The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and in particular Articles 1, 2 and 3 thereof,

–  having regard to the Commission’s 33rd Annual Report on monitoring the application of EU law (2015) (COM(2016)0463),

–  having regard to the Commission’s 34th Annual Report on monitoring the application of EU law (2016) (COM(2017)0370),

–  having regard to the Commission report entitled ‘EU Pilot Evaluation Report’ (COM(2010)0070),

–  having regard to the Commission report entitled ‘Second Evaluation Report on EU Pilot’ (COM(2011)0930),

–  having regard to its resolution of 6 October 2016 entitled ‘Monitoring the application of Union law: 2014 Annual Report’(1),

–  having regard to the Commission communication of 21 December 2016 entitled ‘EU law: Better results through better application’ (C(2016)8600),

–  having regard to the Commission communication of 20 March 2002 on relations with the complainant in respect of infringements of Community law (COM(2002)0141),

–  having regard to the Commission communication of 2 April 2012 on updating the handling of relations with the complainant in respect of the application of Union law (COM(2012)0154),

–  having regard to the Commission communication of 11 March 2014 on a new EU Framework to strengthen the Rule of Law (COM(2014)0158),

–  having regard to the Commission communication of 19 May 2015 entitled ‘Better regulation for better results – An EU agenda’ (COM(2015)0215),

–  having regard to the Framework Agreement on relations between the European Parliament and the European Commission(2),

–  having regard to Council Decision 2001/470/EC of 28 May 2001 establishing a European Judicial Network in civil and commercial matters(3),

–  having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement between the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission of 13 April 2016 on better law-making(4),

–  having regard to its resolution of 10 September 2015 on the 30th and 31st annual reports on monitoring the application of EU law (2012-2013)(5),

–  having regard to its resolution of 25 October 2016 with recommendations to the Commission on the establishment of an EU mechanism on democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights(6),

–  having regard to its resolution of 9 June 2016 for an open, efficient and independent European Union administration(7) and its resolution of 15 January 2013 with recommendations to the Commission on a Law of Administrative Procedure of the European Union(8);

–  having regard to the Commission communications of 27 May 2016 on delivering the benefits of EU environmental policies through a regular Environmental Implementation Review (COM(2016)0316) and of 3 February 2017 entitled ‘The EU Environmental Implementation Review: Common challenges and how to combine efforts to deliver better results’ (COM(2017)0063),

–  having regard to the European Pillar of Social Rights,

–  having regard to Rules 52 and 132(2) of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs and the opinions of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety, the Committee on Constitutional Affairs, the Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality and the Committee on Petitions (A8-0197/2018),

A.  whereas Article 17 of the TEU defines the fundamental role of the Commission as ‘guardian of the Treaties’;

B.  whereas Article 2 of the TEU stipulates that the Union is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities; and whereas proper implementation of EU law is therefore essential to achieving the EU policy goals defined in the Treaties and secondary legislation; whereas Article 8 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) gives the Union the task of eliminating inequalities and promoting equality between men and women through all its activities;

C.  whereas, according to Article 2 of the TEU and Article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (CFREU), equality between women and men is one of the core values on which the EU is founded, and whereas, in all its activities, the Union shall aim to combat all forms of discrimination, eliminate inequalities and promote equal opportunities and equal treatment;

D.  whereas Article 3 of the TEU stipulates that the aims of the Union are, inter alia, to promote peace, its values and the well-being of its peoples and to work for the sustainable development of Europe based on balanced economic growth and price stability, a highly competitive social market economy, aiming at full employment and social progress, and a high level of protection and improvement of the quality of the environment, and that the Union shall combat social exclusion and discrimination, and promote social justice and protection, equality between women and men, solidarity between generations and protection of the rights of the child;

E.  whereas, according to settled case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), the Member States must supply the Commission with clear and precise information on the way in which they transpose EU directives into national law; and whereas, according to the Joint Political Declaration of 28 September 2011 between the Commission and the Member States(9) and the Joint Political Declaration of 27 October 2011 of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission(10), Member States may, when notifying national transposition measures to the Commission, also be required to provide documents explaining how they have transposed directives into national law;

F.  whereas pursuant to Article 4(3) of the TEU and Articles 288(3) and 291(1) of the TFEU, the Member States have the primary responsibility for transposing, applying and implementing EU law correctly and within the time limits set, and for providing sufficient remedies to ensure effective legal protection in the fields covered by EU law;

G.  whereas the correct application of EU law guarantees the benefits of Union’s policies to all European citizens and a level playing field for businesses;

H.  whereas, following the adoption in December 2016 of its communication entitled ‘EU law: Better results through better application’, the Commission has decided to concentrate on cases where Member States fail to communicate transposition measures, where those measures incorrectly transpose directives, or where Member States fail to comply with a judgment of the CJEU (under Article 260(2) of the TFEU), seriously damage EU financial interests or encroach on EU exclusive powers;

