REPORT on the outcome of the Committee on Petitions’ deliberations during 2019

23.11.2020  - (2020/2044(INI))

Committee on Petitions
Rapporteur: Kosma Złotowski

Procedure : 2020/2044(INI)
Document stages in plenary
Document selected :  
A9-0230/2020
Texts tabled :
A9-0230/2020
Texts adopted :

MOTION FOR A EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RESOLUTION

on the outcome of the Committee on Petitions’ deliberations during 2019

(2020/2044(INI))

The European Parliament,

 having regard to its previous resolutions on the outcome of the Committee on Petitions’ deliberations,

 having regard to Articles 10 and 11 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU),

 having regard to Articles 24 and 227 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), which reflect the importance the Treaty attaches to the right of EU citizens and residents to bring their concerns to the attention of Parliament,

 having regard to Article 228 of the TFEU on the role and functions of the European Ombudsman,

 having regard to Article 44 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union concerning the right to petition the European Parliament,

 having regard to the provisions of the TFEU relating to the infringement procedure and, in particular, to Articles 258 and 260 thereof,

 having regard to Rules 54 and 227(7) of its Rules of Procedure,

 having regard to the report of the Committee on Petitions (A9-0230/2020),

A. whereas following the European elections which took place from 23 to 26 May 2019 and the constitution of the new Parliament on 2 July 2019, the Committee on Petitions held its constitutive meeting on 10 July 2019;

B. whereas in 2019 Parliament received 1 357 petitions, which represents an increase of 11.23 % on the 1 220 petitions submitted in 2018 and reveals that despite the European election recess period, EU citizens and residents continued to exercise their right to petition;

C. whereas in 2019 the number of users supporting one or more petitions on Parliament’s Petitions Web Portal increased as compared to 2018 and reached a total of 28 075; whereas the number of clicks in support of petitions was 31 679;

D. whereas of the petitions submitted in 2019, 41 were co-signed by one or more citizens, 8 by more than 100 citizens and 3 by more than 10 000 citizens;

E. whereas the number of petitions remained modest in relation to the total population of the EU; whereas the overall number of petitions received indicates that greater efforts and appropriate measures are necessary to raise citizens' awareness on the right to petition; whereas citizens in exercising the right to petition expect that the EU institutions will provide added value in finding a solution to their problems;

F. whereas of the 1 357 petitions submitted in 2019, 938 were declared admissible, 406 were declared inadmissible and 13 were withdrawn; whereas the relatively high percentage (30 %) of inadmissible petitions in 2019 reveals that there is still a widespread lack of clarity about the EU’s fields of activity; whereas in this sense, it is necessary to address this problem with information campaigns dedicated to clarifying the competences of the Union as well as the procedure for submitting petitions to the European Parliament;

G. whereas the criteria for the admissibility of petitions are laid down in Article 227 of the TFEU and Rule 226 of Parliament’s Rules of Procedure, which require that petitions must be submitted by EU citizens or residents directly affected by matters falling within the European Union’s fields of activity;

H. whereas the right to petition the European Parliament is one of the fundamental rights of EU citizens; whereas the right to petition offers EU citizens and residents an open, democratic and transparent mechanism for addressing their elected representatives directly, and is therefore an important element of active citizens' participation in the EU’s fields of activity;

I. whereas democratic governance based on transparency, effective protection of fundamental rights and the inclusion of EU citizens’ requests in the EU political agenda are needed in order to increase citizens' direct participation and to improve the quality of the EU decision-making process; whereas a democratic and transparent governance should be also considered a cornerstone for enhancing the effectiveness and citizen-friendliness of the work of the Committee on Petitions;

J. whereas the right to petition should enhance Parliament’s responsiveness to complaints and concerns relating to respect for EU fundamental rights and compliance with EU legislation in the Member States; whereas petitions are, among other things, a very useful source of information on instances of misapplication or breaches of EU law; whereas petitions enable Parliament and other EU institutions to assess the transposition and application of EU law and its impact on EU citizens and residents, and to detect shortcomings and inconsistencies of EU law undermining the goal of ensuring full protection of citizens' fundamental rights;

K. whereas citizens usually turn to the Committee on Petitions as a last resort when other bodies and institutions are deemed to be unable to resolve their concerns;

L. whereas Parliament has long been at the forefront of the development of the petitions process internationally and has the most open and transparent petitions process in Europe, allowing petitioners to participate in its activities;

