper (Cu)
± 50 % relative deviation of the declared value up to a maximum of 2,5 percentage points in absolute terms

Total zinc (Zn)
± 50 % relative deviation of the declared value up to a maximum of 2,0 percentage points in absolute terms

Total zinc (Zn)
± 50 % relative deviation of the declared value up to a maximum of 2,0 percentage points in absolute terms

Quantity
—  5 % relative deviation of the declared value

Quantity
—  5 % relative deviation of the declared value




Declared forms of nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium
Binaries: maximum tolerance, in absolute terms, of 1,1 N and 0,5 organic N, 1,1 P2O5, 1,1 K2O and 1,5 for the sum of two nutrients.





Ternaries: maximum tolerance, in absolute terms, of 1,1 N and 0,5 organic N, 1,1 P2O5, 1,1 K2O and 1,9 for the sum of three nutrients.





± 10 % of the total declared content of each nutrient up to a maximum of 2 percentage points in absolute terms.

Amendment 310
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – part 3 – PFC 1(B) – table 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Permissible tolerance for the declared content of forms of inorganic macronutrient

N

P2O5

K2O

MgO

CaO

SO3

Na2O

± 25 % of the declared content of the nutrient forms present up to a maximum of 2 percentage point in absolute terms

± 25 % of the declared content of those nutrients up to a maximum of 1,5 percentage points in absolute terms.

± 25 % of the declared content up to a maximum of 0,9 percentage points in absolute terms

Amendment

Permissible tolerance for the declared content of forms of inorganic macronutrient

N

P2O5

K2O

MgO

CaO

SO3

Na2O

± 25 % of the declared content of the nutrient forms present up to a maximum of 2 percentage point in absolute terms for each nutrient separately and for the sum of nutrients

-50 % and +100 % of the declared content of those nutrients up to a maximum of -2 and +4 percentage points in absolute terms.

± 25 % of the declared content up to a maximum of 0.9 percentage points in absolute terms

P2O5 tolerances refer to phosphorus pentoxide (P2O5) soluble in neutral ammonium citrate and water.

 

 

Amendment 311
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – part 3 – PFC 1(B)
Organic carbon: ± 20 % relative deviation of the declared value up to a maximum of 2,0 percentage point in absolute terms
Organic carbon: ± 15 % relative deviation of the declared value up to a maximum of 2,0 percentage point in absolute terms
Organic nitrogen: ± 50 % relative deviation of the declared value up to a maximum of 1,0 percentage point in absolute terms
Organic nitrogen: ± 15 % relative deviation of the declared value up to a maximum of 1,0 percentage point in absolute terms
Total copper (Cu) ± 50 % relative deviation of the declared value up to a maximum of 2,5 percentage points in absolute terms
Total copper (Cu) ± 15 % relative deviation of the declared value up to a maximum of 2,5 percentage points in absolute terms
Total zinc (Zn) ± 50 % relative deviation of the declared value up to a maximum of 2,0 percentage points in absolute terms
Total zinc (Zn) ± 15 % relative deviation of the declared value up to a maximum of 2,0 percentage points in absolute terms
Amendment 312
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – part 3 - PFC 1(C)(I)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

 

Permissible tolerance for the declared content of forms of inorganic macronutrient

 

N

P2O5

K2O

MgO

CaO

SO3

Na2O

 

± 25 % of the declared content of the nutrient forms present up to a maximum of 2 percentage point in absolute terms

± 25 % of the declared content of those nutrients up to a maximum of 1,5 percentage points in absolute terms.

± 25 % of the declared content up to a maximum of 0,9 percentage points in absolute terms

 

Granulometry: ± 10 % relative deviation applicable to the declared percentage of material passing a specific sieve

 

Quantity: ± 5 % relative deviation of the declared value

 

Amendment

 

Permissible tolerance for the declared content of forms of inorganic macronutrient

 

N

P2O5

K2O

MgO

CaO

SO3

Na2O

 

± 25 % of the declared content of the nutrient forms present up to a maximum of 2 percentage point in absolute terms for each nutrient separately and for the sum of nutrients

-50 % and +100 % of the declared content of those nutrients up to a maximum of -2 and +4 percentage points in absolute terms.

-50 % and +100 % of the declared content up to a maximum of -2 and +4 percentage points in absolute terms

 

The above tolerance values apply also for the N-forms and for the solubilities.

 

Granulometry: ± 20 % relative deviation applicable to the declared percentage of material passing a specific sieve

 

Quantity: ± 3 % relative deviation of the declared value

Amendment 313
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – part 3 – PFC 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Forms of the declared nutrient and other declared quality criteria

Permissible tolerances for the declared parameter

pH

± 0,7 at the time of manufacture

 

± 1,0 at any time in the distribution chain

Organic carbon (C)

± 10% relative deviation of the declared value up to a maximum of 1,0 percentage points in absolute terms

Total nitrogen (N)

± 20% relative deviation up to a maximum of 1,0 percentage point in absolute terms

Total phosphorus pentoxide (P2O5)

± 20% relative deviation up to a maximum of 1,0 percentage point in absolute terms

Total potassium oxide (K2O)

± 20% relative deviation up to a maximum of 1,0 percentage point in absolute terms

Dry matter

± 10% relative deviation of the declared value

Quantity

—  5% relative deviation of the declared value at the time of manufacture

 

—  25% relative deviation of the declared value at any time in the distribution chain

Carbon (C) org /Nitrogen (N) org

± 20% relative deviation of the declared value up to a maximum of 2,0 percentage points in absolute terms

Granulometry

± 10 % relative deviation applicable to the declared percentage of material passing a specific sieve.

Amendment

Forms of the declared nutrient and other declared quality criteria

Permissible tolerances for the declared parameter

pH

± 0,7 at the time of manufacture

 

± 0,9 at any time in the distribution chain

Organic carbon (C)

± 10% relative deviation of the declared value up to a maximum of 1,0 percentage points in absolute terms

Total nitrogen (N)

± 20% relative deviation up to a maximum of 1,0 percentage point in absolute terms

Total phosphorus pentoxide (P2O5)

± 20% relative deviation up to a maximum of 1,0 percentage point in absolute terms

Total potassium oxide (K2O)

± 20% relative deviation up to a maximum of 1,0 percentage point in absolute terms

Dry matter

± 10% relative deviation of the declared value

Quantity

—  5% relative deviation of the declared value at the time of manufacture

 

—  15% relative deviation of the declared value at any time in the distribution chain

Carbon (C) org /Nitrogen (N) org

± 20% relative deviation of the declared value up to a maximum of 2,0 percentage points in absolute terms

Granulometry

± 10 % relative deviation applicable to the declared percentage of material passing a specific sieve.

Amendment 314
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – part 3 – PFC 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Forms of the declared nutrient and other declared quality criteria

Permissible tolerances for the declared parameter

Electric conductivity

± 50% relative deviation at the time of manufacture

 

± 75% relative deviation at any time in the distribution chain

pH

± 0,7 at the time of manufacture

 

± 1,0 at any time in the distribution chain

Quantity by volume (litres or m³)

—  5% relative deviation at the time of manufacture

 

—  25% relative deviation at any time in the distribution chain

Quantity (volume) determination of materials with particle size greater than 60 mm

—  5% relative deviation at the time of manufacture

 

—  25% relative deviation at any time in the distribution chain

Quantity (volume) determination of pre-shaped GM

—  5% relative deviation at the time of manufacture

 

—  25% relative deviation at any time in the distribution chain

Water-soluble nitrogen (N)

± 50% relative deviation at the time of manufacture

 

± 75% relative deviation at any time in the distribution chain

Water-soluble phosphorus pentoxide (P2O5)

± 50% relative deviation at the time of manufacture

 

± 75% relative deviation at any time in the distribution chain

Water-soluble potassium oxide (K2O)

± 50% relative deviation at the time of manufacture

 

± 75% relative deviation at any time in the distribution chain

Amendment

Forms of the declared nutrient and other declared quality criteria

Permissible tolerances for the declared parameter

Electric conductivity

± 50% relative deviation at the time of manufacture

 

± 60% relative deviation at any time in the distribution chain

pH

± 0,7 at the time of manufacture

 

± 0,9 at any time in the distribution chain

Quantity by volume (litres or m³)

—  5% relative deviation at the time of manufacture

 

—  15% relative deviation at any time in the distribution chain

Quantity (volume) determination of materials with particle size greater than 60 mm

—  5% relative deviation at the time of manufacture

 

—  15% relative deviation at any time in the distribution chain

Quantity (volume) determination of pre-shaped GM

—  5% relative deviation at the time of manufacture

 

—  15% relative deviation at any time in the distribution chain

Water-soluble nitrogen (N)

± 50% relative deviation at the time of manufacture

 

± 60% relative deviation at any time in the distribution chain

Water-soluble phosphorus pentoxide (P2O5)

± 50% relative deviation at the time of manufacture

 

± 60% relative deviation at any time in the distribution chain

Water-soluble potassium oxide (K2O)

± 50% relative deviation at the time of manufacture

 

± 60% relative deviation at any time in the distribution chain

Amendment 315
Proposal for a regulation
Annex IV – part 1 – point 1 – point 1 – point b
(b)  energy crop digestates as specified in CMC 4,
(b)  energy crop digestates and plant-based bio-waste as specified in CMC 4,
Amendment 316
Proposal for a regulation
Annex IV – part 1 – point 1 – point 1 – point f a (new)
(fa)  non-processed or mechanically processed plants, plant parts or plant extracts as specified in CMC 2.
Amendment 317
Proposal for a regulation
Annex IV – part 1 – point 1 – point 3 – point b a (new)
(ba)  a denitrification inhibitor as specified in PFC 5(A)(Ia),
Amendment 318
Proposal for a regulation
Annex IV – part 1 – point 3 – point 2 – point a a (new)
(aa)  a denitrification inhibitor as specified in PFC (A)(Ia),
Amendment 319
Proposal for a regulation
Annex IV – part 2 – module A – point 2.2 – point b
(b)  conceptual design and manufacturing drawings and schemes,
deleted
Amendment 320
Proposal for a regulation
Annex IV – part 2 – module A – point 2.2 – point c
(c)  descriptions and explanations necessary for the understanding of those drawings and schemes and the use of the CE marked fertilising product,
deleted
Amendment 321
Proposal for a regulation
Annex IV – part 2 – module A1 – point 4 – paragraph 1
The cycles and test referred to under Headings 4.1-4.3 below shall be carried out on a representative sample of the product at least every 3 months on behalf of the manufacturer, in order to verify conformity with
The cycles and test referred to under Headings 4.1-4.3 below shall be carried out on a representative sample of the product at least every six months in the case of continuous operation of the plant or every year for the periodic production on behalf of the manufacturer, in order to verify conformity with
Amendment 322
Proposal for a regulation
Annex IV – part 2 – module A1 – point 4.3.5 a (new)
4.3.5a.  The manufacturer shall keep the test reports together with the technical documentation.
Amendment 323
Proposal for a regulation
Annex IV – part 2 – module B – point 3.2 – point c – indent 6
–  test reports, and
–  test reports, including studies on agronomic efficiency, and
Amendment 324
Proposal for a regulation
Annex IV – part 2 – module D1 – point 2 – point b
(b)  conceptual design and manufacturing drawings and schemes, including a written description and a diagram of the production process, where each treatment, storage vessel and area is clearly identified,
(b)  a written description and a diagram of the production process,

(1) The matter was referred back for interinstitutional negotiations to the committee responsible, pursuant to Rule 59(4), fourth subparagraph (A8-0270/2017).


Information exchange on, and an early warning system and risk assessment procedure for, new psychoactive substances ***I
PDF 242kWORD 44k
Resolution
Text
European Parliament legislative resolution of 24 October 2017 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 1920/2006 as regards information exchange, early warning system and risk assessment procedure on new psychoactive substances (COM(2016)0547 – C8-0351/2016 – 2016/0261(COD))
P8_TA(2017)0393A8-0359/2016

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2016)0547),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 168(5) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C8‑0351/2016),

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

–  having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 19 October 2016(1),

–  after consulting the Committee of the Regions,

–  having regard to the provisional agreement approved by the responsible committee under Rule 69f(4) of its Rules of Procedure and the undertaking given by the Council representative by letter of 31 May 2017 to approve Parliament’s position, in accordance with Article 294(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  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 and the opinion of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (A8-0359/2016),

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

2.  Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it replaces, substantially amends or intends to substantially amend its proposal;

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 24 October 2017 with a view to the adoption of Regulation (EU) 2017/… of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 1920/2006 as regards information exchange on, and an early warning system and risk assessment procedure for, new psychoactive substances

(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Regulation (EU) 2017/2101.)

(1) OJ C 34, 2.2.2017, p. 182.


Common Fisheries Policy: implementation of the landing obligation ***I
PDF 237kWORD 42k
Resolution
Text
European Parliament legislative resolution of 24 October 2017 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy (COM(2017)0424 – C8-0239/2017 – 2017/0190(COD))
P8_TA(2017)0394A8-0285/2017

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2017)0424),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 43(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C8‑0239/2017),

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

–  having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 18 October 2017,

–  having regard to the undertaking given by the Council representative by letter of 20 September 2017 to approve Parliament’s position, in accordance with Article 294(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

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

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Fisheries (A8-0285/2017),

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

2.  Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it replaces, substantially amends or intends to substantially amend its proposal;

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 24 October 2017 with a view to the adoption of Regulation (EU) 2017/… of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy

(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Regulation (EU) 2017/2092.)


Renewing the approval of the active substance glyphosate
PDF 268kWORD 47k
European Parliament resolution of 24 October 2017 on the draft Commission implementing regulation renewing the approval of the active substance glyphosate in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market, and amending the Annex to Implementing Regulation (EU) No 540/2011 (D053565-01 – 2017/2904(RSP))
P8_TA(2017)0395B8-0567/2017

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the draft Commission implementing regulation renewing the approval of the active substance glyphosate in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market, and amending the Annex to Implementing Regulation (EU) No 540/2011 (D053565-01),

–  having regard to Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market and repealing Council Directives 79/117/EEC and 91/414/EEC(1), and in particular Article 20(1) thereof,

–  having regard to Articles 11 and 13 of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member States of the Commission’s exercise of implementing powers(2),

–  having regard to Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 January 2002 laying down the general principles and requirements of food law, establishing the European Food Safety Authority and laying down procedures in matters of food safety(3),

–  having regard to the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) conclusion on the peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance glyphosate(4),

–  having regard to the Committee for Risk Assessment (RAC) opinion of the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) proposing harmonised classification and labelling at EU level of glyphosate(5),

–  having regard to its resolution of 13 April 2016 on the draft Commission implementing regulation renewing the approval of the active substance glyphosate in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market, and amending the Annex to Implementing Regulation (EU) No 540/2011(6),

–  having regard to the European Citizens’ Initiative ‘Ban glyphosate and protect people and the environment from toxic pesticides’(7),

–  having regard to the motion for a resolution of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety,

–  having regard to Rule 106(2) and (3) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.  whereas the purpose of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 is ‘to ensure a high level of protection of both human and animal health and the environment and to improve the functioning of the internal market through the harmonisation of the rules on the placing on the market of plant protection products, while improving agricultural production’; whereas the provisions of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 are underpinned by the precautionary principle;

B.  whereas the systemic herbicide glyphosate currently has the highest global production volume of all herbicides; whereas 76 % of the use of glyphosate worldwide is in agriculture; whereas it is also widely used in forestry, urban and garden applications; whereas 72 % of the total volume of glyphosate applied globally from 1974 to 2014 has been sprayed in just the last 10 years;

C.  whereas the general population is exposed primarily through residence near sprayed areas, through home use, and through diet; whereas exposure to glyphosate is on the rise owing to the increase in the total volume of glyphosate used; whereas the impact of glyphosate and its most common co-formulants on human health must be regularly monitored; whereas glyphosate and/or its residues have been detected in water, soil, food and drinks and non-edible goods, as well as in the human body (e.g. in urine);

D.  whereas, in the 2014 European Union Report on Pesticide Residues in Food published on 26 October 2016, EFSA noted that Member States took a limited number of oilseed and soybean samples, even though these crops are likely to be treated with glyphosate and residues may therefore be expected; whereas, according to EFSA, no information on glyphosate residues in animal products is available; whereas EFSA considered the results to be statistically not very robust;

E.  whereas EFSA recommended in 2015 that Member States should increase the number of analyses of glyphosate and related residues (e.g. trimethyl-sulfonium) in products for which the use of glyphosate has been approved and where measurable residues are expected; whereas, in particular, the number of samples of soybeans, maize and oilseed rape should be increased; whereas Member States are also encouraged to develop and/or implement existing analytical methods to control glyphosate‑related metabolites and to share the results with EFSA;

F.  whereas glyphosate is a non-selective herbicide which kills all herbage; whereas it acts by interfering with the so-called shikimate pathway, a pathway that is also present in algae, bacteria and fungi; whereas sub-lethal exposures of Escherichia coli and Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium to commercial formulations of glyphosate have been found to induce a changed response to antibiotics;

G.  whereas, in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009, an active substance may only be approved if it is not or is not to be classified as a carcinogen category 1A or 1B under Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008, unless the exposure of humans to the active substance concerned is negligible or there is a serious danger to plant health that cannot be contained by other available means;

H.  whereas in March 2015 the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified glyphosate as ‘probably carcinogenic to humans’ (Group 2A), on the basis of ‘limited evidence’ of cancer in humans (from cases of real-world exposure), ‘sufficient evidence’ of cancer in laboratory animals (from studies of ‘pure’ glyphosate), and ‘strong evidence’ of mechanistic information related to carcinogenicity (for genotoxicity and oxidative stress) for both ‘pure’ glyphosate and glyphosate formulations; whereas the criteria used by IARC for Group 2A are comparable to those for Category 1B in Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008;

I.  whereas in November 2015 EFSA finalised a peer review of glyphosate and concluded that ‘glyphosate is unlikely to pose a carcinogenic hazard to humans and the evidence does not support classification with regard to its carcinogenic potential according to Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008’; whereas in March 2017 the Risk Assessment Committee (RAC) of ECHA concluded by consensus that there is no evidence to link glyphosate to cancer in humans based on the available information, and that glyphosate should not be classified as a substance that causes genetic damage (mutagen) or disrupts reproduction;

J.  whereas at a Joint Meeting on Pesticide Residues (JMPR) held by the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) and the World Health Organisation (WHO) in May 2016, the FAO Panel of Experts on Pesticide Residues in Food and the Environment, and the WHO Core Assessment Group on Pesticide Residues, concluded that ‘glyphosate is unlikely to be genotoxic at anticipated diary exposures’ and ‘is unlikely to pose a carcinogenic risk to humans from exposure through the diet’;

K.  whereas in the context of litigation in the US brought by plaintiffs who claim to have developed non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma as a result of exposure to glyphosate, the court unsealed internal documents by Monsanto, the owner and producer of Roundup, a product whose active substance is glyphosate; whereas the released correspondence cast doubts on the credibility of some studies, both Monsanto-sponsored and presumably independent ones, which were among the evidence used by EFSA and ECHA for their evaluation of the safety of glyphosate; whereas in that respect, the transparency and public availability of scientific studies, as well as of the raw data on which these studies are based, are of the utmost importance;

L.  whereas, apart from its conclusion on the carcinogenicity of glyphosate, ECHA concludes that glyphosate causes serious eye damage and is toxic to aquatic life, with long‑lasting effects;