I.  whereas according to Article 6(1) of the TEU, the CFREU has the same legal value as the Treaties, and is addressed to the institutions, bodies, offices and agencies of the Union and to the Member States when they are implementing Union law (Article 51(1) of the CFREU);

J.  whereas EU Pilot procedures are intended to make for closer and more coherent cooperation between the Commission and the Member States so as to remedy breaches of EU law at an early stage through bilateral dialogue in order, wherever possible, to avert the need to resort to formal infringement proceedings;

K.  whereas it is necessary – in response to the current democratic deficit and with reference to its resolution of 25 October 2016 with recommendations to the Commission on the establishment of an EU mechanism on democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights – to establish a new mechanism providing a single and coherent framework and building on existing instruments and mechanisms, which should be applied in a uniform manner to all EU institutions and all Member States;

L.  whereas, however, under the new policies adopted by the Commission to ensure compliance with EU law, the aim of the EU Pilot is not to prolong the infringement procedure, which is itself a means of entering into problem-solving dialogue with a Member State;

M.  whereas, in order to ensure a more strategic and effective approach to enforcement in dealing with infringements, the Commission has decided, as indicated in its communication entitled ‘Better results through better application’, to launch infringement procedures without relying on the EU Pilot mechanism unless recourse to it is deemed useful in a given case;

N.  whereas in 2016, the Commission received 3 783 new complaints reporting potential breaches of EU law, with Italy (753), Spain (424) and France (325) being the Member States against which the most complaints were filed;

O.  whereas, according to Article 258(1) and (2) of the TFEU, the Commission shall deliver a reasoned opinion to a Member State when it considers that the latter has failed an obligation under the Treaties, and may bring the matter before the CJEU if the Member State in question does not comply with the opinion within a deadline set by the Commission;

P.  whereas in 2016, the Commission launched 847 new infringements procedures for late transposition of directives;

Q.  whereas in 2016, 95 infringement cases were still open, in response to which the CJEU ruled on the failure to comply on the part of the Member States involved;

R.  whereas in its resolution of 25 October 2016 on the establishment of an EU mechanism on democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights, Parliament requested that the Commission submit by September 2017, on the basis of Article 295 of the TFEU, a proposal for the conclusion of a Union Pact for democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights (EU Pact for DRF) in the form of an interinstitutional agreement laying down arrangements facilitating the cooperation between the Union institutions and the Member States in the framework of Article 7 of the TEU;

S.  whereas the Framework Agreement on relations between the European Parliament and the European Commission provides for sharing of information concerning all infringement procedures based on letters of formal notice, but does not cover the informal EU Pilot procedure which precedes the opening of formal infringement proceedings;

T.  whereas Article 41 of the CFREU defines the right to good administration as the right of every person to have his or her affairs handled impartially, fairly and within a reasonable time by the institutions, and whereas Article 298 of the TFEU stipulates that, in carrying out their missions, the institutions, bodies, offices and agencies of the Union shall have the support of an open, efficient and independent European administration;

U.  whereas in its communication of 3 February 2017 on the EU Environmental Implementation Review (EIR), the Commission claims to have laid out a structured and comprehensive dialogue with the Member States about the implementation of EU environmental legislation, and offers, without prejudice to its enforcement powers under the EU Treaties, to facilitate the Member States’ efforts through a new dedicated framework;

V.  whereas Article 157 of the TFEU allows, and its Article 19 enables, legislation to combat all forms of discrimination, including on the basis of gender;

W.  whereas the EU and its Member States have committed themselves, in Declaration No 19 annexed to the Final Act of the Intergovernmental Conference which adopted the Treaty of Lisbon, ‘to combat all kinds of domestic violence […], to prevent and punish these criminal acts and to support and protect the victims’;

X.  whereas EU legislation against trafficking in human beings, in particular women and children, has been adopted on the basis of Articles 79 and 83 of the TFEU; whereas the Rights, Equality and Citizenship Programme finances, among other things, measures contributing to the eradication of violence against women;

Y.  whereas a number of EU directives, in particular those focused on gender equality, are not being implemented properly in a number of Member States, leaving people of different genders unprotected against discrimination in the areas of access to employment, goods and services;

Z.  whereas gender-based discrimination intersects with other types of discrimination, including discrimination on the grounds of race and ethnicity, religion, disability, health, gender identity, sexual orientation, age and/or socio-economic condition;

AA.  whereas 33 % of women in the EU have experienced physical and/or sexual violence and 55 % have been sexually harassed, 32 % in the workplace; whereas women are particularly vulnerable to sexual, physical and online violence, cyber bullying and stalking; whereas more than half of female murder victims are killed by a partner or relative; whereas violence against women is one of the world’s most widespread human rights violations, regardless of the age, nationality, religion, education or financial and social status of the victim, representing a major hindrance to equality between women and men; whereas the phenomenon of femicide is not decreasing in Member States;