M. whereas each petition is carefully examined by the Committee on Petitions; whereas each petitioner has the right to receive a reply and information on the decision on admissibility and follow-up actions taken by the committee, within a reasonable period of time and in their own language or in the language used in the petition;

N. whereas the activities of the Committee on Petitions are based on the input and contributions received from petitioners; whereas the information provided by the petitioners along with the expertise delivered by the Commission, the Member States and other bodies are essential for the work of the committee; whereas admissible petitions often provide valuable input for the work of other parliamentary committees and intergroups;

O. whereas a considerable number of petitions are discussed publicly in meetings of the Committee on Petitions; whereas petitioners are frequently invited to present their petitions and play a full part in the discussion, thereby contributing actively to the work of the committee; whereas in 2019, the Committee on Petitions held 9 ordinary committee meetings, where 250 petitions were discussed with 239 petitioners present, while 126 petitioners participated actively by taking the floor; whereas the role of the committee in empowering European citizens is an important contribution to reinforcing the image and authority of Parliament;

P. whereas the main subjects of concern raised in petitions submitted in 2019 pertained to environmental matters (in particular, issues concerning pollution, protection and preservation and waste management), fundamental rights (notably the rights of the child, voting rights and EU citizens’ rights, in particular in the context of Brexit), constitutional affairs (in particular questions related to the European elections and to the UK’s withdrawal from the EU), health (in particular issues relating to healthcare and to the impact of hazards and toxic substances), transport (notably air and rail passengers’ rights, cross-national connections and seasonal time changes), the internal market (in particular questions relating to consumers’ rights and freedom of movement of persons), employment (in particular access to the job market and precarious contracts), and culture and education (in particular access to education for children with disabilities and harassment at school), in addition to many other areas of activity;

Q. whereas 73.9 % of the petitions received (1 003 petitions) in 2019 were submitted via Parliament’s Petitions Web Portal, as compared to 70.7 % (863 petitions) in 2018;

R. whereas in 2019 the Petitions Web Portal was further developed into a responsive web design version, compliant with the new ‘look and feel’ of the European Parliament’s website (Europarl); whereas it has therefore become more user-friendly and accessible for citizens, who can now use it on any device, optimised to apply the European standard EN 301 549; whereas it is also partially compliant with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1 level AA standard; whereas the new privacy statement has been uploaded in all language versions in the email templates and on the registration page, and audio Captcha for registration of user accounts has been enabled; whereas the Petitions Web Portal and ePetition have been further integrated by improving their synchronisation mechanism; whereas a large number of individual support requests have been handled successfully;

S. whereas it should be noted that owing to the European election recess period, no fact-finding visits took place for petitions for which an inquiry was ongoing during 2019; whereas the committee carried out the follow-up assessments of a number of previous fact-finding visits and adopted the reports on two which took place in 2018; whereas a number of fact-finding visits have been scheduled for 2020;

T. whereas the Committee on Petitions considers the European Citizens’ Initiative (ECI) to be an important instrument of participatory democracy, which enables citizens to become actively involved in shaping the Union’s policies and legislation; whereas there has been a lack of effective communication concerning the ECI;

U. whereas the media play a key role in any democratic system and provide more transparency to the process of the Committee on Petitions; whereas a quality press is an essential element for the whole European Union; whereas there is confusion in some European media as regards the role and powers of the Committee on Petitions;

V. whereas under the Rules of Procedure, the Committee on Petitions is responsible for relations with the European Ombudsman, who investigates complaints of maladministration within the institutions and bodies of the European Union; whereas in 2019 the Committee on Petitions played a key role in the organisation of the election of the European Ombudsman by holding a public hearing of the candidates under Rule 231 of the Rules of Procedure; whereas on 18 December 2019 Emily O’Reilly was re-elected European Ombudsman for the 2019-2024 parliamentary term;

W. whereas the resolution of Parliament of 17 January 2019 on the Ombudsman’s strategic inquiry OI/2/2017 on the transparency of legislative discussions in the preparatory bodies of the Council of the EU[1] expressed support for the Ombudsman in her inquiry and called on the Council to take all measures necessary to implement as swiftly as possible the recommendations of the Ombudsman; whereas the Council has not responded either to the Ombudsman or to Parliament’s resolution, and has not taken any steps towards implementation;