M.  whereas, before an 18‑month technical extension was granted for glyphosate on 29 June 2016, Parliament adopted a resolution on 13 April 2016 which called on the Commission to renew the approval of glyphosate for seven years, but also stressed that the Commission should not approve it for any non-professional uses, for its uses in or close to public parks, public playgrounds and public gardens, or for any agricultural uses where integrated pest management systems are sufficient for the necessary weed control; whereas the same resolution also called on the Commission to develop training and user authorisation for professionals, to provide better information on the use of glyphosate, and to place strict limits on the pre-harvest use of products containing the active substance glyphosate, in order to prevent incorrect use of this substance and to limit the potential risks associated with it;

N.  whereas Parliament’s resolution of 13 April 2016 also called on the Commission and on EFSA to disclose immediately all the scientific evidence that has been the basis for the positive classification of glyphosate and the proposed re-authorisation, given the overriding public interest in disclosure; whereas this has not been done to date;

O.  whereas the European Citizens’ Initiative (ECI), referred to in recital 13 of the draft implementing measure, which gathered more than a million signatures of European citizens within less than a year, not only refers specifically to glyphosate in one of its three aims, but also explicitly calls to ‘ban glyphosate and protect people and the environment from toxic pesticides’ in its title; whereas the Commission received this submission on 6 October 2017 and is required to reply by 8 January 2018;

P.  whereas, in accordance with Article 13 of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009, any decision for the approval of an active substance need to be based on the review report by EFSA, other factors legitimate to the matter under consideration and the precautionary principle;

Q.  whereas the draft Commission implementing regulation, based on a scientific evaluation conducted by the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), EFSA and ECHA proposes authorising glyphosate until 15 December 2027, i.e. for 10 years; whereas it would apply from 16 December 2017;

R.  whereas the specific provisions outlined in Annex I of the draft implementing regulation renewing the approval of the active substance glyphosate are not binding at Union level, but pass the responsibility on to the Member States;

S.  whereas, in its resolution of 15 February 2017 on low‑risk pesticides of biological origin(8), Parliament stressed the need to revise Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 in order to foster the development, authorisation and placing on the Union market of low-risk pesticides of biological origin, and called on the Commission to submit, before the end of 2018, a specific legislative proposal amending Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009, outside of the general revision in connection with the REFIT initiative, with a view to establishing a fast-track evaluation, authorisation and registration process for low-risk pesticides of biological origin;

T.  whereas a Commission communication on the future of the common agriculture policy (CAP) has been announced for publication before the end of 2017 and the budget proposals for May 2018;

1.  Considers that the Commission’s draft implementing regulation fails to ensure a high level of protection of both human and animal health and the environment, fails to apply the precautionary principle, and exceeds the implementing powers provided for in Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009;

2.  Calls on the Commission to withdraw the draft implementing regulation and submit a new draft implementing regulation in line with the requirements laid down by Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009, i.e. including not only EFSA’s opinion, but also other legitimate factors and the precautionary principle;

3.  Calls on the Commission and the Member States neither to approve any non-professional uses of glyphosate, nor to approve any uses of glyphosate in or close to public parks, public playgrounds or public gardens after 15 December 2017;

4.  Calls on the Commission and the Member States in particular not to approve any agricultural uses of glyphosate after 15 December 2017 where integrated pest management systems are sufficient for the necessary weed control;

5.  Calls on the Commission and the Member States not to approve the use of glyphosate for pre-harvest desiccation with effect from 16 December 2017;

6.  Calls on the Commission to adopt necessary measures to phase out the active substance glyphosate in the European Union no later than 15 December 2022, ensuring that no use of glyphosate is authorised after that date, which includes any possible extension period or period referred to in Article 32 of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009;

7.  Welcomes the proposed exclusion of POE-tallowamine from use in plant protection products containing glyphosate; calls on the Commission and the Member States to accelerate their work on the list of co-formulants not accepted for inclusion in plant protection products;

8.  Calls on the Commission and the Member States to ensure that the scientific evaluation of pesticides for EU regulatory approval is based only on published peer-reviewed and independent studies commissioned by competent public authorities; considers that the REFIT procedure of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 can potentially be used for that purpose; considers, furthermore, that EFSA and ECHA should be granted sufficient resources in order increase their capacity, to enable the commissioning of independent scientific studies and to further ensure that the highest scientific standards are upheld and the health and safety of EU citizens protected;

9.  Calls on the Commission and the Member States to ensure sufficient testing and monitoring of glyphosate residues in feed, food and drinks produced in, as well as imported into, the Union, in order to address the current data gap pointed out by EFSA;

10.  Calls on the Commission and the Member States to finance research and innovation with regard to sustainable and cost-efficient solutions for pest-management products to ensure a high level of protection of human and animal health and the environment;

11.  Calls on the Commission and the Member States to propose adequate transitional measures for the agricultural sector and to publish a guidance document outlining all possible safer, low-risk alternatives to help the agricultural sector during the phase-out period of the active substance glyphosate and all of the resources already available to the agricultural sector in the context of the current CAP;

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

(1) OJ L 309, 24.11.2009, p. 1.
(2) OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13.
(3) OJ L 31, 1.2.2002, p. 1.
(4) http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/pub/4302
(5) https://echa.europa.eu/documents/10162/2d3a87cc-5ca1-31d6-8967-9f124f1ab7ae
(6) Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0119.
(7) ECI(2017)000002.
(8) Texts adopted, P8_TA(2017)0042.


Genetically modified maize 1507
PDF 283kWORD 52k
European Parliament resolution of 24 October 2017 on the draft Commission implementing decision renewing the authorisation for the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified maize 1507 (DAS-Ø15Ø7-1) pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council on genetically modified food and feed (D052754 – 2017/2905(RSP))
P8_TA(2017)0396B8-0568/2017

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the draft Commission implementing decision renewing the authorisation for the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified maize 1507 (DAS-Ø15Ø7-1) pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council on genetically modified food and feed (D052754),

–  having regard to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 2003 on genetically modified food and feed(1), and in particular Articles 11(3), and 23(3) thereof,

–  having regard to the vote of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health referred to in Article 35 of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003, on 14 September 2017, where no opinion was delivered,

–  having regard to Articles 11 and 13 of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member States of the Commission’s exercise of implementing powers(2),

–  having regard to the opinion adopted by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) 19 January 2005, and published on 3 March 2005(3),

–  having regard to the opinion adopted by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) on 30 November 2016, and published on 12 January 2017(4),

–  having regard to the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member States of the Commission’s exercise of implementing powers (COM(2017)0085, COD(2017)0035),

–  having regard to its previous resolutions objecting to the authorisation of genetically modified organisms(5), with particular regard to its previous resolution on ‘Placing on the market for cultivation of genetically modified maize 1507 seeds’ of 6 October 2016,

–  having regard to the motion for a resolution of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety,

–  having regard to Rule 106(2) and (3) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.  whereas on 27 February 2015 Pioneer Overseas Corporation and Dow AgroSciences Ltd. jointly submitted to the Commission an application, in accordance with Articles 11 and 23 of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003, for the renewal of the authorisation for the placing on the market of foods and feed containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified maize 1507; whereas the scope of the renewal also covers products other than food and feed containing or consisting of maize 1507;

B.  whereas on 30 November 2016, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) adopted a favourable opinion in accordance with Articles 6 and 18 of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003, which was published on 12 January 2017;

C.  whereas Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 states that genetically modified food or feed must not have adverse effects on human health, animal health or the environment and requires that the Commission take into account any relevant provisions of Union law and other legitimate factors relevant to the matter under consideration when drafting its decision;

D.  whereas genetically modified maize 1507 expresses the Cry1F protein, which is a Bt protein (derived from Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. Kurstaki) conferring resistance to the European corn borer (Ostrinia nubilalis) and certain other lepidopteran pests such as the pink borer (Sesamia spp.), fall armyworm (Spodoptera frugiperda), black cutworm (Agrotis ipsilon) and south-western corn borer (Diatraea grandiosella), and the Pat protein, which confers tolerance to the herbicide glufosinate-ammonium;

E.  whereas genetically modified Bt plants express the insecticidal toxin in every cell throughout their life, including in the parts eaten by humans and animals; whereas animal feeding experiments show that genetically modified Bt plants may have toxic effects(6); whereas it has been shown that the Bt toxin in genetically modified plants differs significantly from that of the naturally occurring Bt toxin(7);

F.  whereas the authorisation for the cultivation of maize 1507 in the Union is pending; whereas Parliament objected to such an authorisation due to concerns as to, inter alia, a possible evolution of resistance to the Cry1F protein in lepidopteran target pests which may lead to altered pest control practices(8);

G.  whereas many critical comments were submitted by Member States during the three-month consultation period for EFSA’s risk assessment relating to the initial authorisation; whereas the most critical comments relate to observations that the documentation is insufficient to perform a risk assessment, that the monitoring plan is not in accordance with Annex VII to Directive 2001/18/EC, and that the data and risk assessments provided by the applicant are not adequate(9);

H.  whereas many critical comments were submitted by Member States during the three-month consultation period for EFSA’s risk assessment in relation to renewal of the authorisation(10); whereas the most critical comments relate to observations that the proposed monitoring plan is not considered appropriate to address relevant issues of post-market environmental monitoring of GM maize 1057 and cannot be regarded as sufficiently elaborated for the monitoring of potential environmental exposure by GM maize 1507, that monitoring as conducted by the notifier did not generate reliable data to confirm the risk assessment conclusion that effects on human and animal health would be negligible, and that evidence showing a history of safe use of the Pat protein, as required under Commission Implementation Regulation (EU) No 503/2013, is not duly documented by the notifier;

I.  whereas persistence of Cry proteins released into the environment due to use of GM maize 1507 in feedstuffs was not monitored, even though Cry proteins may persist in soil for months retaining their insecticidal activity, as found for Cry1Ab-toxin(11);

J.  whereas glufosinate is classified as toxic to reproduction and thus falls under the ‘cut-off criteria’ set out in Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market; whereas the approval of glufosinate expires on 31 July 2018;

K.  whereas the application of the complementary herbicides is part of regular agricultural practice in the cultivation of herbicide-resistant plants and it can therefore be expected that residues from spraying will always be present in the harvest and are inevitable constituents; whereas it has been shown that herbicide-tolerant genetically modified crops result in higher use of complementary herbicides than their conventional counterparts(12);

L.  whereas the residues from spraying with glufosinate were not assessed; whereas it cannot therefore be concluded that genetically engineered maize 1507 is safe for use in food and feed;

M.  whereas maize 1507 is authorised for cultivation in Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Colombia, Honduras, Japan, Panama, Paraguay, the Philippines, South Africa, the USA and Uruguay; whereas a recent peer-reviewed study finds that targeted insects developing resistance to Cry proteins is a ‘major threat to the sustainability of the Bt technology’(13); whereas glufosinate-resistant weeds have been observed since 2009;

N.  whereas the vote of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health, referred to in Article 35 of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003, on 14 September 2017 delivered no opinion; whereas 12 Member States voted against, 12 Member States, representing only 38,75 % of the Union population voted in favour, and four Member States abstained;

O.  whereas on several occasions the Commission has deplored the fact that, since the entry into force of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003, authorisation decisions have been adopted by the Commission without the support of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health and that the return of the dossier to the Commission for final decision, which is very much the exception for the procedure as a whole, has become the norm for decision-making on genetically modified food and feed authorisations; whereas that practice has also been deplored by Commission President Juncker as not being democratic(14);

P.  whereas Parliament rejected the legislative proposal of 22 April 2015 amending Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 on 28 October 2015 at first reading(15) and called on the Commission to withdraw it and submit a new one;

Q.  whereas recital 14 of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 states that the Commission will, as far as possible, act in such a way as to avoid going against any predominant position which might emerge within the appeal committee against the appropriateness of an implementing act, especially on sensitive issues such as consumer health, food safety and the environment;

R.  whereas the Commission’s proposal to amend Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 is not sufficient in terms of addressing the lack of democracy in the GMO authorisation process;

S.  whereas democratic legitimacy can only be ensured by providing, at the very least, that when no opinion is delivered by the Food Chain and Animal Health Standing Committee the Commission proposal is withdrawn; whereas this procedure already exists for some other standing committees;

1.  Considers that the draft Commission implementing decision exceeds the implementing powers provided for in Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003;

2.  Considers that the Commission implementing decision is not consistent with Union law in that it is not compatible with the aim of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 which is, in accordance with the general principles laid down in Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council(16), to provide the basis for ensuring a high level of protection of human life and health, animal health and welfare, the environment and consumer interests in relation to genetically modified food and feed, while ensuring the effective functioning of the internal market;

3.  Calls on the Commission to withdraw its draft implementing decision;

4.  Calls on the Commission to suspend any implementing decision regarding applications for authorisation of genetically modified organisms until the authorisation procedure has been revised in such a way so as to address the shortcomings of the current procedure, which has proven inadequate;

5.  Calls on the legislators responsible to advance work on the Commission proposal amending Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 as a matter of urgency and to ensure that, inter alia, if no opinion is delivered by the Food Chain and Animal Health Standing Committee with respect to GMOs approvals, either for cultivation or for food and feed, the Commission will withdraw the proposal;

6.  Calls on the Commission not to authorise any herbicide-tolerant genetically modified plants (HT GMP) without full assessment of the residues from spraying with the complementary herbicides and their commercial formulations as applied in the countries of cultivation;

7.  Calls on the Commission to develop strategies for health risk assessment and toxicology, as well as post-market monitoring, that target the whole food and feed chain;

8.  Calls on the Commission to fully integrate the risk assessment of the application of the complementary herbicides and their residues into the risk assessment of HT GMP, regardless of whether the genetically modified plant is for cultivation in the Union or for import for food and feed;

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

(1) OJ L 268, 18.10.2003, p. 1.
(2) OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13.
(3) http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/pub/182
(4) https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/pub/4659
(5)––––––––––––––––– –Resolution of 16 January 2014 on the proposal for a Council decision concerning the placing on the market for cultivation, in accordance with Directive 2001/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, of a maize product (Zea mays L., line 1507) genetically modified for resistance to certain lepidopteran pests (OJ C 482, 23.12.2016, p. 110).Resolution of 16 December 2015 on Commission implementing decision (EU) 2015/2279 of 4 December 2015 authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified maize NK603 × T25 (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2015)0456).Resolution of 3 February 2016 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified soybean MON 87705 × MON 89788 (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0040).Resolution of 3 February 2016 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified soybean MON 87708 × MON 89788 (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0039).Resolution of 3 February 2016 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified soybean FG72 (MST-FGØ72-2) (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0038).Resolution of 8 June 2016 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified maize Bt11 × MIR162 × MIR604 × GA21, and genetically modified maizes combining two or three of those events (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0271).Resolution of 8 June 2016 on the draft Commission implementing decision as regards the placing on the market of a genetically modified carnation (Dianthus caryophyllus L., line SHD-27531-4) (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0272).Resolution of 6 October 2016 on the draft Commission implementing decision renewing the authorisation for the placing on the market for cultivation of genetically modified maize MON 810 seeds (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0388).Resolution of 6 October 2016 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of genetically modified maize MON 810 products (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0389).Resolution of 6 October 2016 on the draft Commission implementing decision concerning the placing on the market for cultivation of genetically modified maize Bt11 seeds (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0386).Resolution of 6 October 2016 on the draft Commission implementing decision concerning the placing on the market for cultivation of genetically modified maize 1507 seeds (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0387).Resolution of 6 October 2016 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified cotton 281-24-236 × 3006-210-23 × MON 88913 (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0390).Resolution of 5 April 2017 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified maize Bt11 × 59122 × MIR604 × 1507 × GA21, and genetically modified maizes combining two, three or four of the events Bt11, 59122, MIR604, 1507 and GA21 pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European parliament and of the Council on genetically modified food and feed (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2017)0123).Resolution of 17 May 2017 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified maize DAS-40278-9, pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council on genetically modified food and feed (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2017)0215).Resolution of 17 May 2017 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified cotton GHB119 (BCS-GHØØ5-8) pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2017)0214).Resolution of 13 September 2017 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified soybean DAS-68416-4, pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council on genetically modified food and feed (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2017)0341).Resolution of 4 October 2017 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified soybean FG72 × A5547-127 pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council on genetically modified food and feed (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2017)0377).Resolution of 4 October 2017 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified soybean DAS-44406-6, pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council on genetically modified food and feed (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2017)0378).
(6) See, for example, El-Shamei ZS, Gab-Alla AA, Shatta AA, Moussa EA, Rayan AM, Histopathological Changes in Some Organs of Male Rats Fed on Genetically Modified Corn (Ajeeb YG). J Am Sci. 2012; 8(9):1127-1123. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235256452_Histopathological_Changes_in_Some_Organs_of_Male_Rats_Fed_on_Genetically_Modified_Corn_Ajeeb_YG
(7) Székács A, Darvas B. Comparative aspects of Cry toxin usage in insect control. In: Ishaaya I, Palli SR, Horowitz AR, eds. Advanced Technologies for Managing Insect Pests. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer; 2012:195-230. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-94-007-4497-4_10
(8) Resolution of 6 October 2016 on the draft Commission implementing decision concerning the placing on the market for cultivation of genetically modified maize 1507 seeds (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0387).
(9) http://registerofquestions.efsa.europa.eu/roqFrontend/questionLoader?question=EFSA-Q-2004-08
(10) Annex F – Member States’ comments and GMO Panel responses, http://registerofquestions.efsa.europa.eu/roqFrontend/questionLoader?question=EFSA-Q-2015-00342
(11) Annex F – Member States’ comments and GMO Panel responses, http://registerofquestions.efsa.europa.eu/roqFrontend/questionLoader?question=EFSA-Q-2015-00342, p. 7.
(12) https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs00267-015-0589-7
(13) https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7H5dHXeodSCc2RjYmwzaUIyZWs/view
(14) For example, in the opening statement at the European Parliament plenary session included in the political guidelines for the next European Commission (Strasbourg, 15 July 2014) or in the State of the Union Address 2016 (Strasbourg, 14 September 2016).
(15) OJ C 355, 20.10.2017, p. 165.
(16) OJ L 31, 1.2.2002, p. 1.