AB.  whereas the EU LGBT survey found that lesbian, bisexual and transgender women face a huge risk of discrimination on the basis of their sexual orientation or gender identity; whereas 23 % of lesbians and 35 % of transgender persons have been physically/sexually attacked or threatened with violence at home or elsewhere (in the street, on public transport, at the workplace, etc.) at least once in the last five years;

AC.  whereas the application and enforcement of EU gender equality law in the Member States has been found to entail specific problems related to the transposition and application of the relevant directives, such as substantive deficiencies in legislation and its inconsistent application by national courts;

AD.  whereas institutions and mechanisms for gender equality are often marginalised in national governmental structures, being divided between different policy areas and hampered by complex mandates as well as lacking adequate staff, training and data and sufficient resources, and experiencing insufficient support from political leaders;

AE.  whereas, according to the comparative analysis of non-discrimination law in Europe published in 2017 by the European network of legal experts in gender equality and non-discrimination, in the vast majority of countries serious concerns still persist around perception and awareness, as individuals are often not informed of their rights to protection against discrimination or of the existence of protection mechanisms; whereas, according to this analysis, with regard to the enforcement of the EU anti-discrimination directives, further issues of concern have arisen, such as the lack of (or too restrictive) legal standing of organisations and associations as regards engaging in proceedings on behalf, or in support of, victims of discrimination, and restrictive application of the shift of the burden of proof, as well as a number of barriers to effective access to justice, and these are acting as obstacles that effectively hinder citizens from being able to fully enjoy and protect their rights deriving from the provisions of anti-discrimination law;

AF.  whereas the Gender Equality Index 2017 of the European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE) shows only marginal improvements, making it clear that the EU remains far from achieving gender equality, with the overall score now being 66,2 out of 100, just four points higher than ten years ago;

AG.  whereas, as regards the sphere of decision-making, the aforementioned gender equality data show an improvement of almost ten points over the past decade, with the score now standing at 48,5, but this area still has the lowest attainment score of all; whereas this adverse figure primarily reflects the uneven representation of women and men in politics and points to a democratic deficit in EU governance;

AH.  whereas the Eurofound report on the gender employment gap estimates that this gap is costing the EU around EUR 370 billion per year, corresponding to 2,8 % of EU GDP;

AI.  whereas, according to Eurofound’s Working Conditions Survey, the composite indicator of paid and unpaid working time shows that when paid and unpaid working hours are computed, women work longer hours;

AJ.  whereas, despite the EU’s commitment to gender equality in decision-making, the management boards of the EU agencies are seriously lacking in gender balance, and show persisting patterns of gender segregation;

AK.  whereas the feminisation of poverty is a fact in the EU, and whereas the proper and full application and enforcement of EU equality and gender equality laws should go hand in hand with policies targeting the very high rates of unemployment, poverty and social exclusion among women; whereas the lack of equality policies and the deficient implementation of gender and equality law further endangers women and increases the risk of poverty and social marginalisation by excluding them from the labour market;

AL.  whereas proper implementation of the existing legislation is essential for advancing equality between women and men; whereas even though the recast Directive 2006/54/EC clearly prohibits both direct and indirect discrimination, and despite the fact that women attain on average a high level of education, the gender pay gap still stood at 16,3 % in 2015;

AM.  whereas the principle of gender equality needs to be an essential part in the monitoring of the application of existing EU legislation;

AN.  whereas the collection of data, if possible disaggregated by gender, is substantially important for evaluating the progress made so far in the application of EU law;

1.  Welcomes the Commission’s decision(11) to respond to infringements promptly, and supports its efforts to resolve implementation problems informally; calls on the Commission to improve the EU Pilot problem-solving system;

2.  Expresses its concern at the increase in the total number of infringement procedures in 2016, making the figure for such cases the highest to have been recorded in the past five years;

3.  Welcomes the Commission’s 2016 Annual Report on monitoring the application of EU law, and notes that, according to this report, the four fields in which the greatest number of transposition infringement proceedings were opened against Member States in 2016 were the environment, justice and consumers, taxation, and the internal market;

4.  Recalls that the right to petition Parliament is a cornerstone of European citizenship, as enshrined in Articles 20 and 227 of the TFEU and Article 44 of the CFREU, ranking second in importance to citizens according to recent surveys; underlines the importance of petitions as a means for citizens and residents to feel involved in the activities of the Union and to express their concerns about instances of misapplication or violation of EU law and on potential lacunae, while at the same time highlighting these deficiencies in the hope of a rapid and effective solution to the problems raised; shares the view of the Commission that the work done to ensure the effective enforcement of existing EU law needs to be recognised as being of equivalent importance to the work devoted to developing new legislation; calls on the Commission to improve, in this respect, its handling of petitions addressed by providing timely and in-depth answers;