X. whereas in 2019 the relations between the Committee on Petitions and the European Ombudsman were further strengthened, as demonstrated by the active participation of the Ombudsman in the meetings of the committee; whereas following Parliament’s resolution of 12 February 2019 on the revision of the Statute of the European Ombudsman[2], Emily O’Reilly took part in the committee’s meeting of 2 April 2019 for an exchange of views on her proposed new prerogatives, and presented her Annual Report for 2018 to the Committee on Petitions at its meeting on 4 September 2019;

Y. whereas the Committee on Petitions is a member of the European Network of Ombudsmen, which also includes the European Ombudsman, national and regional ombudsmen and similar bodies of the Member States, the candidate countries, and other European Economic Area countries, and which aims to promote the exchange of information about EU law and policy and to share best practices;

Z. whereas the activities of the Petitions Network should be improved by ensuring a more effective cooperation among committees dealing with petitions; whereas the Petitions Network should strengthen the dialogue and collaboration with the Commission and other EU institutions aiming at guaranteeing that issues raised by citizens in petitions are adequately addressed and resolved;

AA. whereas in her political guidelines for the European Commission 2019-2024, President von der Leyen committed to respond with a legislative act to resolutions of Parliament based on Article 225 TFEU, with a view to giving Parliament a stronger role in initiating EU legislation; whereas the Committee on Petitions should play a strategic role in creating a direct connection between Parliament’s right of legislative initiative and the issues raised by citizens through petitions;

1. Recalls that the Committee on Petitions, as the only committee directly communicating with the citizens, must enhance its key role in defending and promoting the rights of EU citizens and residents within the committee’s competences, ensuring that petitioners’ concerns and complaints are examined in timely fashion and resolved, through an open, democratic, agile and transparent petition process and a strengthened cooperation and dialogue with other EU institutions and national, regional and local authorities, and by avoiding a biased or politicised response to the petitioners;

2. Regrets that petitioners are still not sufficiently informed about the grounds for declaring a petition inadmissible; emphasises the importance of a continuous information campaign and public debate on the Union’s fields of activity aimed at raising public awareness of the right to petition the European Parliament, providing clearer and more detailed information about the powers of the EU; stresses the need to adopt, as a matter of urgency, all necessary measures in order to implement a democratic EU governance based on transparency, enhanced protection of fundamental rights, and direct citizens' inclusion in the EU decision-making processes; considers it essential to find a way of better promoting the right to petition and making citizens aware of this right; proposes that information campaigns in the European Union be stepped up in order to ensure that EU citizens have better knowledge of the EU’s competences and clarify the perception of the role of the Committee on Petitions in public opinion;

3. Calls for a more active press and communications service and a more active social media presence, in order to enhance the visibility of the work of the committee as well as to increase its responsiveness to public concerns and EU debates, by also highlighting those cases and success stories in which an issue raised by a petitioner was resolved with the support of the Committee on Petitions;

4. Proposes to carry out campaigns and outreach events targeting journalists and the media in order to prevent vague information and thus improve the relationship between the Committee on Petitions and the media; underlines that the media play a key role in reaching out to European citizens concerning the day-to-day work of the Committee on Petitions and can contribute through their activities to improving European citizens’ knowledge of the work of the Committee on Petitions; stresses that it is the EU’s task to encourage the provision to European citizens of accurate information;

5. Points out that petitions offer the opportunity to the European Parliament and other EU institutions to maintain a direct dialogue with EU citizens and legal residents who are affected by misapplication or breaches of EU law or by inconsistencies in EU legislation, and to fix problems which have been detected; welcomes, therefore, the fact that petitions are the entrance door of citizens in the European institutions; stresses the need for enhanced cooperation between the Committee on Petitions and lead committees, the EU institutions and national, regional and local authorities, on inquiries or proposals regarding implementation of and compliance with EU law;

6. Considers that in order to ensure that petitions are passed to the relevant and competent authorities, it is necessary to improve cooperation with national parliaments, Member State governments, relevant national institutions and Ombudsmen;

7. Recalls that petitions provide a valuable contribution to the Commission’s role as guardian of the Treaties; reiterates that good cooperation between the Committee on Petitions and the Commission is crucial and that faster answers from the Commission are essential in the process of handling petitions; welcomes, in this regard, the commitment made by the Commission Vice-President for Interinstitutional Relations and Foresight, Maroš Šefčovič, during his hearing as commissioner-designate, to further improve the Commission’s handling of petitions and to ensure the submission of accurate answers within the three-month deadline; reiterates its call on the Commission to ensure transparency and access to documents in the framework of the EU Pilot procedures in relation to petitions received, and of the EU Pilot and infringement procedures that have already been concluded;