Genetically modified soybean 305423 × 40-3-2
PDF 284kWORD 50k
European Parliament resolution of 24 October 2017 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified soybean 305423 × 40-3-2 (DP-3Ø5423-1 × MON-Ø4Ø32-6) pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council on genetically modified food and feed (D052752 – 2017/2906(RSP))
P8_TA(2017)0397B8-0570/2017

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified soybean 305423 × 40-3-2 (DP-3Ø5423-1 × MON-Ø4Ø32-6), pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council on genetically modified food and feed (D052752),

–  having regard to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 2003 on genetically modified food and feed(1), and in particular Articles 7(3), and 19(3) and thereof,

–  having regard to the vote of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health referred to in Article 35 of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003, on 14 September 2017, where no opinion was delivered,

–  having regard to Articles 11 and 13 of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member States of the Commission’s exercise of implementing powers(2),

–  having regard to the opinion adopted by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) on 14 July 2016, and published on 18 August 2016(3),

–  having regard to the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member States of the Commission’s exercise of implementing powers (COM(2017)0085, COD(2017)0035),

–  having regard to its previous resolutions objecting to the authorisation of genetically modified organisms(4),

–  having regard to the motion for a resolution of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety,

–  having regard to Rule 106(2) and (3) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.  whereas on 20 September 2007 Pioneer Overseas Corporation submitted an application for the placing on the market of foods, food ingredients and feed containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified soybean 305423 × 40-3-2 to the national competent authority of the Netherlands in accordance with Articles 5 and 17 of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003; whereas that application also covered the placing on the market of genetically modified soybean 305423 × 40-3-2 in products consisting of it or containing it for uses other than food and feed as any other soybean, with the exception of cultivation;

B.  whereas on 14 July 2016 the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) adopted a favourable opinion in accordance with Articles 6 and 18 of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003, which was published on 18 August 2016;

C.  whereas Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 states that genetically modified food or feed must not have adverse effects on human health, animal health or the environment, and requires the Commission to take into account any relevant provisions of Union law and other legitimate factors relevant to the matter under consideration when drafting its decision;

D.  whereas one of the parental plants, soybean 305423, was genetically engineered with the intention of changing the oil composition in plants and to be resistant to acetolactate synthase (ALS)-inhibiting herbicides, which include herbicides of the imidazolinone, sulfonylurea, triazolopyrimidine, pyrimidinyl(thio)benzoate and sulfonylaminocarbonyltriazolinone chemical families; whereas the other parental plant, soybean 40-3-2, incorporates the EPSPS gene to make it resistant to glyphosate-based herbicides; whereas these genetically modified soybeans were combined to create a so-called stacked event which is resistant to two herbicides and altered in oil composition;

E.  whereas many critical comments were submitted by Member States during the three-month consultation period(5); whereas the most critical comments relate to observations that it is not possible to give a favourable verdict, from the perspective of human or animal nutrition, on the safety profile of products derived from soya varieties carrying transformation events 305423 and 40-3-2, that it is not possible to draw conclusions on the allergenicity of this stacked soybean, that ‘sufficient data and appropriate comparators are missing for assessing potential interactions between the parental lines and for detecting unintended effects in the stacked events compared to the parental lines’ and that ‘the risk assessment of soybean 305423 × 40-3-2 cannot be finalised on the basis of the data provided’;

F.  whereas the applicant provided a 90-day toxicological feeding study which was rejected by EFSA due to its insufficient quality; whereas, as a result, the risk assessment contains no such study, a fact which was criticised by a number of Member State competent authorities; whereas this data gap is unacceptable, especially given that 2006 EFSA guidelines require such a study(6);

G.  whereas, on the basis of a number of data gaps (including the lack of assessment of unintended effects resulting from the genetic modification in question, the lack of assessment of toxic effects and the lack of assessment of residues from spraying with complementary herbicides), an independent study concludes that the risk assessment cannot be concluded and that the application should therefore be rejected(7);

H.  whereas the application of the complementary herbicides is part of regular agricultural practice in the cultivation of herbicide-resistant plants and it can therefore be expected that residues from spraying will always be present in the harvest and are inevitable constituents; whereas it has been shown that herbicide-tolerant genetically modified crops result in higher use of complementary herbicides than their conventional counterparts(8);

I.  whereas glyphosate’s current authorisation expires on 31 December 2017 at the latest; whereas questions on the carcinogenicity of glyphosate remain; whereas EFSA concluded in November 2015 that glyphosate is unlikely to be carcinogenic and the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) concluded in March 2017 that no classification was warranted; whereas, on the contrary, in 2015 the WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified glyphosate as a probable carcinogen for humans;

J.  whereas, according to the EFSA pesticide panel, conclusions on the safety of residues from spraying genetically modified crops with glyphosate formations cannot be drawn on the basis of the data provided so far(9); whereas additives and their mixtures used in commercial formulations for spraying glyphosate can show a higher toxicity than the active ingredient alone(10); whereas a number of studies show that glyphosate formulations can act as endocrine disruptors(11);

K.  whereas imported genetically modified soybean is widely used for animal feed in the Union; whereas a peer-reviewed scientific study has found a possible correlation between glyphosate in feed given to pregnant sows and an increase in the incidence of severe congenital anomalies in their piglets(12);

L.  whereas there is no comprehensive risk assessment of residues from spraying ALS inhibitors as complementary herbicides on genetically modified soybeans; whereas, on the contrary, major data gaps were identified by the EFSA pesticide panel in the case of thifensulfuron, which is one of the active ingredients that acts as an ALS inhibitor(13);

M.  whereas the residues from spraying with the complementary herbicides were not assessed; whereas it cannot therefore be concluded that genetically engineered soybean 305423 × 40-3-2 sprayed with glyphosate and ALS inhibitor herbicides is safe for use in food and feed;

N.  whereas authorising the import of soybean 305423 × 40-3-2 into the Union will undoubtedly lead to an increase in its cultivation in third countries and to a corresponding increase in the use of the complementary herbicides;

O.  whereas soybean 305423 × 40-3-2 is cultivated in Argentina, Canada and Japan; whereas the devastating impact of the use of glyphosate on health in Argentina has been widely documented;

P.  whereas the Union has signed up to the UN’s sustainable development goals (SDGs), which include a commitment to substantially reducing the number of deaths and illnesses from hazardous chemicals, and air, water and soil pollution and contamination, by 2030 (SDG 3, target 3.9)(14); whereas the Union is committed to policy coherence for development (PCD), which aims at minimising contradictions and building synergies between different Union policies, including in the areas of trade, environment and agriculture, to benefit developing countries and increase the effectiveness of development cooperation;

Q.  whereas the development of genetically modified crops tolerant to several selective herbicides is mainly due to the rapid evolution of weed resistance to glyphosate in countries that have relied heavily on genetically modified crops; whereas more than 20 different varieties of glyphosate-resistant weeds have been documented in scientific publications(15);

R.  whereas the vote of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health, referred to in Article 35 of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003, on 14 September 2017 delivered no opinion; whereas 14 Member States voted against, only 10 Member States, representing only 38,43 % of the Union population voted in favour, and four Member States abstained;

S.  whereas on several occasions the Commission has deplored the fact that, since the entry into force of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003, authorisation decisions have been adopted by the Commission without the support of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health and that the return of the dossier to the Commission for final decision, which is very much the exception for the procedure as a whole, has become the norm for decision-making on genetically modified food and feed authorisations; whereas that practice has also been deplored by Commission President Juncker as not being democratic(16);

T.  whereas Parliament rejected the legislative proposal of 22 April 2015 amending Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 on 28 October 2015 at first reading(17) and called on the Commission to withdraw it and submit a new one;

U.  whereas recital 14 of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 states that the Commission will, as far as possible, act in such a way as to avoid going against any predominant position which might emerge within the appeal committee against the appropriateness of an implementing act, especially on sensitive issues such as consumer health, food safety and the environment;

V.  whereas the Commission’s proposal to amend Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 is not sufficient in terms of addressing the lack of democracy in the GMO authorisation process;

W.  whereas democratic legitimacy can only be ensured by providing, at the very least, that when no opinion is delivered by the Food Chain and Animal Health Standing Committee the Commission proposal is withdrawn; whereas this procedure already exists for some other standing committees;

1.  Considers that the draft Commission implementing decision exceeds the implementing powers provided for in Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003;

2.  Considers that the draft Commission implementing decision is not consistent with Union law in that it is not compatible with the aim of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003, which is, in accordance with the general principles laid down in Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council(18), to provide the basis for ensuring a high level of protection of human life and health, animal health and welfare, the environment, and consumer interests in relation to genetically modified food and feed, while ensuring the effective functioning of the internal market;

3.  Calls on the Commission to withdraw its draft implementing decision;

4.  Calls on the Commission to suspend any implementing decision regarding applications for authorisation of genetically modified organisms until the authorisation procedure has been revised in such a way so as to address the shortcomings of the current procedure, which has proven inadequate;

5.  Calls on the legislators responsible to advance work on the Commission proposal amending Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 as a matter of urgency and to ensure that, inter alia, if no opinion is delivered by the Food Chain and Animal Health Standing Committee with respect to GMOs approvals, either for cultivation or for food and feed, the Commission will withdraw the proposal;

6.  Calls on the Commission not to authorise any herbicide-tolerant genetically modified plants (‘HT GMP’) without full assessment of the specific cumulative effects of the residues from spraying with the combination of the complementary herbicides and their commercial formulations as applied in the countries of cultivation;

7.  Calls on the Commission to request much more detailed testing to determine health risks relating to stacked events such as soybean 305423 × 40-3-2;

8.  Calls on the Commission to develop strategies for health risk assessment and toxicology, as well as post-market monitoring, that target the whole food and feed chain;

9.  Calls on the Commission to fully integrate the risk assessment of the application of the complementary herbicides and their residues into the risk assessment of HT GMP, regardless of whether the genetically modified plant is for cultivation in the Union or for import for food and feed;

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

(1) OJ L 268, 18.10.2003, p. 1.
(2) OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13.
(3) https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/pub/4566
(4)––––––––––––––––– .– Resolution of 16 January 2014 on the proposal for a Council decision concerning the placing on the market for cultivation, in accordance with Directive 2001/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, of a maize product (Zea mays L., line 1507) genetically modified for resistance to certain lepidopteran pests (OJ C 482, 23.12.2016, p. 110).Resolution of 16 December 2015 on Commission implementing decision (EU) 2015/2279 of 4 December 2015 authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified maize NK603 × T25 (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2015)0456).Resolution of 3 February 2016 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified soybean MON 87705 × MON 89788 (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0040).Resolution of 3 February 2016 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified soybean MON 87708 × MON 89788 (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0039).Resolution of 3 February 2016 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified soybean FG72 (MST-FGØ72-2) (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0038).Resolution of 8 June 2016 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified maize Bt11 × MIR162 × MIR604 × GA21, and genetically modified maizes combining two or three of those events (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0271).Resolution of 8 June 2016 on the draft Commission implementing decision as regards the placing on the market of a genetically modified carnation (Dianthus caryophyllus L., line SHD-27531-4) (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0272).Resolution of 6 October 2016 on the draft Commission implementing decision renewing the authorisation for the placing on the market for cultivation of genetically modified maize MON 810 seeds (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0388).Resolution of 6 October 2016 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of genetically modified maize MON 810 products (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0389).Resolution of 6 October 2016 on the draft Commission implementing decision concerning the placing on the market for cultivation of genetically modified maize Bt11 seeds (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0386).Resolution of 6 October 2016 on the draft Commission implementing decision concerning the placing on the market for cultivation of genetically modified maize 1507 seeds (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0387).Resolution of 6 October 2016 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified cotton 281-24-236 × 3006-210-23 × MON 88913 (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0390).Resolution of 5 April 2017 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified maize Bt11 × 59122 × MIR604 × 1507 × GA21, and genetically modified maizes combining two, three or four of the events Bt11, 59122, MIR604, 1507 and GA21 pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European parliament and of the Council on genetically modified food and feed (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2017)0123).Resolution of 17 May 2017 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified maize DAS-40278-9, pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council on genetically modified food and feed (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2017)0215).Resolution of 17 May 2017 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified cotton GHB119 (BCS-GHØØ5-8) pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2017)0214).Resolution of 13 September 2017 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified soybean DAS-68416-4, pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council on genetically modified food and feed (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2017)0341).Resolution of 4 October 2017 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified soybean FG72 × A5547-127 pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council on genetically modified food and feed (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2017)0377).Resolution of 4 October 2017 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified soybean DAS-44406-6, pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council on genetically modified food and feed (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2017)0378).
(5) Annex G – Member States’ comments and GMO Panel responses http://registerofquestions.efsa.europa.eu/roqFrontend/questionLoader?question=EFSA-Q-2007-175
(6) Idem.
(7).https://www.testbiotech.org/sites/default/files/TBT%20Background%20Soybean%20305423%20x%2040-3-2.pdf
(8) https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs00267-015-0589-7
(9) EFSA conclusion of the peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance glyphosate. EFSA journal 2015, 13 (11):4302: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2903/j.efsa.2015.4302/epdf
(10) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3955666
(11) https://www.testbiotech.org/sites/default/files/TBT%20Background%20Soybean%20305423%20x%2040-3-2.pdf
(12) https://www.omicsonline.org/open-access/detection-of-glyphosate-in-malformed-piglets-2161-0525.1000230.php?aid=27562
(13) ‘The potential endocrine disruption of thifensufron-methyl was identified as an issue that could not be finalised and a critical area of concern’. Conclusion on the peer review of the active substance thifensulfuron-methyl. EFSA journal 13(7):4201, p. 2: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2903/j.efsa.2015.4201/epdf
(14) https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/sdg3
(15).https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-94-007-7796-5_12
(16) For example, in the opening statement at the European Parliament plenary session included in the political guidelines for the next European Commission (Strasbourg, 15 July 2014) or in the State of the Union Address 2016 (Strasbourg, 14 September 2016).
(17) OJ C 355, 20.10.2017, p. 165.
(18) OJ L 31, 1.2.2002, p. 1.


Genetically modified oilseed rapes MON 88302 × Ms8 × Rf3
PDF 289kWORD 53k
European Parliament resolution of 24 October 2017 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified oilseed rapes MON 88302 × Ms8 x Rf3 (MON-883Ø2-9 × ACSBNØØ5-8 × ACS-BNØØ3-6), MON 88302 × Ms8 (MON-883Ø2-9 × ACSBNØØ5-8) and MON 88302 × Rf3 (MON-883Ø2-9 × ACS-BNØØ3-6) pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council on genetically modified food and feed (D052753 – 2017/2907(RSP))
P8_TA(2017)0398B8-0569/2017

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified oilseed rapes MON 88302 × Ms8 x Rf3 (MON-883Ø2-9 × ACSBNØØ5-8 × ACS-BNØØ3-6), MON 88302 × Ms8 (MON-883Ø2-9 × ACSBNØØ5-8) and MON 88302 × Rf3 (MON-883Ø2-9 × ACS-BNØØ3-6), pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council on genetically modified food and feed (D052753),

–  having regard to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 2003 on genetically modified food and feed(1), and in particular Articles 7(3) and 19(3) thereof,

–  having regard to the vote of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health referred to in Article 35 of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003, on 14 September 2017, where no opinion was delivered,

–  having regard to Articles 11 and 13 of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member States of the Commission’s exercise of implementing powers(2),

–  having regard to the opinion adopted by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) on 1 March 2017, and published on 10 April 2017(3),

–  having regard to the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member States of the Commission’s exercise of implementing powers (COM(2017)0085, COD(2017)0035),

–  having regard to its previous resolutions objecting to the authorisation of genetically modified organisms(4),

–  having regard to the motion for a resolution of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety,

–  having regard to Rule 106(2) and (3) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.  whereas on 3 December 2013 Monsanto Europe S.A. and Bayer CropScience N.V. submitted an application for the placing on the market of foods, food ingredients and feed containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified oilseed rape MON 88302 × Ms8 × Rf3 to the national competent authority of the Netherlands, in accordance with Articles 5 and 17 of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003; whereas that application also covered the placing on the market of genetically modified oilseed rape MON 88302 × Ms8 × Rf3 in products consisting of it or containing it for uses other than food and feed as any other oilseed rape, with the exception of cultivation; whereas the application covered, for those uses, all sub-combinations of the single genetic modification events constituting oilseed rape MON 88302 × Ms8 × Rf3;

B.  whereas on 1 March 2017 the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) adopted a favourable opinion in accordance with Articles 6 and 18 of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003, which was published on 10 April 2017;

C.  whereas Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 states that genetically modified food or feed must not have adverse effects on human health, animal health or the environment, and requires the Commission to take into account any relevant provisions of Union law and other legitimate factors relevant to the matter under consideration when drafting its decision;

D.  whereas the three-event stack oilseed rape (OSR) was produced by conventional crossing to combine three single OSR events: MON 88302, expressing the 5-enolpyruvylshikimate-3-phosphate synthase (CP4 EPSPS) protein for tolerance to glyphosate-containing herbicide, MS8, expressing Barnase and phosphinothricin acetyltransferase (PAT) proteins, and RF3, expressing Barstar and PAT proteins, for tolerance to glufosinate-ammonium-containing herbicides and for obtaining heterosis (hybrid vigour);

E.  whereas many critical comments were submitted by Member States during the three-month consultation period; whereas the most critical general comments include the observation that ‘the presented data do not support a comprehensive and robust assessment of potential interactions between the single events incorporated into the GM OSR MON 88302 × Ms8 × Rf3, which is required according to EFSA guidance’, that ‘given the study batteries and designs, no final evidence is possible with reference to long-term (especially in regards to foodstuffs), reproductive or developmental effects’, that ‘information (data and data analyses) provided on phenotypic evaluation, composition and toxicology is insufficient’ and that ‘further studies should be carried out to prove the safety of OSR MON 88302 × Ms8 × Rf3’(5);

F.  whereas key specific areas of concern relate to the lack of a 90-day feeding study on rats, the lack of assessment of the residues of the complementary herbicides on imported food and feed, the possible negative health consequences thereof and the inadequacy of the environmental monitoring plan;

G.  whereas, on the basis of the lack of a 90-day sub-chronic toxicity report on rats, the French Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health and Safety duly rejected the application to place OSR MON 88302 × Ms8 × Rf3 on the market(6);

H.  whereas an independent study concludes that the opinion of EFSA should be rejected on account of major flaws and substantial gaps and, hence, the import of viable kernels of the stacked event MON 88302 × MS8 × RF3 into the Union should not be authorised(7);

I.  whereas the application of the complementary herbicides is part of regular agricultural practice in the cultivation of herbicide-resistant plants, and it can therefore be expected that residues from spraying will always be present in the harvest and are inevitable constituents; whereas it has been shown that herbicide-tolerant genetically modified crops result in higher use of complementary herbicides than their conventional counterparts(8);

J.  whereas glyphosate’s current authorisation expires on 31 December 2017 at the latest; whereas questions on the carcinogenicity of glyphosate remain; whereas EFSA concluded in November 2015 that glyphosate is unlikely to be carcinogenic and the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) concluded in March 2017 that no classification was warranted; whereas, on the contrary, in 2015 the WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified glyphosate as a probable carcinogen for humans;

K.  whereas, according to the EFSA pesticide panel, on the basis of data provided so far, conclusions on the safety of residues from spraying genetically modified crops with glyphosate formations cannot be drawn(9); whereas additives and their mixtures used in commercial formulations for spraying glyphosate can show a higher toxicity than the active ingredient alone(10); whereas a number of studies show that glyphosate formulations can act as endocrine disruptors(11);

L.  whereas imported genetically modified (GM) oilseed rape is widely used for animal feed in the Union; whereas a peer-reviewed scientific study has found a possible correlation between glyphosate in feed given to pregnant sows, and an increase in the incidence of severe congenital anomalies in their piglets(12);

M.  whereas glufosinate is classified as toxic to reproduction and thus falls under the so-called ‘cut-off’ criteria set out in Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market(13); whereas the approval of glufosinate expires on 31 July 2018(14);

N.  whereas one Member State competent authority has highlighted the inconsistency of authorising the import of this glufosinate-tolerant GM OSR given that it is unlikely that the authorisation for the use of glufosinate in the Union will be renewed due to its reproductive toxicity(15);

O.  whereas the residues from spraying with the complementary herbicides were not assessed; whereas it cannot therefore be concluded that this genetically engineered OSR sprayed with glyphosate and glufosinate is safe for use in food and feed;

P.  whereas, in addition, many Member State competent authorities have raised concerns about the potential of this GM OSR to establish itself as a feral crop population in the Union, particularly along import transport routes, and have pointed out the insufficiency of the monitoring plan in this regard;