5.  Draws attention to the study commissioned by Parliament’s Committee on Petitions to Policy Department C entitled ‘Monitoring the implementation of EU law: tools and challenges’, and welcomes its concrete recommendations to Parliament for action; draws attention to the recently published study commissioned to Policy Department C entitled ‘Effective Access to Justice’, following the recurrent allegations that emerged from the handling of several petitions; endorses the Commission’s proposal to foster judicial training in EU law for the different Member States in order to ensure consistency in the rulings and thus equal enforcement of rights across the Union;

6.  Welcomes the increased transparency and the provision of more statistical information in the Commission report of 2016, when compared to previous reports; regrets the fact, however, that it does not provide any precise information on the number of petitions that have led to the initiation of EU Pilot or infringement procedures, and asks the Commission to provide this specific piece of information; notes with regret that neither Parliament nor the petitioners are involved in these procedures; reiterates its call on the Commission to share with Parliament information on all EU Pilots opened and infringement procedures initiated in order to improve transparency, reduce the time frame for dispute settlement through the Committee on Petitions, build trust in the EU project and, ultimately, enhance the legitimacy of the EU Pilot procedure, especially where infringement procedures are concerned; invites the Commission to systematically communicate its decisions and the different steps taken by the College of Commissioners and to publish the agenda and the main outcomes of package meetings; acknowledges the CJEU’s ruling on cases C-39/05 P, C-52/05 P and C-562/14 P of May 2017, according to which documents within the EU Pilot procedure should not be disclosed publicly if there is a risk that such disclosure would affect the nature of the infringement procedure, alter its progress or undermine the objectives of that procedure; calls on the Commission to disclose documents exchanged with the Member States when this risk ceases to exist, namely after EU pilot procedures are closed; supports, in this regard, the suggestion of the European Ombudsman on the timeliness and transparency of EU Pilot pre-infringement cases; stresses the importance of keeping all actors concerned informed, and of bringing more transparency to the EU Pilot processes; regrets the lack of commitment shown by the Commission when responding to the concerns raised in EU Pilot procedures by MEPs and calls on the Commission to inform the Committee on Petitions of any significant new steps of the investigation and ongoing dialogue with Member States when open petitions are concerned; reiterates its call on the Commission to include in its annual report the rate of implementation of both EU regulations and directives;

7.  Considers that the large number of infringement procedures shows that ensuring the timely and correct application of EU legislation in the Member States remains a serious challenge and priority, bearing in mind the new, more strategic and effective approach to enforcement adopted by the Commission for 2016; considers that some of those infringements could be the result of the lack of resources dedicated to public administration in some Member States;

8.  Underlines the fact that the number of new complaints is at its highest since 2011, representing a 67,5 % increase over the past year, with a record number of 3 783 new complaints and a decrease in rates of resolution, that, in addition, 1 657 infringement cases remained open at the end of 2016, while 986 infringement cases were opened in 2016, among which 847 concern late transposition; notes with concern that 95 infringement cases are still open after a Court ruling because the Commission considered that the Member States concerned had not yet complied with the judgements under Article 258 of the TFEU, and that, overall, the areas of ‘employment’ and ‘justice and consumers’ are the most affected, followed by the internal market, industry, entrepreneurship and SMEs, taxation and customs, and the environment;

9.  Welcomes the fall in the number of new EU Pilot files opened in 2016 (790 compared with 881 in 2014) and the fact that this number has reached the lowest level since 2011, even though the Commission does not undertake any EU Pilot procedures in the event of late transposition of directives; notes, however, that the resolution rate fell slightly compared with 2015 (from 75 % to 72 %); asks the Commission to provide clarification on its priority-setting with regard to its enforcement policy, according to which it states that it will focus its enforcement action where it can make a real difference, and on its policy priorities when pursuing cases that reveal systemic weakness in a Member State’s legal system;

10.  Notes that the Commission’s commitment to be more strategic in enforcing EU law recently led to the closure of infringement cases for political reasons; calls on the Commission, therefore, to explain the considerations behind such decisions in future monitoring reports;

11.  Stresses that most EU Pilot files that have led to formal infringement procedures mainly concerned policy areas pertaining to the environment, the internal market, industry, entrepreneurship and SMEs, energy, and taxation and customs; notes as well that Hungary, Germany, Spain and Poland had the highest number of EU Pilot files pursued through infringement procedures;

12.  Recognises that the primary responsibility for the correct implementation and application of EU law lies with the Member States, but points out that this does not absolve the EU institutions of their duty to respect primary EU law when they produce secondary EU law, even more so in the field of the rule of law and fundamental rights with regard to the CFREU;

13.  Points out that the proper implementation and application of EU law is essential for delivering EU policy in terms of the principle of equality between women and men, as enshrined in the Treaties, and for encouraging and fostering mutual trust between public institutions, both at EU and national level, as well as between institutions and citizens, recalling also that trust and legal certainty both serve as a basis for good cooperation and the effective application of EU law;

14.  Is concerned that that there are still significant shortcomings in the implementation and enforcement of EU environmental legislation in some Member States, particularly in the areas of waste management, waste water treatment infrastructure and compliance with air quality limit values;

