REPORT on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council repealing Council Directive 76/621/EEC relating to the fixing of the maximum level of erucic acid in oils and fats and Council Regulation (EC) No 320/2006 establishing a temporary scheme for the restructuring of the sugar industry
18.9.2015 - (COM(2015)0174 – C8‑0101/2015 – 2015/0090(COD)) - ***I
Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development
Rapporteur: Czesław Adam Siekierski
DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION
on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council repealing Council Directive 76/621/EEC relating to the fixing of the maximum level of erucic acid in oils and fats and Council Regulation (EC) No 320/2006 establishing a temporary scheme for the restructuring of the sugar industry
(COM(2015)0174 – C8‑0101/2015 – 2015/0090(COD))
(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)
The European Parliament,
– having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2015)0174),
– having regard to Article 294(2), Article 42, first subparagraph, and Article 43(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C8‑0101/2015),
– having regard to the opinion of the Committee on Legal Affairs on the proposed legal basis,
– having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
– having regard to the undertaking given by the Council representative by letter of 7 September 2015 to approve Parliament’s position, in accordance with Article 294(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
– having regard to Rules 59 and 39 of its Rules of Procedure,
– having regard to the report of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development (A8-0255/2015),
1. Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;
2. Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend its proposal substantially or replace it with another text;
3. Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.
Amendment 1 Proposal for a regulation Citation 1 | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular the first subparagraph of Article 42 and Article 43(2) thereof, |
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular the first subparagraph of Article 42, Article 43(2) and Article 114 thereof, |
Justification | |
The addition of the reference to Article 114 TFEU is made for consistency with the double legal basis (Agriculture and Internal market policy) used for the adoption of Directive 76/621/EEC relating to the fixing of the maximum level of erucic acid in oils and fats. | |
OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON LEGAL AFFAIRS ON THE LEGAL BASIS
Mr Czesław Adam Siekierski
Chair
Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development
BRUSSELS
Subject: Opinion on the legal basis of the proposal for a Regulation repealing Council Directive 76/621/EEC relating to the fixing of the maximum level of erucic acid in oils and fats and Council Regulation (EC) No 320/2006 establishing a temporary scheme for the restructuring of the sugar industry (COM(2015)0174 – C8‑0101/2015 – 2015/0090(COD))
Dear Mr Chair,
By letter of 15 July 2015 the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development (AGRI) asked the Committee on Legal Affairs, pursuant to Rule 39(2) of the Rules of Procedure, for an opinion on the appropriateness of the legal basis for the above-mentioned proposal.
The legal basis proposed by the Commission consists of the first subparagraph of Article 42 TFEU, which relates to the application of competition rules to production of and trade in agricultural products, and Article 43(2) TFEU, which relates to the establishment of the common organisation of agricultural markets.
AGRI requests an opinion on the appropriateness of adding Article 114 TFEU, relating to the approximation of laws for the establishment and functioning of the internal market, to the above legal basis. This development would leave the original legal basis of the proposed Regulation intact, only adding Article 114 TFEU as a third legal basis.
I. Background
The proposal aims at repealing Council Directive 76/621/EEC and Council Regulation (EC) No 320/2006 related to the Common Agricultural Policy, which are based on Articles 42 and 43(2) TFEU.
Certain legal acts adopted in the last decades have no longer continued relevance, either because their content has been taken up by subsequent acts, or due to their temporary character.
In accordance with the inter-institutional agreement on better law making, Union law should be updated and condensed by removing acts which are no longer applied, in order to improve transparency and certainty.
According to the Commission proposal, it is not within the Commission's powers to declare obsolete acts that were adopted by the Council. The acts listed in the proposal should thus be repealed by the Council and the European Parliament following the ordinary legislative procedure.
A draft report was presented in AGRI on 23 June 2015, aiming at taking over the Commission proposal regarding the abrogation of the two obsolete acts.[1] The rapporteur, Mr Czesław Adam Siekierski, subsequently (24 July 2015) tabled an amendment aimed at adding a reference to Article 114 TFEU "for consistency with the double legal basis (Agriculture and Internal market policy) used for the adoption of Directive76/621/EEC relating to the fixing of the maximum level of erucic acid in oils and fats".[2]
In a letter of 7 September 2015, addressed to the rapporteur, the Council's Special Committee on Agriculture (CSA) confirmed it would approve the European Parliament's position.[3]
II. Relevant Treaty Articles
The following Articles of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, under Title III on 'Agriculture and Fisheries' of Part Three of the TFEU, entitled Union Policies and Internal Actions, are presented as the legal basis in the Commission proposal (emphasis added):
Article 42 TFEU
(ex Article 36 TEC)
The provisions of the Chapter relating to rules on competition shall apply to production of and trade in agricultural products only to the extent determined by the European Parliament and the Council within the framework of Article 43(2) and in accordance with the procedure laid down therein, account being taken of the objectives set out in Article 39.