Q.  whereas one Member State commented that ‘Glyphosate is commonly used for weed control along railways and roadsides in the Union. The high glyphosate tolerance of MON88302 × Ms8 × Rf3 may lead to selective advantage under such circumstances. The effects of this selective advantage on the persistence and invasiveness should be taken into account on assessing the likelihood of the line to form permanent populations in Europe, especially considering the ability of oilseed rape to survive in the seed bank’;

R.  whereas, according to a 2011 Austrian study, ‘Several international studies identify seed spillage during transport activities as a major component for the establishment of feral OSR populations in roadside habitats’, that ‘it is a well-known problem that feral OSR populations are ubiquitous in countries where OSR is grown but also in countries where OSR seeds are just imported and subsequently transported to oil processing plants’ and that ‘moreover, importing different types of herbicide tolerant (HT) OSR lines can result in multiple-resistant feral populations (‘gene stacking’) causing or exacerbating herbicide management problems of road side habitats’(16);

S.  whereas the development of GM crops tolerant to several selective herbicides is mainly due to the rapid evolution of weed resistance to glyphosate in countries that have relied heavily on GM crops; whereas more than 20 different varieties of glyphosate-resistant weeds have been documented in scientific publications(17); whereas glufosinate-resistant weeds have been observed since 2009;

T.  whereas the vote of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health, referred to in Article 35 of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003, on 14 September 2017 delivered no opinion; whereas 14 Member States voted against the draft implementing act, only nine Member States, representing only 36,48 % of the Union population voted in favour, and five Member States abstained;

U.  whereas on several occasions the Commission has deplored the fact that, since the entry into force of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003, it has adopted authorisation decisions without the support of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health, and that the return of the dossier to the Commission for final decision, which is very much the exception for the procedure as a whole, has become the norm for decision-making on genetically modified food and feed authorisations; whereas that practice has also been deplored by Commission President Juncker as not being democratic(18);

V.  whereas Parliament rejected the legislative proposal of 22 April 2015 amending Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 on 28 October 2015 at first reading(19) and called on the Commission to withdraw it and submit a new one;

W.  whereas recital 14 of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 states that the Commission will, as far as possible, act in such a way as to avoid going against any predominant position which might emerge within the appeal committee against the appropriateness of an implementing act, especially on sensitive issues such as consumer health, food safety and the environment;

X.  whereas the Commission’s proposal to amend Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 is not sufficient in terms of addressing the lack of democracy in the GMO authorisation process;

Y.  whereas democratic legitimacy can only be ensured by providing, at the very least, that when no opinion is delivered by the Food Chain and Animal Health Standing Committee, the Commission proposal is withdrawn; whereas this procedure already exists for some other standing committees;

1.  Considers that the draft Commission implementing decision exceeds the implementing powers provided for in Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003;

2.  Considers that the Commission implementing decision is not consistent with Union law in that it is not compatible with the aim of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003, which is, in accordance with the general principles laid down in Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council(20), to provide the basis for ensuring a high level of protection of human life and health, animal health and welfare, the environment, and consumer interests in relation to genetically modified food and feed, while ensuring the effective functioning of the internal market;

3.  Calls on the Commission to withdraw its draft implementing decision;

4.  Calls on the Commission to suspend any implementing decision regarding applications for authorisation of genetically modified organisms until the authorisation procedure has been revised in such a way so as to address the shortcomings of the current procedure, which has proven inadequate;

5.  Calls on the legislators responsible to advance work on the Commission proposal amending Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 as a matter of urgency and to ensure that, inter alia, if no opinion is delivered by the Food Chain and Animal Health Standing Committee with respect to GMOs approvals, either for cultivation or for food and feed, the Commission will withdraw the proposal;

6.  Calls on the Commission not to authorise any herbicide-tolerant genetically modified plants (HT GMP) made resistant to a combination of herbicides, as is the case with oilseed rape MON 88302 × Ms8 × Rf3, without a full assessment of the specific cumulative effects of the residues from spraying with the combination of the complementary herbicides and its commercial formulations as applied in the countries of cultivation;

7.  Calls on the Commission to request much more detailed testing to determine health risks relating to stacked events such as oilseed rape MON 88302 × Ms8 × Rf3;

8.  Calls on the Commission to develop strategies for health risk assessment, toxicology and post-market monitoring that target the whole food and feed chain;

9.  Calls on the Commission to fully integrate the risk assessment of the application of the complementary herbicides and their residues into the risk assessment of HT GMP, regardless of whether the genetically modified plant is for cultivation in the Union or for import for food and feed;

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

(1) OJ L 268, 18.10.2003, p. 1.
(2) OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13.
(3) https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/pub/4767
(4)––––––––––––––––– – Resolution of 16 January 2014 on the proposal for a Council decision concerning the placing on the market for cultivation, in accordance with Directive 2001/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, of a maize product (Zea mays L., line 1507) genetically modified for resistance to certain lepidopteran pests (OJ C 482, 23.12.2016, p. 110).Resolution of 16 December 2015 on Commission implementing decision (EU) 2015/2279 of 4 December 2015 authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified maize NK603 × T25 (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2015)0456).Resolution of 3 February 2016 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified soybean MON 87705 × MON 89788 (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0040).Resolution of 3 February 2016 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified soybean MON 87708 × MON 89788 (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0039).Resolution of 3 February 2016 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified soybean FG72 (MST-FGØ72-2) (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0038).Resolution of 8 June 2016 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified maize Bt11 × MIR162 × MIR604 × GA21, and genetically modified maizes combining two or three of those events (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0271).Resolution of 8 June 2016 on the draft Commission implementing decision as regards the placing on the market of a genetically modified carnation (Dianthus caryophyllus L., line SHD-27531-4)) (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0272).Resolution of 6 October 2016 on the draft Commission implementing decision renewing the authorisation for the placing on the market for cultivation of genetically modified maize MON 810 seeds (P8_TA(2016)0388).Resolution of 6 October 2016 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of genetically modified maize MON 810 products (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0389).Resolution of 6 October 2016 on the draft Commission implementing decision concerning the placing on the market for cultivation of genetically modified maize Bt11 seeds (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0386).Resolution of 6 October 2016 on the draft Commission implementing decision concerning the placing on the market for cultivation of genetically modified maize 1507 seeds (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0387).Resolution of 6 October 2016 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified cotton 281-24-236 × 3006-210-23 × MON 88913 (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0390).Resolution of 5 April 2017 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified maize Bt11 × 59122 × MIR604 × 1507 × GA21, and genetically modified maizes combining two, three or four of the events Bt11, 59122, MIR604, 1507 and GA21 pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European parliament and of the Council on genetically modified food and feed (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2017)0123).Resolution of 17 May 2017 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified maize DAS-40278-9, pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council on genetically modified food and feed (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2017)0215).Resolution of 17 May 2017 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified cotton GHB119 (BCS-GHØØ5-8) pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2017)0214).Resolution of 13 September 2017 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified soybean DAS-68416-4, pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council on genetically modified food and feed (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2017)0341).Resolution of 4 October 2017 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified soybean FG72 × A5547-127 pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council on genetically modified food and feed (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2017)0377).Resolution of 4 October 2017 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified soybean DAS-44406-6, pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council on genetically modified food and feed (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2017)0378).
(5) Annex G – Member States’ comments and GMO Panel responses: http://registerofquestions.efsa.europa.eu/roqFrontend/questionLoader?question=EFSA-Q-2013-01002
(6) Idem.
(7) https://www.testbiotech.org/sites/default/files/TBT%20comment%20MON80332%20x%20MS8%20x%20RF3_v2.pdf
(8) https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs00267-015-0589-7
(9) EFSA conclusion of the peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance glyphosate. EFSA journal 2015, 13 (11):4302: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2903/j.efsa.2015.4302/epdf
(10) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3955666
(11) https://www.testbiotech.org/sites/default/files/TBT%20Background%20Soybean%20305423%20x%2040-3-2.pdf
(12) https://www.omicsonline.org/open-access/detection-of-glyphosate-in-malformed-piglets-2161-0525.1000230.php?aid=27562
(13) OJ L 309, 24.11.2009, p. 1.
(14) OJ L 67, 12.3.2015, p. 6.
(15) Annex G – Member States’ comments and GMO Panel responses: http://registerofquestions.efsa.europa.eu/roqFrontend/questionLoader?question=EFSA-Q-2013-01002
(16) https://www.bmgf.gv.at/cms/home/attachments/3/0/9/CH1060/CMS1215778250501/osrimportban_gt73,ms8xrf3_2011_(nicht_zu_versenden_).pdf, p. 4.
(17) https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-94-007-7796-5_12
(18) For example, in the opening statement at the European Parliament plenary session included in the political guidelines for the next European Commission (Strasbourg, 15 July 2014) or in the State of the Union Address 2016 (Strasbourg, 14 September 2016).
(19) OJ C 355, 20.10.2017, p. 165.
(20) OJ L 31, 1.2.2002, p. 1.


Draft amending budget No 5/2017: financing for the European Fund for Sustainable Development and increasing the Emergency Aid Reserve
PDF 250kWORD 45k
European Parliament resolution of 24 October 2017 on the Council position on Draft amending budget No 5/2017 of the European Union for the financial year 2017 providing the financing for the European Fund for Sustainable Development (EFSD) and increasing the Emergency Aid Reserve (EAR) further to the revision of the Multiannual Financial Framework regulation (12441/2017 – C8-0351/2017 – 2017/2135(BUD))
P8_TA(2017)0399A8-0301/2017

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to Article 314 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to Article 106a of the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community,

–  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(1), and in particular Article 41 thereof,

–  having regard to the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2017, as adopted on 1 December 2016,(2)

–  having regard to Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1311/2013 of 2 December 2013 laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2014-2020(3) (MFF Regulation),

–  having regard to Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2017/1123 of 20 June 2017 amending Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1311/2013 laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2014-2020(4),

–  having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 2 December 2013 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline, on cooperation in budgetary matters and on sound financial management(5),

–  having regard to Council Decision 2014/335/EU, Euratom of 26 May 2014 on the system of own resources of the European Union(6),

–  having regard to Draft amending budget No 5/2017, which the Commission adopted on 28 July 2017 (COM(2017)0485),

–  having regard to the position on Draft amending budget No 5/2017 which the Council adopted on 10 October 2017 and forwarded to Parliament on 11 October 2017 (12441/2017 - C8-0351/2017),

–  having regard to Rules 88 and 91 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgets (A8-0301/2017),

A.  whereas Draft amending budget No 5/2017 aims to provide for the financing of the European Fund for Sustainable Development (EFSD) further to the adoption of the related legal base, and to reflect in the general budget 2017 the outcome of the mid-term revision of the MFF Regulation as regards the increase in the annual amount of the Emergency Aid Reserve (EAR) from EUR 280 million to EUR 300 million in 2011 prices;

B.  whereas Draft amending budget No 5/2017 provides EUR 275 million in commitment and payment appropriations for the EFSD, to be covered in full by a mobilisation of the Flexibility Instrument, given the absence of margin under the commitment ceiling of Heading 4 (Global Europe);

C.  whereas Draft amending budget No 5/2017 provides, at the same time, for a reduction by the amount of EUR 275 million in payment appropriations for the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF) under Heading 3 (Security and Citizenship), due to an expected under-implementation caused by a late adoption of the legal bases and a delay in programming;

D.  whereas Draft amending budget No 5/2017 also provides for an additional EUR 22,8 million (in current prices) for the EAR in commitment appropriations, reflecting the mid-term revision of the MFF Regulation;

E.  whereas Draft amending budget No 5/2017 is accompanied by a proposal for a decision on the mobilisation of the Flexibility Instrument to provide the financing for the EFSD (COM(2017)0480) in the amount of EUR 275 million in commitment and payment appropriations under Heading 4;

F.  whereas, within the 2017 budgetary procedure, the European Parliament and the Council invited the Commission to request the necessary appropriations for the financing of the EFSD in an amending budget as soon as the legal base is adopted, and undertook to process rapidly the draft amending budget for 2017 put forward by the Commission;

1.  Takes note of Draft amending budget No 5/2017, as submitted by the Commission;

2.  Welcomes the timely adoption and entry into force of the EFSD Regulation (EU) 2017/1601(7) and calls for its swift implementation, in full observance of the rules and priorities set by the legislator and with a particular attention to its accountability provisions;

3.  Welcomes the fact that the mid-term revision of the Multiannual Financial Framework allows for the financing of the EFSD through an increased Flexibility Instrument, while also increasing the size of the EAR;

4.  Deplores the low implementation of the AMIF and the Internal Security Fund (ISF) by the Member States; recalls that a budgetary transfer (DEC 18/2017) already reduces the payment appropriations under Heading 3 (Security and Citizenship) by EUR 284 million, using AMIF and ISF as a source for reinforcements under another heading; calls the Member States to respect their political agreements and to do their utmost within their competences to reflect the importance of this Union priority;

5.  Approves the Council position on Draft amending budget No 5/2017;

6.  Instructs its President to declare that Amending budget No 5/2017 has been definitively adopted and arrange for its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union;

7.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the Court of Auditors and the national parliaments.

(1) OJ L 298, 26.10.2012, p. 1.
(2) OJ L 51, 28.2.2017.
(3) OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 884.
(4) OJ L 163, 24.6.2017, p. 1.
(5) OJ C 373, 20.12.2013, p. 1.
(6) OJ L 168, 7.6.2014, p. 105.
(7) OJ L 249, 27.9.2017, p. 1.


Mobilisation of the Flexibility Instrument to provide the financing for the European Fund for Sustainable Development
PDF 245kWORD 43k
Resolution
Annex
European Parliament resolution of 24 October 2017 on the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council on the mobilisation of the Flexibility Instrument to provide the financing for the European Fund for Sustainable Development (COM(2017)0480 – C8-0235/2017 – 2017/2134(BUD))
P8_TA(2017)0400A8-0298/2017

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to the European Parliament and the Council (COM(2017)0480 – C8‑0235/2017),

–  having regard to Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1311/2013 of 2 December 2013 laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2014-2020(1) (MFF Regulation), and in particular Article 11 thereof,

–  having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 2 December 2013 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline, on cooperation in budgetary matters and on sound financial management(2), and in particular point 12 thereof,

–  having regard to the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2017, as adopted on 1 December 2016(3),

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgets (A8-0298/2017),

A.  whereas, after the revision of the MFF Regulation, an annual amount of EUR 676 million in current prices is available under the Flexibility instrument, increased by lapsed amounts from the European Union Solidarity Fund and the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund, namely EUR 646 million at the end of 2016; whereas an amount of EUR 530 million is already mobilised under the Flexibility instrument in the 2017 budget, thus leaving EUR 792 million available for a further mobilisation;

B.  whereas Regulation (EU) 2017/1601 of the European Parliament and of the Council(4) entered into force on 28 September 2017;

C.  whereas, after having examined all possibilities for re-allocating commitment appropriations under Heading 4 (Global Europe), the Commission has proposed to mobilise the Flexibility Instrument for an amount of EUR 275 million beyond the ceiling of Heading 4 to provide the financing for the European Fund for Sustainable Development (EFSD);

1.  Notes that the 2017 ceiling for Heading 4 does not allow for an adequate financing of the EFSD; reiterates its long-standing position that the financial resources for external action of the Union are not sufficient to cover the needs of a proactive and sustainable external policy;

2.  Agrees therefore with the mobilisation of the Flexibility Instrument for an amount of EUR 275 million in commitment and payment appropriations;

3.  Reiterates that the mobilisation of this instrument, as provided for in Article 11 of the MFF Regulation, shows, once more, the crucial need for the Union budget to be more flexible;

4.  Reiterates its long-standing view that the payments stemming from commitments previously mobilised through the Flexibility Instrument can only be counted over and above the MFF ceilings;

5.  Approves the decision annexed to this resolution;

6.  Instructs its President to sign the decision with the President of the Council and arrange for its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union;

7.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution, including its annex, to the Council and the Commission.

ANNEX: DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL

on the mobilisation of the Flexibility Instrument to provide the financing for the European Fund for Sustainable Development

(The text of this annex is not reproduced here since it corresponds to the final act, Decision (EU) 2018/51.)

(1) OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 884.
(2) OJ C 373, 20.12.2013, p. 1.
(3) OJ L 51, 28.2.2017.
(4) Regulation (EU) 2017/1601 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 September 2017 establishing the European Fund for Sustainable Development (EFSD), the EFSD Guarantee and the EFSD Guarantee Fund (OJ L 249, 27.9.2017, p. 1).


Reflection paper on the future of EU finances
PDF 173kWORD 49k
European Parliament resolution of 24 October 2017 on the Reflection Paper on the Future of EU Finances (2017/2742(RSP))
P8_TA(2017)0401B8-0565/2017

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to Articles 311, 312 and 323 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU),

–  having regard to Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1311/2013 of 2 December 2013 laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2014-2020(1), and in particular Article 2 thereof,

–  having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 2 December 2013 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline, on cooperation in budgetary matters and on sound financial management(2),

–  having regard to its resolution of 6 July 2016 on ‘Preparation of the post-electoral revision of the MFF 2014-2020: Parliament’s input ahead of the Commission’s proposal’(3),

–  having regard to the Commission’s Reflection Paper on the Future of EU Finances of 28 June 2017,

–  having regard to the Commission statement of 4 July 2017 on the Reflection Paper on the Future of EU finances,

–  having regard to its resolution of 16 February 2017 on budgetary capacity for the euro area(4),

–  having regard to the motion for a resolution of the Committee on Budgets,

–  having regard to Rule 123(2) of its Rules of Procedure,

1.  Is convinced that a debate on the future financing of the European Union cannot happen without taking into account the lessons learnt from the previous multiannual financial frameworks (MFF) and particularly the 2014-2020 MFF; points to the severe deficiencies of the current MFF, which was stretched to its limits in order to provide the necessary resources for the Union to confront a number of serious crises and new challenges and finance its new political priorities; stresses its conviction that the low level of the current MFF proved insufficient to match the actual needs and political ambitions of the Union;

2.  Welcomes the Commission’s presentation of its Reflection Paper on the Future of EU Finances; notes that the Commission translates into budgetary terms the five scenarios for the future model of the European Union, as presented in its White Paper on the Future of Europe of March 2017, while addressing a number of basic characteristics and principles of the EU budget; agrees with the proposed methodology and takes a positive stance towards the Commission’s statement that the future MFF must be underpinned by a clear vision of Europe’s priorities; trusts that this paper sets a clear structure for the discussions and opens a much-needed political debate on the orientation, purpose and level of the EU budget in the light of the fundamental objectives and future challenges of the Union; calls on the Member States to consult citizens and to assume an active and constructive role in laying down their vision for the future of the EU budget;

3.  Regrets, however, the fact that four out of the five presented scenarios (‘Carrying on’, ‘Doing less together’, ‘Some do more’ and ‘Radical redesign’) signify an effective decline in the Union’s ambitions and envisage the reduction of two long-standing EU policies and cornerstones of the European project enshrined in the Treaties – the common agricultural policy and cohesion policy; stresses its long-standing position that additional political priorities should be coupled with additional financial means and not be financed to the detriment of existing EU policies; considers the fifth scenario (‘Doing much more together’) a positive and constructive starting point for the ongoing discussion on the future of EU finances and consequently the future model of the European Union; encourages the Commission to develop a scenario which takes into account Parliament’s recommendations in order to respond to the current and future challenges, and in order to define the new set of priorities;