15.  Underlines the important role that social partners, civil society organisations, European citizens and other stakeholders play in monitoring and reporting shortcomings in the transposition and application of EU law by Member States; welcomes, therefore, the greater responsiveness among citizens about the implementation of EU legislation, including the crucial role of whistle-blowers in the private and public sector; stresses that EU citizens, as of right, must be the first to be made aware in a clear, effectively accessible, transparent and timely manner whether and which national laws have been adopted in transposition of EU laws, and which national authorities are responsible for ensuring they are correctly implemented;

16.  Notes the importance attached by the Commission to the timely and correct transposition of EU law into national legislation, and the existence of clear internal framework provisions requiring Member States to accord priority to this objective, so as to avoid infringements of EU law, while ensuring that individuals and undertakings are able to benefit from the effective and efficient implementation thereof;

17.  Points out, however, that unrealistic deadlines for the implementation of legislation may make it impossible for Member States to comply, implying tacit acceptance of late implementation; urges the EU institutions to agree on a more realistic timetable for the implementation of regulations and directives, taking due account of the time needed for verification and consultation; considers that the Commission should submit reports, summaries and legislative revisions on the dates agreed on by the co-legislators and in line with the legal provisions applicable;

18.  Points out that there were 70 directives to transpose in 2016, up from 56 in 2015; expresses concern at the sharp increase in the number of new late transposition infringements from 543 to 847; regrets that, at the end of 2016, 868 late transposition infringement cases were still open, a 67,5 % increase compared to the 518 cases open at the end of 2015;

19.  Expresses concern that, as in 2015, the Member States failed to deliver on all their commitments to provide explanatory documents together with the measures they had taken to transpose directives into national legislation; considers that, in view of the uneven quality of many of the explanatory documents submitted, the Commission should provide more assistance to Member States in preparing them and in drawing up correlation tables;

20.  Underlines the fact that failure to ensure timely and correct transposition of the existing EU legislation – addressing the principles of equal opportunities for and equal treatment of men and women in matters of education, employment and occupation, equal pay for equal work, and equal treatment of women and men in access to and supply of goods and services – as well as of the existing provisions to improve work-life balance and to end all forms of violence against women and girls, ultimately deprives citizens and businesses of the benefits to which they are entitled under EU law;

21.  Emphasises the fact that the EU has been set up as a Union based on the rule of law and respect for human rights (Article 2 of the TEU); notes that, in implementing EU legislation, Member States must comply fully with the fundamental rights enshrined in the Treaties and in the CFREU; reiterates that careful monitoring of the acts and omissions of Member States, and of EU institutions, is of the utmost importance;

22.  Reiterates its concern at the number of petitions to Parliament and complaints to the Commission concerning issues supposedly resolved by the Commission;

23.  Highlights the importance of safeguarding the integrity of the EU legal order, which includes primary and secondary legislation and soft law; calls, for this reason, for the timely adoption of the legislative and non-legislative initiatives required to make the European Pillar of Social Rights a reality for citizens; calls on the Commission to exert the most transparency and coherence possible in its efforts to create a new framework dedicated to the proper implementation of EU legislation, such as the EIR; calls on the Commission to consider creating such a framework specifically dedicated to fair and balanced development, employment, social affairs and inclusion affairs in relation to the European Pillar of Social Rights;

24.  Reiterates its call on the Commission, following its resolution of 25 October 2016, to submit a proposal for the conclusion of a Union pact for democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights (EU Pact for DRF), thus effectively bundling its relevant annual thematic reports with the outcome of existing monitoring mechanisms and periodic assessment tools, to be presented in due time; recalls that the Commission, as Guardian of the Treaties in full respect for the principles of good and effective administration laid down by Articles 298 of the TFEU and Articles 41 and 47 of the CFREU, has a duty to monitor and assess the correct implementation of Union law, and the respect given the principles and objectives enshrined in the Treaties, by the Member States and all the Union institutions and bodies, and to respect its commitment to actively help Member States transpose and implement certain directives and regulations; recommends, therefore, that this task be taken into consideration within the aforementioned DRF policy cycle from 2018 onwards, its relevant annual thematic reports – with the outcome of existing monitoring mechanisms and periodic assessment tools –to be presented in due time;

25.  Recalls that, on several occasions, Parliament has called on the Commission to monitor, direct and support the implementation of environmental legislation and policies more proactively;

26.  Welcomes the Commission’s commitment to actively help Member States transpose and implement European legislation by preparing implementation plans for certain directives and regulations;

27.  Considers that, given that it is jointly responsible for ensuring the implementation and enforcement of EU law in accordance with the Interinstitutional Agreement and its relevant function of political control over the Commission conferred by Article 14 of the TEU, Parliament should be automatically notified about every EU Pilot opened and infringement initiated, and should be granted adequate access to documents relating to these two kinds of procedures, particularly when they arise from petitions, while respecting the necessary confidentiality provisions for the successful handling of cases;