[...]
Article 43
(ex Article 37 TEC)
1. [...]
2. The European Parliament and the Council, acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure and after consulting the Economic and Social Committee, shall establish the common organisation of agricultural markets provided for in Article 40(1) and the other provisions necessary for the pursuit of the objectives of the common agricultural policy and the common fisheries policy.
[...]
III - The proposed legal basis
AGRI requests an opinion on the appropriateness of adding Article 114 TFEU to the existing legal basis, which reads as follows (emphasis added):
Article 114
(ex Article 95 TEC)
1. Save where otherwise provided in the Treaties, the following provisions shall apply for the achievement of the objectives set out in Article 26. The European Parliament and the Council shall, acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure and after consulting the Economic and Social Committee, adopt the measures for the approximation of the provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States which have as their object the establishment and functioning of the internal market.
[...]
IV. Case-law
It is settled case-law of the Court of Justice that "the choice of legal basis for a Community measure must rest on objective factors amenable to judicial review, which include in particular the aim and content of the measure".[4] The choice of an incorrect legal basis may therefore justify the annulment of the act in question.
In principle, a measure is to be founded on a single legal basis. A dual legal basis can nevertheless be used, where a measure pursues simultaneously various objectives or has several linked components, without one being secondary and indirect in relation to the other.[5] Additionally, the procedures laid down in each legal basis for the adoption of the said measure should not be incompatible with each other.[6]
V. The aim and content of the proposed regulation
The Commission proposal aims at repealing Council Directive 76/621/EEC and Council Regulation (EC) No 320/2006,[7] which have exhausted all their practical effects and remain only technically in force.
According to recital 1 of the proposal, increasing the transparency of Union law, via inter alia the removal 'from active legislation of those acts which no longer have real effect', constitutes an essential element of the better lawmaking strategy implemented by the institutions.
The content of Council Directive 76/621/EEC has been taken up by the Commission Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006 setting maximum levels for certain contaminants in foodstuffs.[8] Further, the temporary scheme established by Council Regulation (EC) No 320/2006 was applicable only until the marketing year 2009/2010 (Recital 2).
As a result, the above legal acts relating to the common agricultural policy have become obsolete, despite formally still being in force and should thus be repealed for reasons of legal security and clarity (Recital 3 and Article 1).
VI. Analysis and Determination of the appropriate legal basis
The aim and content of the proposed regulation consist in a pure repeal of Council Directive 76/621/EEC and Council Regulation (EC) No 320/2006.[9]
Specifically, both acts have become obsolete since the content of Council Directive 76/621/EEC has been taken up by the subsequent Regulation 1881/2006, whereas Council Regulation 320/2006 only established a temporary scheme, which is no longer applicable.
What is more, Council Directive 76/621/EEC was adopted under Articles 43 and 100 EEC Treaty, which currently correspond to Articles 43 and 114 TFEU respectively, whereas Council Regulation (EC) No 320/2006 was based on Article 36 and the third subparagraph of Article 37(2) of the EC Treaty, which currently correspond to Articles 42 and 43(2) TFEU respectively.
As confirmed in the Legal Service's note on the legal basis of the proposed Regulation (emphasis added):
'There is thus a trace of an internal market legal basis in one of the two acts being repealed. Even if it could be argued that in the overall repeal the part concerning internal market is only incidental, it does however seem fully in line with the usual practice for legal basis for repealing acts to add Article 114 to the legal basis.'[10]
Furthermore, since both Articles 43(2) TFEU and 114 TFEU provide for the ordinary legislative procedure, there is no incompatibility of procedure in this case.
VII. Conclusion and recommendation
In the light of the foregoing analysis, since both acts proposed to be repealed lie in the field of common agricultural policy and Council Directive 76/621/EEC is also based on what currently corresponds to Article 114 TFEU, the internal market basis for the approximation of laws, the first subparagraph of Article 42, Article 43(2) and Article 114 TFEU constitute the appropriate legal bases for the proposed Regulation repealing Council Directive 76/621/EEC relating to the fixing of the maximum level of erucic acid in oils and fats and Council Regulation (EC) No 320/2006 establishing a temporary scheme for the restructuring of the sugar industry.