4.  Recalls that pursuant to Article 311 TFEU, the Union shall provide itself with the means necessary to attain its objectives; believes that the shortcomings of the current MFF and the scale of the new priorities, as well as the impact of the United Kingdom’s withdrawal, all point to the same conclusion: the need to break the ceiling for expenditure of 1 % of the EU’s Gross National Income (GNI) and, therefore, to significantly increase the Union’s budget in order to respond to the challenges ahead; opposes, in this context, any nominal decrease in the volume of the EU budget in the next MFF, and therefore believes that the next MFF should be set at the level of at least 1,23 % of the EU’s GNI; advocates a discussion among the Member States on the matter;

5.  Regrets the fact that the EU budget is predominantly financed from national contributions based on GNI instead of genuine own resources, as provided for in the EU Treaties; reiterates its commitment to a fully-fledged reform of the EU own resources system, with simplicity, fairness and transparency as guiding principles, and in line with the recommendations of the High Level Group on Own Resources; stresses that any such system should include a balanced basket of new EU own resources designed to support EU policy objectives that should be introduced progressively to provide fairer and more stable EU finances; highlights, moreover, that the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the Union provides an opportunity to put an end to all rebates; expects the Commission to submit ambitious legislative proposals to that effect and points out that both the expenditure and the revenue side of the next MFF will be treated as a single package in the upcoming negotiations;

6.  Is convinced that, unless the Council agrees to significantly increase the level of its national contributions to the EU budget, the introduction of new EU own resources remains the only option for adequately financing the next MFF to a level that corresponds to the actual needs and political ambitions of the Union; expects, therefore, the Council to take a political stance on this matter, considering that a de facto blockage of any reform of the EU own resources system can no longer be envisaged; recalls in this regard that the report of the High Level Group on Own Resources was adopted unanimously by all of its members, including those members appointed by the Council;

7.  Welcomes the Commission’s intention to design the future EU budget on the basis of the principles of EU added value, a focus on performance, accountability, greater flexibility within a stable framework and simplified rules, as presented in the reflection paper;

8.  Stresses, in this context, the importance of a thorough evaluation of the efficiency and effectiveness of current EU policies, programmes and instruments; looks forward, in that respect, to the results of the ongoing spending review and expects them to be taken into account in the design of the post-2020 MFF; underlines, in particular, the need to ensure the success rate of highly oversubscribed EU programmes on the one hand, and to determine the reasons for under-implementation on the other; considers it important to achieve synergies between the EU budget and the national budgets, and to provide for the means to monitor the level and performance of spending at national and EU level;

9.  Acknowledges that the search for European added value is a fundamental question to be addressed, and agrees that the Union budget should serve, inter alia, as a tool for achieving the Treaty objectives and providing for European public goods; points out, however, the multi-faceted character of the concept of European added value and its multiple interpretations, and warns against any attempt to use its definition to call into question the relevance of EU policies and programmes on purely quantitative or short-term economic considerations; believes that there is a clear added value when an action at European level:

   goes further than national, regional or local efforts could (spillover effect),
   incentivises actions at national, regional or local level to fulfil EU Treaty objectives which would not otherwise be realised,
   supports actions that can only be financed by pooling resources at EU level because of their very high financing requirements, or
   contributes to the establishment and support of peace and stability in the EU’s neighbourhood and beyond;

encourages the Commission to further develop the concept of European added value, while taking into account territorial specificities; calls on the Commission to propose the appropriate performance indicators for this purpose;

10.  Considers that the structure of the next MFF should render the EU budget more readable and understandable to EU citizens and allow for a clearer presentation of all areas of EU expenditure; recalls, at the same time, the need to facilitate both planning continuity and flexibility within headings; believes that the overall MFF structure should reflect the political debate on the main pillars and orientation of EU spending, including sustainable development, growth and innovation, climate change, solidarity, security and defence; is convinced, therefore, that an adjustment to the current MFF headings is necessary;

11.  Believes that the EU budget must be transparent and democratic; recalls its firm commitment to the notion of the unity of the EU budget and questions the necessity and added value of creating additional instruments outside the MFF; reiterates its long-standing position that the European Development Fund, alongside other instruments outside the MFF, should be integrated into the Union budget; stresses that such integration should entail the respective financial envelopes of those instruments being added on top of the current MFF ceilings, in order not to jeopardise the financing of other EU policies and programmes;

12.  Points out that, after exhausting all available margins, the budgetary authority approved the substantial mobilisation of the flexibility provisions and special instruments included in the MFF regulation in order to secure the additional appropriations needed to respond to crises or finance new political priorities during the current MFF; underlines the fact that during the MFF mid-term revision, several barriers to the MFF flexibility mechanisms were removed, in order to allow for greater flexibility under the current financial framework;

13.  Underlines, in this context, that the next MFF should provide directly for the appropriate level of flexibility that will enable the Union to respond to unforeseen circumstances and finance its evolving political priorities; believes, therefore, that the MFF flexibility provisions should allow for all unallocated margins, as well as de-committed appropriations, to be carried over without any restrictions to future financial years and mobilised by the budgetary authority, for any purpose deemed necessary, in the context of the annual budgetary procedure; calls, moreover, for the significant reinforcement of MFF special instruments, which should be counted over and above the MFF ceilings for both commitments and payments, as well as for the creation of a separate crisis reserve that should allow resources to be mobilised immediately in the event of an emergency;

14.  Advocates a real and tangible simplification of implementation rules for beneficiaries and a reduction of the administrative burden; encourages the Commission, in this context, to identify and eliminate overlaps between instruments offered by the EU budget which pursue similar objectives and serve similar types of actions; is of the opinion, however, that such simplification should not result in the replacement of grants by financial instruments and must not lead to a sectorialisation of EU programmes and policies, but should guarantee a cross-cutting approach with complementarity at its heart; calls for a far-reaching harmonisation of rules with the aim of creating a single rulebook for all EU instruments;

15.  Recognises the potential of financial instruments as a complementary form of funding to subsidies and grants; cautions, however, that they are not appropriate for all types of actions and policy fields, as not all policies are entirely market-driven; calls on the Commission to simplify the rules governing the use of financial instruments and to encourage the possibility of a combination of various EU resources under harmonised rules by creating synergies and avoiding any competition between different forms of funding; expresses its concern regarding the option of a single fund that would integrate EU-level financial instruments and provide loans, guarantees and risk-sharing instruments in different policy windows, as presented in the reflection paper in this context, and will examine this proposal thoroughly;

16.  Reiterates its position that the duration of the MFF should be aligned with the political cycle of both Parliament and the Commission and should ensure long-term programming; stresses, in this context, that the duration of the MFF should take full account of the need for longer-term predictability in the implementation of European Structural and Investment Fund (ESIF) programmes under shared management, which cannot operate without the stability of at least a seven-year commitment; proposes, therefore, that the next MFF should be agreed for a period of 5+5 years with a mandatory mid-term revision;

17.  Notes the Commission President’s announcement in his State of the Union address of an upcoming proposal for a dedicated euro area budget line; calls on the Commission to come up with additional and more detailed information in that respect; recalls that Parliament’s resolution of 16 February 2017 calls for a specific euro area budgetary capacity which should be part of the EU budget over and above the current ceilings of the MFF and financed by euro area and other participating members via a source of revenue, which should, for its part, be agreed between participating Member States and considered to be assigned revenue and guarantees;

18.  Expects the Commission to present its proposals on both the future MFF and own resources by May 2018; states its intention to present in due time its own position on all related aspects, and expects Parliament’s views to be fully incorporated into the forthcoming Commission proposals;

19.  Expresses its readiness to engage in a structured dialogue with the Commission and the Council, with a view to reaching a final agreement on the next MFF before the end of the current parliamentary term; is convinced that an early adoption of the MFF Regulation will enable the subsequent adoption of all sectoral legislative acts in time for the new programmes to be in place at the beginning of the next period; stresses the detrimental effects of the late launching of the programmes under the current MFF; urges the European Council, in this context, to use the ‘passerelle’ clause of Article 312(2) TFEU, which allows qualified majority voting on the MFF in Council;

20.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the other institutions and bodies concerned, and the governments and parliaments of the Member States.

(1) OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 884.
(2) OJ C 373, 20.12.2013, p. 1.
(3) Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0309.
(4) Texts adopted, P8_TA(2017)0050.


Legitimate measures to protect whistle-blowers acting in the public interest
PDF 228kWORD 64k
European Parliament resolution of 24 October 2017 on legitimate measures to protect whistle-blowers acting in the public interest when disclosing the confidential information of companies and public bodies (2016/2224(INI))
P8_TA(2017)0402A8-0295/2017

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Treaty on European Union, in particular Article 2 thereof,

–  having regard to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, in particular Article 11 thereof,

–  having regard to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), in particular Article 10 thereof,

–  having regard to Directive (EU) 2016/943 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2016 on the protection of undisclosed know-how and business information (trade secrets) against their unlawful acquisition, use and disclosure,

–  having regard to Directive 2013/30/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 June 2013 on safety of offshore oil and gas operations and amending Directive 2004/35/EC,

–  having regard to Regulation (EU) No 596/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014 on market abuse (market abuse regulation) and repealing Directive 2003/6/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Commission Directives 2003/124/EC, 2003/125/EC and 2004/72/EC,

–  having regard to Directive (EU) 2015/849 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2015 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purposes of money laundering or terrorist financing, amending Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Directive 2005/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Commission Directive 2006/70/EC,

–  having regard to its resolution of 25 November 2015 on tax rulings and other measures similar in nature or effect(1),

–  having regard to its resolution of 6 July 2016 on tax rulings and other measures similar in nature or effect (TAXE 2)(2),

–  having regard to its resolution of 23 October 2013 on organised crime, corruption and money laundering: recommendations on action and initiatives to be taken(3),

–  having regard to Resolution 1729 (2010) of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe on the protection of ‘whistle-blowers’,

–  having regard to Resolution 2060 (2015) of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe on improving the protection of whistle-blowers,

–  having regard to its resolution of 16 December 2015 with recommendations to the Commission on bringing transparency, coordination and convergence to corporate tax policies in the Union(4),

–  having regard to the Commission communication of 6 June 2011 on fighting corruption in the EU (COM(2011)0308),

–  having regard to the Commission communication of 5 July 2016 on further measures to enhance transparency and the fight against tax evasion and avoidance (COM(2016)0451),

–  having regard to the G20 Anti-Corruption Action Plan, in particular its guiding principles for legislation on the protection of whistle-blowers,

–  having regard to the OECD report of March 2016 entitled ‘Committing to Effective Whistleblower Protection’,

–  having regard to the Decision of the European Ombudsman closing her own-initiative inquiry OI/1/2014/PMC concerning whistle-blowing,

–  having regard to the Recommendation CM/Rec(2014)7 of 30 April 2014 of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on the protection of whistle-blowers, as well to its relevant brief guide for implementing a national framework of January 2015,

–  having regard to Resolution 2171 (2017) of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe of 27 June 2017 calling on the national parliaments to recognise the ‘right to blow the whistle’,

–  having regard to Principle 4 of the OECD Recommendation on Improving Ethical Conduct in the Public Service,

–  having regard to the Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions,

–  having regard to its resolution of 14 February 2017 on the role of whistle-blowers in the protection of EU’s financial interests(5),

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

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs and the opinions of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs, the Committee on Budgetary Control, the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety, the Committee on Culture and Education, the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs and the Committee on Constitutional Affairs (A8-0295/2017),

A.  whereas the EU set itself the objective of upholding democracy and the rule of law and thus guarantees its citizens freedom of expression; whereas whistle-blowing is a fundamental aspect of the freedom of expression and information, as enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, compliance with and application of which are guaranteed by the EU; whereas the EU promotes workers’ protection and the improvement of working conditions;

B.  whereas the European Union is helping to consolidate international cooperation in the fight against corruption, in full compliance with the principles of international law, human rights and the rule of law, as well as the sovereignty of each country;

C.  whereas under Article 67(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) the European Union is competent to deal with matters relating to the European common asylum policy;

D.  whereas transparency and citizen participation are among the developments and challenges to be addressed by democracies in the 21st century;

E.  whereas, since the economic and financial crisis and the debt crisis, we have seen a wave of action against international tax avoidance and evasion; whereas more transparency in the financial services sphere is needed in order to discourage malpractice, and some Member States have already experience with central repositories for reporting actual or possible breaches of financial prudential rules; whereas the United Nations adopted its Convention against Corruption in 2003(6); whereas Parliament established two special committees and one committee of inquiry following these revelations; whereas it has already called for protection of whistle-blowers in several resolutions(7); whereas the initiatives already agreed upon to strengthen international information exchange in tax matters have been helpful, and whereas the various tax-related leaks have revealed large amounts of important information on malpractices that would otherwise not have surfaced;

F.  whereas whistle-blowers play an important role in reporting unlawful or improper conduct which undermines the public interest and the functioning of our societies, and, in order to do so, they expose to their employer, public authorities or directly to the public, information on such conduct which undermines the public interest;

G.  whereas, in so doing, they help Member States, the major EU institutions and other EU bodies to prevent and tackle, in particular, any breach of the principle of integrity or any misuse of power that threatens or violates public health and safety, financial integrity, the economy, human rights, the environment or the rule of law, or which increases unemployment, limits or distorts fair competition or undermines citizens’ trust in democratic institutions and processes at national and EU levels;

H.  whereas corruption is a serious problem facing the European Union today, as it can result in the failure of governments to protect the population, workers, the rule of law and the economy, in a deterioration of public institutions and services, economic growth and competitiveness in various fields, and in a loss of trust in the transparency and democratic accountability of public and private institutions and industries; whereas corruption is estimated to cost the EU economy EUR 120 billion annually or 1 % of EU GDP;

I.  whereas, while global anti-corruption efforts have thus far been focused predominantly on public sector wrongdoings, recent leaks have highlighted the role of financial institutions, advisers and other private companies in facilitating corruption;

J.  whereas a number of publicised whistle-blowing cases have shown that whistle-blowing brings information of public interest, such as unlawful or improper conduct or other serious wrongdoing in the private and public sectors, to the attention of the public and of political authorities; whereas some of these acts have therefore been subject to corrective measures;

K.  whereas the safeguarding of confidentiality contributes to the creation of more effective channels for reporting fraud, corruption or other infringements, and whereas, given the sensitivity of the information, mismanagement of confidentiality may lead to the unauthorised dissemination of information and a violation of the public interest of the Union and the Member States;

L.  whereas the introduction of public beneficial ownership registries for company trusts, and similar legal arrangements and other transparency measures for investment vehicles, may act as a counter-deterrent against the wrongdoings that whistle-blowers typically address;

M.  whereas safeguarding the confidentiality of whistle-blowers’ identities and of the information they disclose contributes to the creation of more effective channels for reporting fraud, corruption, wrongdoing, misconduct and other serious infringements, and whereas, given the sensitivity of the information, mismanagement of confidentiality may lead to undesired information leaks and a violation of the public interest within the Union; whereas, in the public sector, protecting whistle-blowers can make it easier to detect the misuse of public funds, fraud and other forms of cross-border corruption linked to national or EU interests;

N.  whereas it is regrettable that the existing channels for making formal complaints about misconduct by multinational companies rarely result in any concrete punishments for wrongdoings;

O.  whereas whistle-blowing has proved useful in a number of areas, in both the public and private sectors, such as public health, taxation, the environment, consumer protection, combating corruption and discrimination and upholding social rights;

P.  whereas such cases must be clearly defined, in the light of the duties performed by whistle-blowers, the seriousness of the facts reported or the nature of the dangers revealed;

Q.  whereas it is essential that the line between whistle-blowing and informing should not be crossed; whereas it is not a matter of knowing everything about everyone, but rather of identifying instances of a failure to address threats to democracy;

R.  whereas, in a number of cases, whistle-blowers are subject to retaliatory action, intimidation and pressure with the intention of preventing or deterring them from whistle-blowing or punishing them for having done so, and whereas such pressure is particularly often exercised in the workplace where whistle-blowers who have discovered information in the public interest in the context their working relationship may find themselves in a weaker position vis-à-vis employers;

S.  whereas serious concerns have often been raised that whistle-blowers acting in the public interest can face hostility, harassment, intimidation and exclusion at their place of work, impediments to future employment, loss of livelihood and often also serious threats to their family members and colleagues; whereas fears of retaliation can have a deterrent effect on whistle-blowers, thereby endangering the public interest;

T.  whereas the protection of whistle-blowers should be guaranteed by law and reinforced throughout the EU, in both the public and private sectors, provided they are acting on reasonable grounds; whereas such protection mechanisms should be balanced and guarantee full respect of the fundamental and legal rights of the persons against whom the reports are made; whereas such protection mechanisms should apply to investigative journalists, who remain vulnerable in the context of the disclosure of sensitive information and protect whistle-blowers in the name of the confidentiality of their sources;

U.  whereas the protection of whistle-blowers is not adequately guaranteed in a number of Member States, while many others have introduced advanced programmes to protect them, often, however, lacking in consistency and therefore offering an insufficient degree of protection; whereas the result of that is fragmented protection of whistle-blowers in Europe, which makes it difficult for them to find out their rights, and how to whistle-blow, and creates legal insecurity especially in cross-border scenarios;

V.  whereas the office of the European Ombudsman has a clear competence in relation to the investigation of EU citizens’ complaints about maladministration in the EU institutions, but in itself plays no role in the protection of whistle-blowers;

W.  whereas whistle-blowing is very often not restricted to economic and financial matters; whereas the lack of adequate protection could dissuade potential whistle-blowers from reporting misconduct in order to avoid the risk of reprisal and/or retaliation; whereas the OECD has reported that in 2015, 86 % of companies had a mechanism to report suspected instances of serious corporate misconduct, but over one-third of them did not have a written policy on protecting whistle-blowers from reprisals, or did not know if such a policy existed; whereas several whistle-blowers exposing economic and financial wrongdoings, misconducts or illegal activities have been subject to prosecution; whereas persons who report or disclose information in the public interest often suffer reprisals, as do family members and colleagues, resulting, for example, in the loss of their careers; whereas the European Court of Human Rights has a well-established case law regarding whistle-blowers, but the protection of whistle-blowers should be guaranteed by law; whereas the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union ensures the freedom of expression and the right to good administration;

X.  whereas the protection of whistle-blowers in the European Union should not be limited to European cases alone, but should also apply to international cases;

Y.  whereas workplaces need to cultivate a working environment within which people feel confident in raising concerns about potential wrongdoings such as failings, misconduct, mismanagement, fraud or illegal actions; whereas it is extremely important to foster the right culture that allows people to feel able to raise issues without fear of reprisals that might affect their current and future employment situation;

Z.  whereas in many jurisdictions, and particularly in the private sector, employees are subject to duties of confidentiality with respect to certain information, with the possible consequence that whistle-blowers might encounter disciplinary action for reporting outside of their working relationship;

AA.  whereas, according to an OECD study, more than one third of organisations with a reporting mechanism do not have or do not know of a written policy on protecting whistle-blowers from reprisals;

AB.  whereas EU law already provides for certain rules protecting whistle-blowers from certain forms of retaliation in different areas, the Commission has not yet proposed adequate legislative measures for the effective and uniform protection of whistle-blowers and their rights in the EU;

AC.  whereas all EU institutions have been obliged since 1 January 2014 to introduce internal rules protecting whistle-blowers who are officials of EU institutions, in accordance with Articles 22a, 22b and 22c of the Staff Regulations;

AD.  whereas Parliament has repeatedly called for the horizontal protection of whistle-blowers in the EU;