28.  Proposes that Member State representatives be more present during discussions of petitions in the Committee on Petitions;

29.  Notes the unsatisfying level of application of EU law among Member States, as illustrated by the high number of complaints sent to the Commission and the important flow of petitions addressed to Parliament; welcomes the intention of the Commission, as expressed in its communication of December 2016 to increase its use of preventive tools such as package meetings, implementation guidelines, experts groups AND specialised networks (including the SOLVIT network), and to support capacity-building in the Member States to enforce EU law; calls on the Commission to use the provisions of Article 197 of the TFEU to implement this renewed enforcement policy in full partnership with Member States and the European institutions; calls on the Commission to improve its handling of petitions addressed by providing timely and in-depth answers;

30.  Notes that while 95 infringement cases are still open, and while the CJEU has ruled on Member States’ failure to comply, in only three of these cases have the Commission brought the matter before the Court pursuant to Article 260 of the TFEU; considers that it is of utmost importance to ensure full and timely execution of the Court’s decisions and, when necessary, to make full use of the provisions of Article 279 of the TFEU to prevent any undermining of EU law and of the CJEU’s authority; calls on the Commission to address this situation and to report regularly to Parliament on progress made in this regard;

31.  Highlights the fact that all EU institutions are bound by the EU Treaties and the CFREU(12);

32.  Recommends that any inter-parliamentary debate on democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights shall include civil society and civic participation, e.g. through petitions transmitted to Parliament and the European Citizens Initiative;

33.  Stresses that memoranda of understanding concluded between EU institutions and Member States are not considered EU acts pursuant to Article 288 of the TFEU;

34.  Stresses the crucial importance of efficiency, transparency and accountability in the drafting and application of EU law by the EU institutions; emphasises in particular the principle of democratic accountability – and the role that Parliament plays in ensuring it – as well as the right of EU citizens to justice and good administration, as stipulated in Articles 41 and 47 of the CFREU; points out that these rights and principles require citizens to be given adequate easy access to drafts of the legal acts that concern them; recalls that these same rights and principles should also be of paramount importance to the Member States when proposing draft acts aiming at implementing EU law;

35.  Calls on the Commission to enhance, where possible and necessary, EU financial resources, such as the European Social Fund, dedicated to ‘enhancing institutional capacity of public authorities and stakeholders and efficient public administration’ with a view to promoting social welfare and economic development, and to enhance the effectiveness of beneficial legislation; calls on the Commission to make full use of Article 197 of the TFEU to help enhance the capacity of the Member States to implement and enforce EU law;

36.  Calls on the Commission to develop instruments designed to help Member states recognise transposition problems, address them at an early stage of the infringement procedure and find joint solutions;

37.  Recalls that the legislation giving rise to the most flagrant infringement proceedings is the result of directives; recalls that regulations are directly and compulsorily applicable in all the Member States; calls, therefore, on the Commission to make use of regulations as far as possible whenever it considers issuing legislative proposals; considers that such an approach could mitigate the risk of over-regulation;

38.  Recalls that preliminary rulings help clarify the manner in which the law of the European Union is to be applied; considers that recourse to this procedure allows for a uniform interpretation and implementation of EU legislation; calls, therefore, on the Commission to follow more effectively the fulfilment of the obligation of national courts to seek a preliminary ruling by the CJEU, as stated in Article 267 of the TFEU; encourages, therefore, national courts, in the event of doubt, to refer questions to the CJEU and thereby prevent infringement proceedings;

39.  Calls on the Commission to pay particular attention to its control over the implementation of Council Directive (EU) 2016/1164 of 12 July 2016 laying down rules against tax avoidance practices that directly affect the functioning of the internal market(13), and to launch infringement proceedings where necessary, particular vigilance given to incorrect or bad application;

40.  Welcomes the Commission’s continued efforts to enforce EU environmental rules in order to ensure a level playing field for all Member States and economic operators, and to address shortcomings in the implementation and enforcement of EU environmental legislation, including by resorting to infringement proceedings if necessary; underlines, however, the known limitations in the effectiveness of EU environmental rules and, in particular, the Environmental Liability Directive (ELD); calls on the Commission to take note of Parliament’s resolution of 26 October 2017(14) on the implementation of the ELD; points out that, in certain Member States, the right to a healthy environment is being undermined by shortcomings in the implementation and enforcement of EU environmental legislation, particularly when it comes to the prevention of damage to air and water, waste management and wastewater treatment infrastructure; stresses that full implementation of EU environmental legislation could save the EU economy EUR 50 billion each year in, above all, health costs and direct costs to the environment;

41.  Emphasises that the EU’s acquis also comprises international agreements concluded by the EU; notes with serious concern that EU environmental rules may not be in compliance with the Aarhus Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters (‘the Aarhus Convention’)(15) by not granting sufficient access to justice to environmental organisations and members of the public; calls, therefore, on the Commission to pay attention to the findings and recommendations of the Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee(16) and of the Council position of 17 July 2017(17), and to explore ways and means to comply with the Aarhus Convention in a way that is compatible with the fundamental principles of the Union legal order and with its system of judicial review;