At its meeting of 15 September 2015 the Committee on Legal Affairs accordingly decided, unanimously[11], to recommend to the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development to include Article 114 TFEU in addition to Articles 42 and 43(2) in the legal basis.
Yours sincerely,
Pavel Svoboda
PROCEDURE
|
Title |
Fixing of the maximum level of erucic acid in oils and fats and establishing a temporary scheme for the restructuring of the sugar industry |
||||
|
References |
COM(2015)0174 – C8-0101/2015 – 2015/0090(COD) |
||||
|
Date submitted to Parliament |
22.4.2015 |
|
|
|
|
|
Committee responsible Date announced in plenary |
AGRI 27.4.2015 |
|
|
|
|
|
Committees asked for opinions Date announced in plenary |
DEVE 27.4.2015 |
INTA 27.4.2015 |
JURI 27.4.2015 |
|
|
|
Not delivering opinions Date of decision |
DEVE 20.5.2015 |
INTA 6.5.2015 |
JURI 22.6.2015 |
|
|
|
Rapporteurs Date appointed |
Czesław Adam Siekierski 5.5.2015 |
|
|
|
|
|
Legal basis disputed Date of JURI opinion |
JURI 15.9.2015 |
|
|
|
|
|
Date adopted |
15.9.2015 |
|
|
|
|
|
Result of final vote |
+: –: 0: |
37 0 2 |
|||
|
Members present for the final vote |
Clara Eugenia Aguilera García, Eric Andrieu, Richard Ashworth, José Bové, Paul Brannen, Daniel Buda, Nicola Caputo, Matt Carthy, Viorica Dăncilă, Michel Dantin, Paolo De Castro, Albert Deß, Herbert Dorfmann, Norbert Erdős, Edouard Ferrand, Luke Ming Flanagan, Beata Gosiewska, Martin Häusling, Esther Herranz García, Jan Huitema, Peter Jahr, Jarosław Kalinowski, Elisabeth Köstinger, Zbigniew Kuźmiuk, Philippe Loiseau, Mairead McGuinness, Giulia Moi, Ulrike Müller, James Nicholson, Maria Noichl, Marijana Petir, Laurenţiu Rebega, Bronis Ropė, Jordi Sebastià, Lidia Senra Rodríguez, Marc Tarabella, Janusz Wojciechowski, Marco Zullo |
||||
|
Substitutes present for the final vote |
Franc Bogovič, Angélique Delahaye, Jean-Paul Denanot, Maria Heubuch, Norbert Lins, Sofia Ribeiro, Annie Schreijer-Pierik, Alyn Smith, Hannu Takkula, Ramón Luis Valcárcel Siso |
||||
|
Date tabled |
18.9.2015 |
||||
- [1] PE560.619v01-00.
- [2] PE565.051v01-00.
- [3] See the SCA letter to rapporteur Mr Siekierski of 7 September 2015 (SGS15/10567).
- [4] Case C-45/86, Commission v. Council (Generalised Tariff Preferences) [1987] ECR 1439, para. 5; Case C-440/05 Commission v. Council [2007] E.C.R. I-9097; Case C-411/06 Commission v. Parliament and Council [2009] ECR I-7585.
- [5] Case C411/06 Commission v Parliament and Council [2009] ECR I-07585, para. 47.
- [6] Case C-300/89 Commission v Council ("Titanium dioxide") [1991] ECR I-2867, paras 17-25.
- [7] OJ L 58, 28.2.2006, p. 42.
- [8] OJ L 364, 20.12.2006, p. 5.
- [9] OJ L 58, 28.2.2006, p. 42.
- [10] SJ-0446/15.
- [11] The following were present for the final vote: Pavel Svoboda (Chair), Jean-Marie Cavada, Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg, Axel Voss (Vice-Chair), Jytte Guteland (rapporteur), Max Andersson, Joëlle Bergeron, Marie-Christine Boutonnet, Daniel Buda, Therese Comodini Cachia, Angel Dzhambazki, Laura Ferrara, Enrico Gasbarra, Heidi Hautala, Sajjad Karim, Dietmar Köster, Stefano Maullu, Emil Radev, Julia Reda, Evelyn Regner, Virginie Rozière, Tadeusz Zwiefka,Verónica Lope Fontagné (for Rosa Estaràs Ferragut pursuant to Rule 200(2)), and Dominique Martin (for Gilles Lebreton pursuant to Rule 200(2)).