AE.  whereas, in its resolutions of 23 October 2013 on organised crime, corruption and money laundering: recommendations on action and initiatives to be taken; of 25 November 2015 on tax rulings and other measures similar in nature or effect; of 16 December 2015 on bringing transparency, coordination and convergence to corporate tax policies; and of 14 February 2017 on the role of whistle-blowers in the protection of the EU’s financial interests, Parliament called on the Commission to submit a legislative proposal establishing an effective and comprehensive European whistle-blower protection programme protecting those who report suspected fraud or illegal activity affecting the public interest or the financial interests of the European Union;

AF.  whereas any third-country national recognised as a whistle-blower by the European Union or one of its Member States must be entitled to all the relevant protection measures if, whether in the course of his or her duties or otherwise, he or she has come into the possession of and disclosed information about illegal conduct or acts of espionage, committed either by a third country or by a domestic or multinational company, which are prejudicial to a State, a nation or Union citizens and jeopardise, without their knowledge, the integrity of a government, national security or collective or individual freedoms;

AG.  whereas since 1 July 2014 almost all European institutions and agencies have, as is mandatory, incorporated measures to protect whistle-blowers into their internal rules of procedure, in accordance with Articles 22(b) and (c) of the Staff Regulations;

AH.  whereas international organisations such as the Council of Europe and the OECD have already laid down principles which are now well established and the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights is consistent on that matter;

AI.  whereas the importance of the protection of whistle-blowers has been recognised by all major international instruments concerning corruption, and whistle-blowing standards have been set out by the United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC), Council of Europe Recommendation CM/Rec(2014)7 and the 2009 OECD Anti-Bribery Recommendation;

AJ.  whereas it is vital for a horizontal, comprehensive framework to be established as a matter of urgency, which, by laying down rights and obligations, protects whistle-blowers effectively throughout the Member States of the EU, as well as in the EU institutions, authorities and organisations;

Role of whistle-blowers and the need to protect them

1.  Calls on the Commission, after carrying out an assessment of the appropriate legal base enabling the EU to take further action, to present before the end of this year a horizontal legislative proposal establishing a comprehensive common regulatory framework which will guarantee a high level of protection across the board, in both the public and private sectors as well as in national and European institutions, including relevant national and European bodies, offices and agencies, for whistle-blowers in the EU, taking into account the national context and without limiting the possibility for Member States to take further measures; stresses that there are at present a number of possibilities for legal bases enabling the EU to take action on the matter; calls on the Commission to consider them with the aim of proposing a broad, coherent and effective mechanism; reminds the Commission of the doctrine elaborated by the CJEU, through long-standing case-law, on the concept of implied competences of the Union, which allows the use of several legal bases;

2.  Emphasises the unreasonable and worrying fact that citizens and journalists are being subject to prosecution rather than legal protection when disclosing information in the public interest, including information on suspected misconduct, wrongdoing, fraud or illegal activity, particularly when it comes to conduct violating fundamental principles of the EU, such as tax avoidance, tax evasion and money laundering;

3.  Suggests that international agreements pertaining to financial services, taxation and competition should include provisions on the protection of whistle-blowers;

4.  Highlights the need for legal certainty regarding the protective provisions afforded to whistle-blowers, as a continued lack of clarity and a fragmented approach deters potential whistle-blowers from coming forward; points out, therefore, that relevant EU legislation should establish a clear procedure for properly handling disclosures and effectively protecting whistle-blowers;

5.  Recalls that any future normative framework should take into account the rules, rights and duties that govern and impact on employment; further emphasises that this should be done in consultation with the social partners and in compliance with collective bargaining agreements;

6.  Calls for such legislation to ensure that companies that take fully verified retaliatory action against whistle-blowers may not receive EU funds nor enter into contracts with public bodies;

7.  Encourages the Member States to develop benchmarks and indicators on whistle-blower policies in both the public and private sector;

8.  Calls on the Member States to take into consideration Article 33 of the UN Convention against Corruption, underlining the role of whistle-blowers in the prevention of, and fight against, corruption;

9.  Deplores the fact that only a few Member States have introduced sufficiently advanced whistle-blower protection systems; calls on those Member States which have not yet adopted such systems, or relevant principles in national law, to do so as soon as possible;

10.  Stresses the need for more attention to business ethics in the educational curricula of business studies and related disciplines;

11.  Encourages the Member States and the EU institutions to promote a culture of acknowledgement of the important role played by whistle-blowers in society, including through awareness-raising campaigns; calls on the Commission, in particular, to come up with a comprehensive plan on this issue; considers it necessary to foster an ethical culture in the public sector and in workplaces, so as to highlight the importance of raising employees’ awareness of existing legal frameworks regarding whistle-blowing, in cooperation with trade union organisations;

12.  Urges the Commission to monitor Member States’ provisions on whistle-blowers with a view to facilitating the exchange of best practices, which will help to ensure more efficient protection for whistle-blowers at national level;

13.  Calls on the Commission to provide a comprehensive plan to discourage asset transfers to countries outside the EU where the anonymity of corrupt persons can be maintained;

14.  Takes ‘whistle-blower’ to mean anybody who reports on or reveals information in the public interest, including the European public interest, such as an unlawful or wrongful act, or an act which represents a threat or involves harm, which undermines or endangers the public interest, usually but not only in the context of his or her working relationship, be it in the public or private sector, of a contractual relationship, or of his or her trade union or association activities; stresses that this includes individuals who are outside the traditional employee-employer relationship, such as consultants, contractors, trainees, volunteers, student workers, temporary workers and former employees, who have evidence of such acts with reasonable grounds to believe that the information reported is true;

15.  Considers that individuals who are outside the traditional employee-employer relationship, such as consultants, contractors, trainees, volunteers, student workers, temporary workers and former employees, as well as citizens, should also be given access to reporting channels and appropriate protection when they reveal information on an unlawful or wrongful act or an act which undermines the public interest;

16.  States that a clear solution for whistle-blowers working in EU-registered companies but based outside the EU is needed;

17.  Considers that a breach of the public interest includes, but is not limited to, acts of corruption, criminal offences, breaches of legal obligations, miscarriages of justice, abuse of authority, conflicts of interest, unlawful use of public funds, misuse of powers, illicit financial flows, threats to the environment, health, public safety, national and global security, privacy and personal data protection, tax avoidance, consumers’ rights, attacks on workers’ rights and other social rights and attacks on human rights and fundamental freedoms as well as on the rule of law, and acts to cover up any of these breaches;

18.  Considers that the general public interest should take precedence over the private or economic value of the information revealed, and that it should be possible to reveal information on serious threats to the public interest even when it is legally protected; takes the view, however, that special procedures should apply for information involving respect for professional ethics and classified information related to national security and defence; considers that in such cases, the report should be made to a competent authority;

19.  Stresses that whistle-blowers must always be guaranteed effective protection, even if the disclosures do not concern unlawful acts, if the information is made available with the aim of ensuring that the public interest is not undermined;

20.  Stresses the need for the Member States to comply with the Council of Europe Recommendation on the protection of whistle-blowers;

21.  Stresses that the role of whistle-blowers in revealing serious attacks on the public interest has proved its significance on many occasions over a number of years and that whistle-blowers contribute to democracy, the transparency of politics and the economy and public information, and that they should be recognised as necessary to prevent illegitimate action; underlines that whistle-blowers have proved to be a crucial resource for investigative journalism and for an independent press; points out that guaranteeing the confidentiality of sources is fundamental to freedom of the press; calls on the Member States to ensure that the right of journalists not to reveal a source’s identity is effectively protected; takes the view that journalists are also vulnerable and should therefore benefit from legal protection;

22.  Notes the fact that in recent years some Member States have taken steps to strengthen whistle-blowers’ rights; deplores, however, the fact that whistle-blowers continue to be subject to civil and criminal proceedings in a number of Member States, especially where the existing means to defend, support and protect them are absent, insufficient or ineffective; notes that, in addition, the disparities between Member States lead to legal insecurity, forum shopping and the risk of unequal treatment;

23.  Believes that the lack of adequate whistle-blower protection has a negative impact on the protection of the EU’s financial interest;

24.  Considers that the implementation of comprehensive legal regulations on the protection of whistle-blowers encourages a ‘speak up’ culture and that whistle-blowing should be promoted as an act of good citizenship; urges the Member States and the EU institutions, therefore, to promote the positive role that whistle-blowers play, as well the serious concerns regarding their often vulnerable and defenceless position, in particular through awareness-raising and protection campaigns, communication and training efforts; recommends to the Commission, in particular, that a comprehensive plan on this issue be presented; calls, in this context, for a website to be launched where useful information on the protection of whistle-blowers should be provided, and through which complaints can be submitted; stresses that this website should be easily accessible to the public and should keep their data anonymous;

25.  Calls for action to change the public perception of whistle-blowers, particularly by politicians, employers and the media, by highlighting their positive role as an early-warning mechanism and a deterrent, enabling the detection and prevention of abuses and corruption, and as an accountability mechanism enabling public scrutiny of governments and companies;

26.  Encourages Member States to be proactive in promoting an open culture within the workplace, whether public or private, which enables organisations to operate to high ethical standards, gives employees the confidence to speak up, and therefore enables action to be taken to prevent or remedy any threats or harm;

27.  Encourages Member States to evaluate regularly the effectiveness of the measures they implement, taking account of public opinion on attitudes towards the act of whistle-blowing and whistle-blowers, cross-sectoral surveys of senior managers responsible for receiving and handling reports, and independent research studies on whistle-blowing across workplaces;

28.  Encourages those Member States that have not yet adopted legislation on whistle-blowing to do so in the near future, and calls on the Commission to consider creating a platform for exchanging best practices in this area between Member States and also with third countries;

29.  Highlights the importance of research and the exchange of best practices to encourage better protection for whistle-blowers at European level;

30.  Urges the European Court of Auditors and the Office of the European Ombudsman to publish by the end of 2017: (1) special reports containing statistics and a clear track record of whistle-blowing cases identified in the European institutions and in businesses, associations, organisations and other bodies registered in the Union; (2) the follow-up by the institutions concerned in relation to the cases revealed, on the basis of the current Commission guidelines and rules; (3) the outcome of each investigation opened as a result of the information received from whistle-blowers; (4) the measures envisaged in every case for the whistle-blowers’ protection;

Reporting mechanism

31.  Notes that the absence of clearly identified means of protection and of safe reporting, as well as the potential absence of follow-up, constitutes a barrier to whistle-blowers’ activities, can dissuade them from whistle-blowing and can lead a number of whistle-blowers to remain silent; expresses its concern about retaliation and pressures which whistle-blowers face when they address the wrong person or party within their organisation;

32.  Considers that it is necessary to establish a consistent, credible and reliable system which enables reports to be delivered inside the organisation, to competent authorities and outside the organisation; believes that such a system would facilitate the assessment of the credibility and validity of a report made within its framework;

33.  Calls on the Commission to study a system which would enable whistle-blowing inside and outside the organisation; stresses that, to do so, clear, fair and equitable procedures should be established, ensuring full respect for the fundamental and legal rights of both the whistle-blower and the alleged wrongdoer; believes that employers should be encouraged to introduce internal reporting procedures and that one independent and impartial person or entity should be responsible for collecting reports in each organisation; considers that employee representatives should be involved in the assignment of that role; underlines that the recipient of the alert should give appropriate follow-up to each report received and keep the whistle-blower informed of that follow-up in a reasonable time frame;

34.  Believes that each organisation should set up clear reporting channels allowing the whistle-blower to blow the whistle inside his or her organisation; underlines that each employee should be informed of the relevant reporting procedure, which should guarantee confidentiality and a treatment of the alert within a reasonable time frame; underlines that the whistle-blower must remain able to turn to the appropriate public authorities, non-governmental organisations or the media, especially in the absence of a favourable response from the organisation, or if reporting internally or to the competent authorities would obviously compromise the efficiency of the alert, if the whistle-blower is at risk or urgently needs to report information;

35.  Highlights the right of the public to be informed of any wrongdoing that undermines the public interest; underlines, in that respect, that it should always be possible for a whistle-blower publicly to disclose information on an unlawful or wrongful act or an act which undermines the public interest;

36.  Points out that its resolution of 14 February 2017 on the role of whistle-blowers in the protection of EU’s financial interests also calls for the EU institutions, in co-operation with all relevant national authorities, to introduce and take all necessary measures to protect the confidentiality of information sources, and calls therefore for the creation of a controlled website where complaints can be submitted in a strictly confidential manner;

37.  Believes that reporting outside the organisation, including directly to the public without first going through an internal step, is not grounds to invalidate a report, file a lawsuit or refuse to give protection; believes that this protection should be granted independently of the chosen reporting channel and on grounds of the information revealed and the fact that the whistle-blower had reasonable grounds to believe that it was true;

Protection given to whistle-blowers

38.  Expresses its concerns about the risks run by whistle-blowers at their place of work, in particular the risks of direct or indirect retaliation by the employer and by those working for or acting on behalf of the employer; stresses that retaliation usually takes the form of suspending, slowing down or stopping career progression, or even of dismissal, along with psychological harassment; stresses that retaliation is a barrier to whistle-blowers’ activities; believes that it is necessary to introduce protective measures against retaliation; takes the view that retaliation should be penalised and sanctioned effectively; stresses that, once someone is recognised as a whistle-blower, measures should be taken to protect him or her, to bring to an end any retaliation measures taken against him or her, and to grant the whistle-blower full compensation for the prejudice and damage incurred; is of the opinion that these provisions should be included in the Commission’s proposal for a horizontal whistle-blower protection directive;

39.  Considers that whistle-blowers should have the option of lodging an application for interim relief to prevent retaliation, such as dismissal, until there is an official outcome of any administrative, judicial or other proceedings;

40.  Emphasises that no employment relationship should restrict someone’s right of freedom of expression and that no one should be discriminated against in the event of exercising that right;

41.  Points out that any future normative framework should take into account the rules, rights and duties that govern and impact on employment; emphasises, furthermore, that this should be done with the involvement of the social partners and in compliance with collective bargaining agreements;

42.  Stresses that whistle-blowers and their family members, as well as anyone who assists them and whose lives or safety are in jeopardy, must be entitled to proper and effective protection of their physical, moral and social integrity and their livelihoods by being granted the highest possible level of confidentiality;

43.  Emphasises that protection should also be provided if a whistle-blower draws attention to conduct involving a Member State;

44.  Notes that investigative journalists and members of the independent press pursue a profession that is often solitary and in the course of which they face many kinds of pressure, and therefore that it is essential they be protected against all attempts at intimidation;

45.  Suggests that interim relief pending the outcome of civil proceedings should be available for persons who have been the victim of retaliation for having made a public interest report or disclosure, particularly in cases of loss of employment;

46.  Condemns the practice of gagging orders, which involve filing or threatening to file lawsuits against the whistle-blower not in an effort to seek justice but in an effort to bring about self-censorship or financial, mental or psychological exhaustion; believes that such abuse of process should be subject to criminal penalties and sanctions;

47.  Points out the risk that whistle-blowers run of having legal and civil proceedings brought against them; stresses that they are often the weaker party in trials; considers, therefore, that in the case of alleged retaliatory actions taken against the whistle-blower, the employer shall provide evidence that these actions are unrelated to the report made by the whistle-blower; considers that the protection of the whistle-blower should be granted on the basis of the information exposed and not on the intention of the whistle-blower; stresses, however, that the whistle-blower must have reported information that he or she believed to be true; takes the view that confidentiality should be guaranteed throughout the proceedings and that the identity of the whistle-blower shall not be revealed without his or her consent; underlines that a breach of the confidentiality of identity without the whistle-blower’s consent should be subject to criminal penalties and sanctions;

48.  Takes the view that whistle-blowers should not be liable for prosecution, civil legal action or administrative or disciplinary penalties because they have made a report;

49.   Believes that the option to report anonymously could encourage whistle-blowers to share information which they would not share otherwise; stresses, in that regard, that clearly regulated means of reporting anonymously, to the national or European independent body responsible for collecting reports, verifying their credibility, following up on the response given and providing guidance to whistle-blowers, including in the digital environment, should be introduced, setting out exactly the cases in which the means of reporting anonymously apply; stresses that the identity of the whistle-blower and any information allowing his or her identification should not be revealed without his or her consent; considers that any breach of anonymity should be subject to sanctions;

50.  Stresses that nobody should lose the benefit of protection on the sole grounds that he or she has misjudged the facts or that the perceived threat to the public interest did not materialise, provided that, at the time of reporting, he or she had reasonable grounds to believe them to be true; recalls that, in the event of false accusations, those responsible should be held accountable and not benefit from the protection granted to whistle-blowers; stresses that any person who is prejudiced, whether directly or indirectly, by the reporting or disclosure of inaccurate or misleading information should be afforded the right to seek effective remedies against malicious or abusive reporting;

51.  Recalls the importance of devising instruments to ban any form of retaliation, whether this is passive dismissal or passive measures; urges the Member States to refrain from criminalising the actions of whistle-blowers in disclosing information on unlawful or wrongful acts or acts which undermine or endanger the public interest;

52.  Recalls that in the meantime, current EU law must be applied properly by both the EU institutions and the Member States, and that it should be interpreted in such a way as to offer whistle-blowers acting in the public interest the best possible protection; stresses that whistle-blower protection has already been recognised as an important mechanism for ensuring the effective application of EU legislation; calls, therefore, on the Member States to refrain from criminalising the actions of whistle-blowers who disclose information in the public interest;

Supporting whistle-blowers

53.  Stresses the role that public authorities, trade unions and civil society organisations play in supporting and helping whistle-blowers in their dealings within their organisation;

54.  Stresses that, in addition to the professional risks, whistle-blowers, as well as people who assist them, also face personal, psychological, social and financial risks; believes that, where applicable, psychological support should be provided, that specialised legal aid should be given to whistle-blowers who ask for it and lack sufficient resources, that social and financial aid should be given to those who express a duly justified need for it, and as a protective measure if civil or judicial proceedings are brought against a whistle-blower, in accordance with national law and practices; adds that compensation should be granted, irrespective of the nature of the damage suffered by the whistle-blower as a result of making a report;

55.  Refers, in this respect, to the fact that the European Ombudsman has indicated in Parliament that she is willing to examine the possibility of creating such a body within the Ombudsman’s Office, and urges the Commission to look into the feasibility of entrusting the European Ombudsman, which already has a competence to investigate complaints of malpractices within the EU institutions, with these tasks;

56.  Calls on Member States and EU institutions, in cooperation with all relevant authorities, to introduce and take all possible necessary measures to protect the confidentiality of the information sources in order to prevent any discriminatory actions or threats, as well as to establish transparent channels for information disclosure, to set up independent national and EU authorities to protect whistle-blowers, and to consider providing those authorities with specific support funds; calls also for the establishment of a centralised European authority for the effective protection of whistle-blowers and people who assist their acts based on the model of national privacy watchdogs;

57.  Calls on the Commission, in order for these measures to be effective, to develop instruments focusing on providing protection against unjustified legal prosecutions, economic sanctions and discrimination;

58.  Calls on the Member States to establish independent bodies, with sufficient budgetary resources, adequate competence and appropriate specialists, responsible for collecting reports, verifying their credibility, following up on the response given and providing guidance to whistle-blowers, particularly in the absence of a positive response from their organisation, as well as orienting them towards appropriate financial help, especially in cross-border situations or in cases directly involving Member States or the EU institutions; suggests that the latter publish an annual report on the alerts received and their treatment, while respecting the confidentiality requirement of potentially ongoing investigations;