42.  Calls on the Commission to pay particular attention to the implementation of measures adopted in the area of asylum and migration, so as to ensure that they comply with the principles enshrined in the CFREU, to work with the Member States to overcome any difficulties they may encounter in that implementation and to launch the necessary infringement proceedings where relevant; notes with concern that certain Member States are disregarding their obligations with regard to asylum and migration, in particular where relocation of asylum seekers is concerned; underlines the need to address the lack of solidarity between some Member States with regard to asylum and migration, so that all Member States meet their obligations; calls on the Member States to tackle the rise in trafficking in human beings for the purpose of labour exploitation or sexual exploitation;

43.  Calls on the Commission to respond effectively to the developing migration and security situation and to enforce the European Agenda on Migration and the related implementation packages efficiently; asks the Member States to implement the Return Directive (2008/115/EC)(18) correctly and to report regularly on the implementation of the European Agenda on Migration;

44.  Calls on the Commission to check the compatibility of the zero-hour contracts with EU employment legislation, including the Part-Time Workers Directive as many petitions have been received in 2016 relate to precarious work;

45.  Welcomes the fact that the report acknowledges the role of Parliament in calling the Commission’s attention to shortcomings in the application of EU law in Member States by means of parliamentary questions and petitions; points out that closer scrutiny by national parliaments of their respective governments, when the latter are involved in the law-making process, will foster more effective application of EU law, as envisaged in the Treaties;

46.  Expresses concern that, given the incongruent translations of many directives into the EU’s official languages, it is likely that different language versions result in disparate interpretations of the respective texts and in differences in their transposition in the Member States; deplores the fact that such differences in the transposition and legal interpretation of directives may not be uncovered systematically, but only when clarified by rulings of the CJEU;

47.  Recalls that national parliaments have an essential role to play in both the pre-legislative scrutiny of draft EU legal acts and the post-legislative scrutiny of the correct implementation of EU law by the Member States; calls on national parliaments to pursue this role proactively;

48.  Considers that, in line with the Commission’s efforts to produce better and more effective EU legislation, the application of the subsidiarity and proportionality principles should always be taken into account;

49.  Reiterates its call for the creation, within the relevant Directorates-General (DG IPOL, DG EXPO and DG EPRS), of an autonomous system for ex-post assessment of the impact of the main EU laws adopted by Parliament under codecision and in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure;

50.  Calls on the Commission to pay particular attention to its control over the implementation of EU legislation laying down rules against corruption practices that directly affect the functioning of the internal market, and to take the appropriate measures to tackle such phenomena;

51.  Reminds the Member States and the EU institutions that ensuring timely and proper application of the legislation in the Member States remains a priority for the EU; stresses the importance of upholding the principles of conferral, subsidiarity and proportionality, pursuant to Article 5 of the TEU, as well as the principle of equality before the law, with a view to better monitoring of the application of EU law; recalls the importance of raising awareness of the provisions of the existing directives tackling various aspects of the principle of equality between women and men and of delivering on it in practice;

52.  Encourages the EU institutions to fulfil at all times their duty to respect primary EU law when establishing the provisions of secondary EU and soft law, developing policies and signing agreements or treaties with institutions outside the EU, to assist Member States by all means available in their efforts to transpose EU legislation in all areas and to respect the values and principles of the Union, especially with respect to recent developments in Member States;

53.  Agrees with the Commission’s view that individual complainants play an essential role in identifying wider problems with the enforcement and application of EU law affecting the interests of citizens and businesses;

54.  Stresses that the lack of a coherent and comprehensive set of codified rules of good administration across the Union makes it difficult for citizens and businesses to easily and fully understand their rights under Union law; emphasises, therefore, that codifying rules of good administration in the form of a regulation setting out the various aspects of the administrative procedure – including notifications, binding time limits, the right to be heard and the right for every person to have access to his or her file – is tantamount to reinforcing citizens’ rights and transparency; believes that this regulation would bring more accessibility, clarity and coherence to the interpretation of existing rules, for the benefit of citizens and businesses and of the administration and its officials;

55.  Recalls that in its resolutions of 15 January 2013 and 9 June 2016, Parliament called for the adoption of a regulation on an open, efficient and independent EU administration under Article 298 of the TFEU, and notes that this request has not been followed up by a Commission proposal; calls, therefore, once again on the Commission to come forward with a legislative proposal on a European law of administrative procedure, taking into account the steps taken so far by Parliament in this field;

56.  Stresses that the inadequate integration of environmental considerations into other policy areas is one of the root causes of poor implementation of environmental legislation and policy;

57.  Underlines the need to maintain a high level of environmental protection, as well as of health and food safety;

58.  Stresses that effective enforcement of EU rules in the fields of health, food safety and the environment is important for European citizens since it influences their day-to-day lives and serves the general interest;