59.  Stresses that consideration should be given to making access to information and confidential advice free of charge for individuals contemplating making a public interest report or disclosure on unlawful or wrongful acts which undermine or endanger the public interest; notes that structures able to provide such information and advice should be identified and their details made available to the general public;

60.  Emphasises that, in addition to all the protection measures afforded to whistle-blowers in general, these whistle-blowers in particular must be guaranteed proper reception arrangements, accommodation and safety in a Member State which does not have an extradition agreement with the country which committed the acts in question; in cases where the European Union has an extradition agreement with the third country involved, calls on the Commission, pursuant to Article 67(2) TFEU on European asylum policy, to use its powers to take all the measures required to protect these whistle-blowers, who are particular vulnerable to severe reprisals in the country whose illegal or fraudulent practices they brought to public attention;

61.  Calls on the Commission to propose the establishment of a similar body at EU level, with sufficient budgetary resources, adequate competence and appropriate specialists, responsible for coordinating Member State activities, particularly in cross-border cases; believes that that European body should also be able to collect reports, verify their credibility, issue binding recommendations and guide whistle-blowers when the response given by the Member State or national bodies is obviously not appropriate; suggests that the latter publish an annual report on the alerts received and their treatment, while respecting the confidentiality requirement of potentially ongoing investigations; considers that the European Ombudsman’s mandate could be extended to serve that purpose;

62.  Believes that, once an alert has been recognised as serious, it should lead to proper investigation and be followed by appropriate measures; underlines that, during the investigation, the whistle-blower should be allowed to clarify his or her complaint and provide additional information or evidence;

63.  Encourages the Member States to develop data, benchmarks and indicators on whistle-blower policies in the public and private sectors;

64.  Calls on the EU institutions to address the Ombudsman’s own initiative report of 24 July 2014, in compliance with Article 22(c) of the new Staff Regulations, inviting all EU bodies to adopt ethical alert mechanisms and whistle-blowing legal frameworks directly based on the internal rules of the Ombudsman’s office; reiterates its determination to take such action;

65.  Considers that whistle-blowers should also have the right to review and comment on the outcome of the investigation related to their disclosure;

66.  Calls on the EU institutions and other EU bodies to lead by example by applying, without delay, the European Ombudsman’s guidelines; calls on the Commission to implement in full, both for itself and for EU agencies, its own guidelines protecting whistle-blowers in accordance with its 2012 staff regulations; calls on the Commission effectively to cooperate and coordinate efforts with other institutions, including the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, to protect whistle-blowers;

67.  Points to the need for a better system for reporting corporate malpractices, one that complements and seeks to improve the efficiency of the current National Contact Points for the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises;

68.  Stresses that investigations into the issues raised by whistle-blowers should be conducted independently and within the shortest time frame possible, protecting too the rights of individuals potentially implicated by a disclosure; underlines that both the whistle-blower and any person implicated by a disclosure should be able to provide additional arguments and evidence throughout the investigation, and that they should be kept informed of the handling of the disclosure;

69.  Welcomes the fact that the Commission has finally introduced a channel for whistle-blowers to report or disclose information on competition and cartel agreements, but stresses the need for simplifying procedures and insists that there should not be an excessive number of channels;

o
o   o

70.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission.

(1) Texts adopted of that date, P8_TA(2015)0408.
(2) Texts adopted of that date, P8_TA(2016)0310.
(3) OJ C 208, 10.6.2016, p. 89.
(4) Texts adopted of that date, P8_TA(2015)0457.
(5) Texts adopted of that date, P8_TA(2017)0022.
(6) https://www.unodc.org/documents/treaties/UNCAC/Publications/Convention/08-50027_F.pdf
(7) See, for example, its resolution of 6 July 2016 on tax rulings and other measures similar in nature or effect and its resolution of 16 December 2015 with recommendations to the Commission on bringing transparency, coordination and convergence to corporate tax policies in the Union.


Minimum income policies as a tool for fighting poverty
PDF 229kWORD 66k
European Parliament resolution of 24 October 2017 on minimum income policies as a tool for fighting poverty (2016/2270(INI))
P8_TA(2017)0403A8-0292/2017

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to Article 5(3) of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and Articles 4, 9, 14, 19, 151 and 153 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU),

–  having regard to the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, as reconfirmed by the 1993 World Conference on Human Rights, and in particular Articles 3, 23 and 25 thereof,

–  having regard to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, and notably its provisions relating to social rights, in particular Articles 34, 35 and 36, which specifically define the right to social and housing assistance, the right to a high level of human health protection, and the right of access to services of general economic interest,

–  having regard to the European Social Charter and in particular Articles 1, 4, 6, 12, 14, 17, 19, 30 and 31 thereof,

–  having regard to International Labour Organization (ILO) Conventions Nos 29 and 105 on the abolition of forced labour, ILO Convention No 102 on social security, and ILO Recommendation No 202 on social protection floors,

–  having regard to the ILO’s Decent Work Agenda and Global Jobs Pact, as adopted by a worldwide consensus at the International Labour Conference on 19 June 2009,

–  having regard to the EPSCO Council conclusions of June 2013, ‘Towards social investment for growth and jobs’,

–  having regard to Council Recommendation 92/441/EEC of 24 June 1992 on common criteria concerning sufficient resources and social assistance in social protection systems(1) (recommendation on minimum income),

–  having regard to Council Recommendation 92/442/EEC of 27 July 1992 on the convergence of social protection objectives and policies(2),

–  having regard to Commission Recommendation 2013/112/EU of 20 February 2013 entitled ‘Investing in Children: breaking the cycle of disadvantage’(3),

–  having regard to the Commission communication of 20 February 2013 entitled ‘Towards Social Investment for Growth and Cohesion – including implementing the European Social Fund 2014-2020’ (COM(2013)0083) and its accompanying document SWD(2013)0038,

–  having regard to Commission Recommendation 2008/867/EC of 3 October 2008 on the active inclusion of people excluded from the labour market(4),

–  having regard to the Commission communication of 3 March 2010 entitled ‘Europe 2020: a strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth’ (COM(2010)2020),

–  having regard to the Commission proposal of 2 March 2015 for a Council decision on guidelines for the employment policies of the Member States (COM(2015)0098),

–  having regard to its resolution of 6 May 2009 on the renewed social agenda(5),

–  having regard to its resolution of 20 October 2010 on the role of minimum income in combating poverty and promoting an inclusive society in Europe(6),

–  having regard to its resolution of 20 November 2012 entitled ‘Social Investment Pact – as a response to the crisis’(7),

–  having regard to its resolution of 24 November 2015 on reducing inequalities with a special focus on child poverty(8),

–  having regard to its resolution of 14 April 2016 on meeting the antipoverty target in the light of increasing household costs(9),

–  having regard to its resolution of 26 May 2016 entitled ‘Poverty: a gender perspective’(10),

–  having regard to its resolution of 15 September 2016 on the proposal for a Council decision on guidelines for the employment policies of the Member States(11),

–  having regard to its resolution of 19 January 2017 on a European Pillar of Social Rights(12),

–  having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 15 June 2011 entitled ‘The European Platform against Poverty and Social Exclusion – a European framework for social and territorial cohesion’,

–  having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 10 December 2013 on ‘European minimum income and poverty indicators’,

–  having regard to the study entitled ‘Towards adequate and accessible minimum income schemes in Europe’, published in 2015 by the European Minimum Income Network (EMIN),

–  having regard to the Eurofound report of 2015 entitled ‘Access to social benefits: reducing non-take-up’,

–  having regard to the Eurofound report of 2017 on ‘Income inequalities and employment patterns in Europe before and after the Great Recession’,

–  having regard to the study by the European Parliament’s Policy Department A entitled ‘Minimum Income Policies in EU Member States’, published in final form in April 2017,

–  having regard to the report entitled ‘Minimum Income Schemes in Europe – A study of national policies 2015’, drawn up for the Commission by the European Social Policy Network (ESPN) in 2016,

–  having regard to the question for oral answer O-000087/2016 – B8-0710/2016 of 15 June 2016 tabled by its Committee on Employment and Social Affairs,

–  having regard to the question for written answer P-001004/2016 of 2 February 2016,

–  having regard to its recommendation to the Council of 7 July 2016 on the 71st session of the United Nations General Assembly(13),

–  having regard to the Schuman Declaration of 9 May 1950, which called for ‘the equalisation and improvement of the living conditions of workers’;

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

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs and the opinion of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (A8-0292/2017),

A.  whereas poverty and social exclusion, the causes and duration of which are not dependent on the will of those afflicted by them, are infringements of human dignity and of fundamental human rights; whereas the EU and its Member States committed in 2010 to reducing the number of persons at risk of poverty and social exclusion by 20 million by 2020; whereas poverty and social exclusion are not only matters of individual responsibility and need to be addressed in a collective manner;

B.  whereas Europe is one of the wealthiest regions in the world, although recent data on income poverty have highlighted the rise in poverty and severe material deprivation in Europe and growing inequalities between Member States;

C.  whereas a buoyant economy with low unemployment is still the most effective tool for fighting poverty;

D.  whereas income poverty is only a part of the overall concept of poverty, and therefore poverty does not refer only to material resources, but also to social resources, notably education, health and access to services;

E.  whereas the term ‘relative poverty’ says nothing about real need, but, rather, merely describes a person’s income relative to that of others;

F.  whereas according to the methodology developed by Eurostat, the at-risk-of-poverty threshold is set at 60 % of national median equivalised disposable income (per household, after social transfers); whereas given the existing divergences between Member States and different national social policies, this percentage should be considered together with other indicators such as reference budgets; whereas income is an indirect indicator of living standards and a reference budget reflects the diversity of consumption patterns and the cost of living across Member States;

G.  whereas there must be no confusion between ‘income differentials’ and ‘poverty’;

H.  whereas, according to the Commission(14), 119 million people in the EU – some 25 % of the total population – are at risk of poverty and social exclusion after social benefits; whereas in some Member States this fact is accompanied by persistently high unemployment rates, and whereas this situation particularly affects young people, for whom the figures are even more alarming; whereas even though numbers are slightly declining, there are still more people at risk of poverty than in 2008; whereas the EU and the Member States are far from reaching the Europe 2020 target on poverty and social exclusion, since the level remains above that target;

I.  whereas available data suggest that certain groups of people, such as children, women, the unemployed, single-parent households, and persons with disabilities, are especially vulnerable to poverty, deprivation and social exclusion;

J.  whereas poverty especially hits families;

K.  whereas reconciling family and working life, especially for single parents, is of the utmost importance for being able to escape poverty;

L.  whereas account should be taken of the need to incorporate action to prevent and combat poverty and social exclusion in all relevant policy areas, ensuring universal access to public services, decent jobs and an income allowing people to live with dignity;

M.  whereas, according to the Commission, high unemployment, poverty and inequality remain key concerns in some Member States; whereas broad income inequalities are not only detrimental to social cohesion, but they also hamper sustainable economic growth, as has been noted by Commissioner Thyssen; whereas, according to Eurofound, the impact of the crisis has been generally more acute among lower-income individuals, pushing income inequalities upwards within European societies(15);

N.  whereas homelessness represents the most extreme form of poverty and deprivation and has increased in recent years in virtually all Member States, overall in those worst hit by the economic and financial crisis; whereas, according to the European Federation of National Organisations working with the Homeless (FEANTSA), around 4 million people across the EU experience homelessness every year, over 10,5 million households suffer severe housing deprivation and 22,3 million households face a housing cost overburden, indicating that they spend more than 40 % of disposable income on housing;

O.  whereas the current situation requires measures to promote national minimum income schemes so that all those with insufficient incomes and meeting specific conditions for eligibility are ensured decent living conditions, while also improving social and labour market inclusion and guaranteeing equal opportunities in enjoying fundamental rights; whereas education, redistributive social transfers and benefits, fair tax policy and a sound employment policy are important factors for mitigating income inequalities, lowering the unemployment rate and cutting poverty; whereas having a decent job would protect someone from the risk of poverty and could be considered as a major indispensable means of social integration;

P.  whereas according to an overview carried out by Eurofound, many people in the EU do not receive the benefits they are entitled to, including in-work benefits, for example because of the complexity of benefit systems or application procedures, or because they are not aware of their entitlements;

Q.  whereas the concept of a minimum income must not be confused with the concept of a minimum wage, which is fixed by collective agreement or by legislation at national level;

R.  whereas the setting of wages is a Member State competence;

S.  whereas introducing and strengthening adequate minimum income schemes in all Member States, with adequate budgetary, human and material resources, together with active employment policies for people able to work, is an important and effective measure for combating poverty and inequality, helping ensure economic and territorial cohesion, protecting the fundamental rights of individuals, ensuring a balance between economic and social objectives and supporting social integration and access to the labour market;

T.  whereas the provision and management of social security systems is a Member State competence, which the Union coordinates but does not harmonise;

U.  whereas, according to the European Social Observatory (OSE), some forms of income support already exist in 26 Member States(16);

V.  whereas there are many differences between Member States in the treatment of minimum income policies, since the right to a dignified life is not considered as a universal and subjective right in all Member States; whereas there exist high levels of non-take-up, as well as lack of coordination between income support, active labour market policies and social services; whereas in only a few cases are minimum income schemes able to lift people out of poverty;

W.  whereas some of the most vulnerable people, such as the homeless, experience difficulties in accessing minimum income schemes;

X.  whereas guaranteeing the provision of an adequate minimum income for those who lack the requisite resources to achieve a decent standard of living, as well as participation in labour market (re)integration measures and safeguarding access to employment and the motivation to seek work, are provisions that are included under the European Pillar of Social Rights(17); whereas at the high-level conference held in Brussels on 23 January 2017, following the public consultation on this issue, the President of the Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, reiterated that such measures should be adopted by all Member States;

Y.  whereas, according to Eurostat, in 2015 the employment rate of EU citizens aged from 20 to 64 stood at 70.1 % and was far from the goal of 75 % set under the Europe 2020 strategy;

Z.  whereas the Commission proposal of 2 March 2015 on guidelines for the employment policies of the Member States reiterates the importance of income support for combating poverty (Guideline 8);

AA.  whereas well-designed, adequate and widely available income support systems do not prevent or discourage a return to the labour market and also help boost internal demand;

AB.  whereas the Commission’s Recommendation of 3 October 2008 on active inclusion rightly recognises that apart from facilitating access to quality employment for those who can work, active inclusion policies should also ‘provide resources which are sufficient to live in dignity, together with support for social participation, for those who cannot’;

AC.  whereas on 5 October 2015 the Council adopted conclusions on pension adequacy, considering it essential that public pension or other social protection schemes contain appropriate safeguards for people whose employment opportunities do or did not allow them to build up sufficient pension entitlements, and that such safeguards should notably include minimum pensions or other minimum income provisions for older people;

AD.  whereas in Council Recommendation 92/441/EEC, the Council called on Member States to recognise the basic right of all people to receive social assistance and have sufficient resources to be able to live in a dignified manner; whereas in Council Recommendation 92/442/EEC of 27 July 1992 Member States are urged to base their own social protection systems on those principles;

AE.  whereas in its conclusions of 17 December 1999, the Council endorsed promoting social inclusion as one of the objectives with a view to modernising and improving social protection;

AF.  whereas the Recommendation on active inclusion identifies adequate income support as one of the three equally important strands of an active inclusion strategy and stresses that it must be accompanied by access to quality services and by inclusive labour markets; whereas, likewise, promoting social inclusion requires coordinated measures that address the individual and his or her dependants, accompanied by action to promote stable work;

AG.  whereas in many countries key barriers to developing effective links between the different strands of active inclusion include lack of capacity, skills and resources in public employment services and social assistance institutions, lack of coordination and cooperation between services, and a tendency to prioritise different groups in need of support who may be easier to reintegrate into the labour market(18);

AH.  whereas the Commission’s Social Investment Package of 2013 once again reiterated the importance of an active inclusion approach, and within this stressed the importance of adequate minimum income support; whereas it was stated that the adequacy of existing national minimum income schemes can be improved to ensure that the level is high enough for a decent life; whereas it was mentioned that ‘the Commission will, as part of the European Semester, monitor the adequacy of income support and use for this purpose reference budgets once these have been developed together with the Member States’;

AI.  whereas ILO Recommendation No 202 on social protection floors states that countries should ‘establish as quickly as possible and maintain their social protection floors comprising basic social security guarantees’, and further states: ‘The guarantees should ensure at a minimum that, over the life cycle, all in need have access to essential health care and to basic income security which together secure effective access to goods and services’;

AJ.  whereas the Council has recognised the necessity of active inclusion with adequate income support and the importance of an integrated life-cycle approach for tackling poverty(19);

AK.  whereas the long-term unemployed, who at the end of 2015 accounted for 48,1 % of the unemployed total in the EU, equivalent to 10,9 million people, find it much harder to return to the labour market;

AL.  whereas in many instances, as a result of bringing up children and the periods of time spent doing so, there are severe losses of income and continuing financial drawbacks (‘family pay gap’);

AM.  whereas mothers and fathers bringing up children are doing real work that must be recognised as such;

AN.  whereas, at the end of 2015 5,1 % of inactive individuals in the EU consisted of discouraged people who would have wanted to work but had stopped looking for employment, and whereas these people are not systematically counted in the unemployment figures;

AO.  whereas unemployment leads to a fast and steady deterioration of workers’ living conditions and of their mental and emotional state, which compromises their prospects of updating their skills and, consequently, the possibility of (re)integration in the labour market;

AP.  whereas certain public employment programmes may be an effective tool that can work along with minimum income schemes as a means to the social and vocational inclusion of particular categories, such as unemployed young people, the long-term unemployed and other vulnerable groups; whereas such programmes could be effective in contexts and depressed geographic areas where retraining is required; whereas people who keep themselves busy working under a public employment programme will also find it easier to find new jobs; whereas such programmes need to provide a decent wage and include a personalised itinerary, and should lead to decent work;

AQ.  whereas the Council conclusions on the 2017 Annual Growth Survey and the Joint Employment Report adopted by the EPSCO Council on 3 March 2017(20) both call on Member States to ensure that social protection systems provide adequate income support and that reforms continue to focus on, among other things, providing adequate income support and high-quality activation and enabling services;

AR.  whereas vocational training, in particular through work-related training schemes, provides the necessary skills for pursuing a professional activity and building a professional network, thus helping achieve sustainable labour market integration and reducing the risk of poverty;

AS.  whereas minimum income schemes represent a very small percentage of government social spending, while providing a huge return on investment, and the cost of non-investment has enormous immediate impacts for the individuals concerned and long-term costs for society;

AT.  whereas minimum income schemes are good for the whole of society, as they are indispensable for achieving more equal societies and more equal societies perform better on many social and economic indicators;

AU.  whereas minimum income schemes are an effective form of economic stimulus package, as the money is used to address pressing needs and immediately re-enters the real economy;

AV.  whereas the right to an adequate standard of living is recognised in Article 25 of the UN Universal Declaration on Human Rights, and refers to the extent to which the level of benefit provides people with sufficient resources to ensure ‘a standard of living adequate for their health and well-being’; whereas coverage refers to the extent to which all those in need of support are covered by the eligibility conditions pertaining to a minimum income scheme; whereas take-up refers to the extent to which those who are eligible to receive a minimum income benefit actually do receive it;

AW.  whereas often the lack of adequate payments coupled with limited coverage and poor take-up, due inter alia to poor administration, inadequate access to information, excessive bureaucracy and stigmatisation, means that the payments concerned fall very far short of ensuring a decent life for the most vulnerable in society(21);

AX.  whereas a number of Member States have to deal with severe budget deficits and increased debt levels and have consequently tightened their social spending, and this has affected their public health, education, social security and protection and housing systems, and, in particular, access to the related services and the adequacy, availability and quality of those services, resulting in a negative impact especially on the most deprived members of society in those Member States;

AY.  whereas minimum income schemes can act as automatic macroeconomic stabilisers in response to economic shocks;

AZ.  whereas the effectiveness of minimum income schemes in terms of alleviating poverty, fostering labour market integration, especially for the young, and acting as automatic stabilisers varies significantly between Member States;

BA.  whereas minimum income policies act as an automatic stabiliser; whereas the recession has been less severe in countries which have solid systems to support disposable household income;

BB.  whereas tax avoidance and tax evasion create an unlevel playing field within the EU and are depriving Member States of large volumes of revenue that would otherwise contribute to sufficient funding for robust social and public welfare policies, as well as reducing government revenue when such revenue could finance better conditions for economic growth, higher incomes and social policies; whereas this phenomenon constitutes a serious problem for the EU;

BC.  whereas a number of studies have shown how poverty negatively affects economic growth(22);

BD.  whereas some Member States are launching pilot projects for testing basic income policies, among them Finland, where a randomly chosen group of 2 000 unemployed people will receive an unconditional sum of EUR 560 per month, which should produce an adequate incentive to accept temporary or part-time work;

BE.  whereas implementing basic income schemes is being discussed in several Member States;

Minimum income schemes

1.  Calls on all Member States to introduce adequate minimum income schemes, accompanied by back-to-work support measures for those who can work and education and training programmes adapted to the personal and family situation of the beneficiary, in order to support households with inadequate income and enable them to have a decent standard of living; stresses that this minimum income should be the last social protection network and should consist of adequate financial support in addition to a guaranteed access to quality services and to active labour policies, as an effective way to combat poverty and ensure a decent existence for all those who lack sufficient resources; highlights in this regard that the right to social assistance is a fundamental right and that adequate minimum income schemes help people to live a life in dignity, support their full participation in society and ensure their autonomy across the life cycle;

2.  Takes the view that promoting inclusive and poverty-free societies must be based on enhancing the status of work with labour rights based on collective bargaining and providing quality public health, social security and education services that break the cycles of exclusion and promote development;

3.  Highlights the importance of adequate public funding to finance minimum income schemes; calls on the Commission to specifically monitor the use of the 20 % of the total allocation of the ESF devoted to fighting poverty and social exclusion, and also to examine, in the forthcoming review of the Common Provisions Regulation for the Structural Funds (Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013), and in particular in the framework of the European Social Fund and the EU Programme for Employment and Social Innovation (EaSI), the funding possibilities for helping every Member State establish a minimum income scheme where it does not exist or improve the functioning and effectiveness of existing systems;

4.  Acknowledged that it is difficult for Member States to go from no or low-quality minimum income schemes to high-level schemes; requests, therefore, that Member States work towards the progressive realisation of adequate minimum income schemes, addressing the issues of adequacy, coverage and take-up of the schemes;

5.  Emphasises that the establishment of minimum income schemes can both mitigate inequalities and the social impact of the crisis and have a counter-cyclical impact by providing resources to improve demand in the internal market;

6.  Stresses that it is vital for all those in need to have access to sufficient minimum income schemes to be able to meet their basic requirements, including for the most excluded such as homeless people; considers that adequate minimum income is an income that is indispensable for those in need to live a life in dignity, and that it should be considered in conjunction with the right to access to universal public and social services; believes that minimum income schemes have to ensure the non-perpetuation of social dependency and facilitate inclusion in society; recalls that the Recommendation on active inclusion recognises the need for an integrated strategy in the implementation of the three social inclusion strands (adequate income support, inclusive labour markets and access to quality services);

7.  Highlights the importance of the automatic stabilisation dimension of welfare systems for the absorption of social shock waves caused by external effects such as recessions; calls, therefore, on the Member States, in view of ILO Recommendation No 202, which defines social protection floors, to ensure and increase investment in social protection systems in order to guarantee their performance in tackling and preventing poverty and inequalities while ensuring their sustainability;

8.  Points up – in connection with the minimum income debate – the particular position of families and single parents and the particular extent to which they are affected;

9.  Highlights that people should be enabled to participate fully in society and the economy, and that this right should be fully recognised and made visible in Union policymaking, by ensuring high-quality universal social protection systems which include within them effective and adequate minimum income schemes;

10.  Considers that social protection, including pensions and services such as healthcare, childcare and long-term care, remains essential for balanced and inclusive growth, also contributing to a longer working life, creating employment and reducing inequalities; calls, therefore, on the Commission and the Member States to boost policies that ensure sufficiency, adequacy and efficiency, as well as the quality of social protection systems throughout the life-cycle of a person, thus guaranteeing a decent life, fighting inequalities and boosting inclusion, with the aim of eradicating poverty, especially for those excluded from the labour market and the most vulnerable groups;

11.  Emphasises that an adequate income across the life-cycle is fundamental for helping people with insufficient levels of income to achieve a decent life;

12.  Emphasises that adequate minimum income schemes, as an active inclusion tool, promote social participation and inclusion;

13.  Recalls that one of the main goals of the Europe 2020 strategy is reducing the number of those affected by poverty and social exclusion by at least 20 million, and that still more efforts are needed to reach that goal; believes that minimum income schemes can be a helpful way to reach this objective;

14.  Stresses that decent jobs are the best way to fight poverty and social exclusion; recalls in this context the importance of boosting growth, investment and job creation;

15.  Regrets that some Member States appear to disregard Council Recommendation 92/441/EEC, which recognises the ‘basic right of a person to sufficient resources and social assistance to live in a manner compatible with human dignity’;

16.  Points out that, while most Member States have national minimum income schemes, several of these schemes do not provide adequate income support for all the people that need them(23); calls on all Member States to provide for the introduction and, if necessary, upgrading of guaranteed minimum income schemes so as to help prevent poverty and foster social inclusion;

17.  Stresses that the introduction of a national minimum income scheme should not lower the protection afforded by regional minimum income schemes;

18.  Stresses the importance of the European Semester in encouraging Member States which do not yet have minimum income schemes to introduce systems of adequate income support;

19.  Notes that in some Member States the entitlement to minimum income benefits is subject to participation in active labour market measures; highlights in this regard the important role of the EU as a medium that enables Member States to exchange best practice;

20.  Reiterates its position, as expressed in its resolution of 20 October 2010, on the role of minimum income in combating poverty and promoting an inclusive society in Europe;

21.  Takes due note of the European Economic and Social Committee’s opinion on a framework directive on adequate minimum income in the European Union, which should lay down common rules and indicators, provide methods for monitoring its implementation and improve dialogue between the individuals concerned, the Member States and the EU institutions; calls on the Commission and the Member States, in this regard, to evaluate the manner and the means of providing an adequate minimum income in all Member States;

22.  Welcomes the Commission statement that the European Semester now has a stronger focus on employment and social performance, but believes more efforts are necessary to reach this goal and to assure global coherence, especially through the promotion of social investment; calls on the Commission to regularly monitor and assess the progress made by Member States with regard to the Country Specific Recommendations (CSRs) in delivering accessible, affordable and quality services, as well as implementing adequate and efficient minimum income schemes;

23.  Stresses the importance of the European Semester in monitoring the adequacy of existing minimum income schemes and their impact on reducing poverty, specifically through the CSRs, but also underlines the importance of the joint employment report and the Annual Growth Survey;

24.  Stresses that minimum income schemes should ensure an income that is above the poverty line, prevent severe material deprivation, and lift households out of such situations, and should be accompanied by the provision of public services such as health, education and childcare;

25.  Considers that minimum income schemes should be embedded in a strategic approach towards social inclusion and integration, involving both general policies and targeted measures – in terms of housing, healthcare, education and training, social services and other services of general interest – helping people to overcome poverty, while providing personalised support, as well as assistance in gaining access to the labour market for those who can work; believes that the real objective of minimum income schemes should be not simply to assist but above all to accompany the beneficiaries in moving from situations of social exclusion to an active life, thus avoiding long-term dependency;

26.  Calls on the Member States to improve coordination and integrated planning between administrations and services dealing with the different strands of active inclusion, developing a single point of contact for clients, and enhancing the capacity of and resources available to services so as to increase access to them and improve their quality;

27.  Considers it crucial to guarantee an adequate income also for people in vulnerable situations for whom a return to work is not possible or no longer an option, as recognised by the Recommendation on active inclusion;

28.  Calls for significant and verified progress to be made on the adequacy of minimum income schemes, so as to reduce poverty and social exclusion, in particular among the most vulnerable in society, and help guarantee their right to a life of dignity;

29.  Notes with concern that in many Member States, for example, the costs of long-term care exceed even the average pension income; stresses the importance of taking into account the specific needs and living costs of different age groups;

30.  Stresses the importance of defining appropriate eligibility criteria adapted to the socio-economic situation in the Member States, to make it possible to benefit from an adequate minimum income scheme; believes that these criteria should include not being a beneficiary of an unemployment benefit, or the circumstance that being a beneficiary is insufficient to avoid poverty and social exclusion, and should also take account of the number of children and other dependents; emphasises nevertheless that these criteria should not create administrative barriers for accessing minimum income schemes for people who are already in a highly vulnerable situation (e.g. a fixed address should not be required for homeless people);

31.  Reiterates the importance of equal access to minimum income schemes, with no discrimination on grounds of ethnicity, gender, educational level, nationality, sexual orientation, religion, disability, age, political opinions or socio-economic background;

32.  Is concerned at the high rate of non-take-up among people who are entitled to minimum income; considers that non-take-up is one of the major barriers to the social inclusion of those concerned; requests the Commission and the Social Protection Committee to further research the problem of non-take-up and to develop recommendations and guidelines to tackle this problem; calls on the Member States to combat non-take-up, including by raising public awareness about the existence of minimum income schemes, providing appropriate guidance on accessing those schemes, and improving their administrative organisation;

33.  Stresses the need for Member States to take specific action to determine a minimum income threshold, based on relevant indicators including reference budgets, in order to safeguard economic and social cohesion and reduce the risk of poverty in all Member States; takes the view that this information should be presented annually on the International Day for the Eradication of Poverty (17 October);

34.  Notes that many Member States already use the Minimum Income Protection Indicators (MIPI); calls for the use of MIPI data by all Member States, which will also allow better comparison between national systems;

35.  Believes that minimum income should be considered temporary and should always be accompanied by active policies of inclusion in the labour market;

36.  Argues that minimum income schemes are transitional instruments for reducing and fighting poverty, social exclusion and inequality, and that they should be seen as a social investment; notes the counter-cyclical effects of minimum income schemes;

37.  Emphasises the need, when minimum income levels are determined, for due account to be taken of the number of dependants, in particular children or people with high dependence, in order to break the vicious circle of poverty, in particular child poverty; calls on the Commission and the Member States to ensure the swift implementation of the 2013 recommendation ‘Investing in children: breaking the cycle of disadvantage’; takes the view, furthermore, that the Commission should draw up an annual report on progress in the fight against child poverty and the implementation of the recommendation, with the help of the indicators included therein;

38.  Points out that reference budgets can help set the level of minimum income necessary to meet people’s fundamental needs, including also non-monetary aspects, such as access to education and lifelong learning, decent housing, quality healthcare services, social activities and civic participation, while taking into account household composition and ages, as well as the economic and social context of each Member State; recalls that the Commission, in its Social Investment Package communication, urges Member States to set reference budgets to help design efficient and adequate income support that takes into account social needs identified at local, regional and national level in order to improve territorial cohesion; calls, in addition, for the use of reference budgets as a tool to assess the adequacy of minimum income schemes provided by Member States;

39.  Believes that Member States, when setting adequate minimum income schemes, should take into account the Eurostat at-risk-of poverty threshold, set at 60 % of national median equivalised disposable income (after social transfers), together with other indicators such as reference budgets; considers that reference budgets could be used to better tackle poverty and to test the robustness of the level of minimum income and of the above-mentioned threshold, while respecting the subsidiarity principle;

40.  Believes that the lack of up-to-date figures on income and living conditions is an obstacle to the implementation and comparison of a reference budget and a minimum income taking account of national specificities;

41.  Calls on the Commission and the Member States to exchange best practices from minimum income schemes;

42.  Calls on the Commission and the Social Protection Committee to document and disseminate examples of successful strategies, and to promote peer reviews and other methods of exchanging good practice on minimum income schemes; recommends that these efforts should focus on key issues such as ensuring regular uprating, improving coverage and take-up, addressing disincentives, and enhancing links between the different active inclusion strands;

43.  Believes that, given the many questions posed by minimum income schemes, such as accessibility, coverage, financing, entitlement conditions and duration, a concept for national minimum income schemes could be helpful in contributing to a level playing field among Member States; in this regard calls on the Commission to carry out an impact assessment of minimum income schemes in the EU, to request regular monitoring and reporting, and to consider further steps, taking into account the economic and social circumstances of each Member State and the needs of the groups most affected, as well as assessing whether the schemes enable households to meet their basic personal needs and to reduce poverty;

44.  Is concerned at the cuts in the amount and/or duration of unemployment benefits and the tightening of eligibility criteria which have occurred in many Member States in recent years, resulting in more people having to rely on minimum income schemes and creating additional pressure on those schemes(24);

45.  Stresses that inequalities are growing within each Member State and within the EU;

46.  Is concerned that in many Member States the level of benefits and coverage of minimum income schemes seems to have been reduced in recent years; considers that Member States should increase coverage by minimum income schemes of people in need of support, in line with the recommendations of the ESPN(25):

   (a) calls on Member States with very complex and fragmented systems to simplify these and develop more comprehensive systems;
   (b) calls on Member States with currently low levels of coverage to review their conditions to ensure that all people in need are covered;
   (c) calls on Member States whose minimum income schemes currently exclude significant groups experiencing poverty, to amend their schemes to better cover them;
   (d) calls on Member States with high levels of administrative discretion in their core minimum income systems to aim to reduce this and ensure that there are clear and consistent criteria for making decisions linked to an effective appeals process;

47.  Stresses the importance of increasing participation in lifelong learning of workers, the unemployed and vulnerable social groups, as well as the need to improve the level of professional qualifications and the acquisition of new skills, which are a fundamental tool to accelerate integration in the labour market, increase productivity and help people find a job;

48.  Points up the importance of demographic developments in connection with combating poverty in Europe;

49.  Stresses that urgent practical steps need to be taken to eradicate poverty and social exclusion, promote effective social safety nets and reduce inequality, in such a way as to help ensure economic and territorial cohesion; stresses that these steps must be taken at the appropriate level, with actions at both national and European level in accordance with the division of competences for the relevant policies;

50.  Supports the Commission’s social investment approach, which views well-designed social policies as contributing to economic growth whilst protecting people from poverty and acting as economic stabilisers(26);

51.  Welcomes reflections and studies concerning how to achieve a fairer distribution of income and wealth within our societies;

52.  Stresses that key factors impeding the development of a social investment approach by Member States include the impact of the economic crisis(27);

53.  Calls for due attention to be paid as of now, in the shaping of macroeconomic policies, to the need to reduce social inequalities and guarantee access for all social groups to properly funded public social services, thus tackling poverty and social exclusion;

54.  Calls for action to reduce social inequalities by enabling people to make best use of their gifts and capabilities; also calls for social support to be focused on those who are both poor and unable to earn a sufficient income by their own efforts;

55.  Points out that recent experience of reforms based on tax exemptions shows that it is preferable to finance minimum income policies using budget support rather than through tax incentives;

56.  Underlines that education, social transfers and progressive, fair and redistributive tax systems, alongside practical measures to strengthen competitiveness and combat tax avoidance and tax evasion, all have the potential to contribute to economic, social and territorial cohesion;

57.  Underlines the need to adapt existing minimum income schemes in order to better address the challenge of youth unemployment;

Public employment programmes

58.  Takes note of certain public employment programmes, which consist of the option, for those who want to and are able to work, to have a transitional job, in the public sector or in non-profit private entities or social economy enterprises; stresses, however, that it is important for these programmes to promote work with rights, based on collective bargaining and on labour legislation;

59.  Takes the view that public employment programmes should help to improve workers’ employability and facilitate their access to the regular labour market; recalls that these programmes should include a personalised itinerary and should provide decent wages and lead to decent work;

60.  Believes that the creation of decent jobs should be a priority for the EU as an important step towards reducing poverty and social exclusion;

61.  Calls on the Commission and the Member States to ensure the full participation of all stakeholders, in particular social partners and civil society organisations, in the design, implementation and monitoring of minimum income policies and programmes;

o
o   o

62.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission.

(1) OJ L 245, 26.8.1992, p. 46.
(2) OJ L 245, 26.8.1992, p. 49.
(3) OJ L 59, 2.3.2013, p. 5.
(4) OJ L 307, 18.11.2008, p. 11.
(5) OJ C 212 E, 5.8.2010, p. 11.
(6) OJ C 70 E, 8.3.2012, p. 8.
(7) OJ C 419, 16.12.2015, p. 5.
(8) Texts adopted, P8_TA(2015)0401.
(9) Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0136.
(10) Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0235.
(11) Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0355.
(12) Texts adopted, P8_TA(2017)0010.
(13) Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0317.
(14) ‘2017 European Semester: Assessment of progress on structural reforms, prevention and correction of macroeconomic imbalances, and results of in-depth reviews under Regulation (EU) No 1176/2011’ (COM(2017)0090).
(15) https://www.eurofound.europa.eu/publications/report/2017/income-inequalities-and-employment-patterns-in-europe-before-and-after-the-great-recession
(16) ‘Towards a European minimum income’, November 2013: http://www.eesc.europa.eu/resources/docs/revenu-minimum_-etude-ose_-vfinale_en--2.pdf
(17) Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions launching a consultation on a European Pillar of Social Rights (COM(2016)0127) – Annex 1.
(18) European Social Policy Network (ESPN), ‘Minimum Income Schemes in Europe: A study of national policies 2015’, January 2016.
(19) Council Conclusions on ‘Combating Poverty and Social Exclusion: An integrated approach’, 16 June 2016.
(20) Council document 6885/17: ‘The 2017 Annual Growth Survey and Joint Employment Report: Political guidance on employment and social policies – Council Conclusions’ (3 March 2017); and Council document 6887/17: ‘Joint Employment Report from the Commission and the Council accompanying the Communication from the Commission on the Annual Growth Survey 2017’ (3 March 2017).
(21) ESPN, ‘Minimum Income Schemes in Europe: A study of national policies 2015’.
(22) See: World Bank, ‘Poverty Reduction and Growth: The Virtuous and Vicious Circle’, 2006; OECD, ‘Trends in Income Inequality and its Impact on Economic Growth’, 2014.
(23) ESPN, ‘Minimum Income Schemes in Europe: A study of national policies 2015’.
(24) ESPN, ‘Social Investment in Europe: A study of national policies 2015’, 2015.
(25) ESPN, ‘Minimum Income Schemes in Europe: A study of national policies 2015’.
(26) European Commission: communication ‘Towards Social Investment for Growth and Cohesion – including implementing the European Social Fund 2014-2020’ (COM(2013)0083), 20 February 2013; and: ESPN, ‘Social Investment in Europe: A study of national policies 2015’.
(27) ESPN, ‘Social Investment in Europe: A study of national policies 2015’.

Legal notice