59.  Calls on the Commission to monitor closely environment-related infringement cases with a cross-border dimension, especially in the area of clean air legislation, including correct transposition and application of EU law in future Member States; calls, furthermore, on the Commission to inform complainants in an appropriate, transparent and timely manner of the arguments provided by the states concerned in reaction to the complaint;

60.  Notes that the number of infringement proceedings concerning the environment fell in 2016 compared with 2015, but is concerned that there was an increase in the number of procedures in the area of health and food safety, and calls on the Commission to bring particular attention to bear on this point;

61.  Highlights the fact that equality between women and men is a core principle of the EU that needs to be mainstreamed in all policies;

62.  Underlines the fundamental role of the rule of law in terms of providing legitimacy to any form of democratic governance; stresses that this is a cornerstone of the Union legal order and, as such, is consistent with the concept of a Union based on the rule of law;

63.  Recalls that the principle of equality – in terms of equal pay for equal work – has been enshrined in the European Treaties since 1957 (see Article 157 of the TFEU), and highlights the fact that Article 153 of the TFEU allows the EU to act in the wider area of equal opportunities and equal treatment in matters of employment and occupation;

64.  Notes with appreciation that the CJEU’s broad interpretation of the concept of equal pay for equal work, as articulated in its rulings and in its extensive case law on the relevant article, has certainly broadened the possibilities of combating both direct and indirect gender discrimination as regards pay, and of narrowing the gender pay gap, but stresses that more remains to be done to eliminate the persisting gender pay gap in the EU;

65.  Is deeply saddened that the introduction of legal principles outlawing inequality in pay between men and women has not proved sufficient on its own to eradicate the persisting gender pay gap; stresses that recast Directive 2006/54/EC requires that the Member States ensure that all provisions of collective agreements, wage scales, wage agreements and individual employment contracts that are contrary to the principle of equal pay shall be or may be declared null and void, or may be amended;

66.  Stresses that both the Member States and the Commission should pay attention to the implementation of EU law, especially the provisions concerning equality in terms of payment; reiterates the importance of mainstreaming the principle of equality between women and men in a number of EU directives and considers alternative instruments to be valuable tools for the correct implementation of EU law; recalls the importance of raising awareness of the provisions of the existing directives tackling various aspects of the principle of equality between women and men and of delivering it in practice; highlights that collective bargaining may allow for the further application of EU law on equal pay for equal work between women and men, parental leave, working conditions and working hours, including a weekly common day of rest, to achieve work-life balance for women and men and to improve their situation on the labour market;

67.  Recalls its resolution of 15 January 2013 calling for the adoption of an EU regulation on a European law of administrative procedure under Article 298 of the TFEU; notes with disappointment that the Commission has failed to follow up on Parliament’s call on it to submit a proposal for a legislative act on a law of administrative procedure;

68.  Recognises the importance of collecting data, if possible disaggregated by gender, for evaluating the progress made in advancing women’s rights;

69.  Regrets the shortcomings of the Commission’s approach to animal welfare, ignoring as it does the serious inconsistencies reported by a large number of citizens who have exercised the right of petition; reiterates its call for the launching of a new strategy at EU level to bridge all the existing gaps and ensure full and effective protection of animal welfare through a clear and comprehensive legislative framework that fully meets the requirements of Article 13 of the TFEU;

70.  Calls on the Commission to examine thoroughly the petitions relating to the differing quality of food products from the same brand in different Member States; urges the Commission to put an end to unfair practices and to ensure that all consumers are treated equally;

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

(1) Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0385. (2) OJ L 304, 20.11.2010, p. 47. (3) OJ L 174, 27.6.2001, p. 25. (4) OJ L 123, 12.5.2016, p. 1. (5) OJ C 316, 22.9.2017, p. 246. (6) Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0409. (7) OJ C 86, 6.3.2018, p. 126. (8) OJ C 440, 30.12.2015, p. 17. (9) OJ C 369, 17.12.2011, p. 14. (10) OJ C 369, 17.12.2011, p. 15. (11) OJ C 18, 19.1.2017, p. 10. (12) Judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 20 September 2016 in Joined Cases C-8/15 P to C-10/15 P, Ledra Advertising Ltd (C-8/15 P), Andreas Eleftheriou (C-9/15 P), Eleni Eleftheriou (C-9/15 P), Lilia Papachristofi (C-9/15 P), Christos Theophilou (C-10/15 P), Eleni Theophilou (C-10/15 P) v European Commission and European Central Bank (ECLI:EU:C:2016:701). (13) OJ L 193, 19.7.2016, p. 1. (14) Texts adopted, P8_TA(2017)0414. (15) OJ L 124, 17.5.2005, p. 4. (16) ACCC/C/2008/32 (EU), Part II, adopted 17 March 2017. (17) OJ L 186, 19.7.2017, p. 15. (18) OJ L 348, 24.12.2008, p. 98.