8. Calls on the Commission to commit to a more active involvement with the Committee on Petitions in order to ensure that petitioners receive a precise response to their requests and complaints regarding the implementation of EU law;

9. Considers that the Commission should not place the responsibility to act on a petitioner alone when there is a problem detected with the application or breach of EU law; believes that the Commission must check whether national authorities are taking steps to solve the problem mentioned in the petition and must be ready to intervene in case of inefficiency of actions of national authorities;

10. Stresses that transparency and public access to the documents of all EU institutions, including the Council, should be the rule in order to ensure the highest level of protection of the democratic rights of citizens; points out that the current Regulation 1049/2001[3] no longer reflects the actual situation; calls on the Commission to submit a proposal for a recast of the 2001 Regulation, with a view to enhancing transparency and accountability by promoting good administrative practice;

11. Notes that the Committee on Petitions frequently receives complaints about rule of law violations by certain authorities; recalls that ensuring the effective, equal and uniform application of EU law is crucial for upholding the rule of law, which is one of the founding values of the Union and its Member States, pursuant to Article 2 of the TEU; while respecting the subsidiarity principle, calls on the Commission to respect the commitments made in its communication of 17 July 2019 entitled ‘Strengthening the rule of law within the Union: A blueprint for action’ (COM(2019)0343), in order to promote a culture of respect for the rule of law, reinforce cooperation with national authorities, and ensure an effective common response to actual threats within the Union;

12. Urges the Commission to take steps to ensure that the interpretation of the scope of Article 51 is as coherent and broad as possible; recalls that the expectations of most petitioners in relation to the rights conferred on them by the Charter are high and go beyond their current scope of application;

13. Believes that cooperation with other committees of Parliament is essential for the comprehensive treatment of petitions; notes that in 2019, 65 petitions were sent to other committees for opinion and 351 for information, and that 38 opinions and 9 acknowledgements of taking petitions into consideration in their work were received from other committees; also notes that in 2018, 47 petitions were sent to other committees for opinion and 660 for information, and that 30 opinions and 38 acknowledgements of taking petitions into consideration in their work were received from other committees; recalls that petitioners are informed of decisions to request opinions from other committees for the treatment of their petitions; therefore underlines the importance of the contribution of other committees in enabling Parliament to respond more swiftly and efficiently to citizens’ concerns;

14. Trusts that the petitions network is a useful tool for raising awareness of the issues brought up in petitions and facilitating the treatment of petitions in other committees to which they are sent for opinion or for information; notes that there is a need for ensuring an adequate follow-up of petitions in parliamentary and legislative work; stresses that the petitions network could be considered as a strategic tool to foster the right of legislative initiative of the European Parliament enshrined in Article 225 TFEU, thus addressing the shortcomings and inconsistencies of EU law highlighted in petitions in order to ensure full protection of citizens' rights; believes that regular meetings of the petitions network are key for enhancing cooperation between parliamentary committees through exchange of information and sharing of best practices among the network members; stresses that a closer liaison between the committees may also improve efficiency as regards planning hearings and parliamentary studies on the same subjects; advocates drafting a mechanism to enable the Committee on Petitions to be directly involved in the legislative process;

15. Draws attention to the key annual reports adopted by the Committee on Petitions in 2019, notably the Annual Report on the Committee on Petitions’ activities in 2018[4] and the Annual Report on the European Ombudsman’s work in 2018[5];

16. Notes that the Committee on Petitions has expressed its opinion on important issues raised in petitions by contributing to parliamentary and legislative reports, notably on the implementation of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union in the EU institutional framework[6] and on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on discontinuing seasonal changes of time and repealing Directive 2000/84/EC[7];

17. Underlines that many petitions have led to legislative or political action, whether in the form of reports or motions for resolutions, or of preliminary rulings or infringement procedures;

18. Takes note that the environment was the main area of concern for petitioners in 2019; points in this regard to the motion for a resolution pursuant to Rule 227(2) on waste management, adopted on 21 March 2019 by the Committee on Petitions and on 4 April 2019 in plenary[8]; stresses that waste management is one of the main global socio-economic and environmental challenges, and reiterates its call to maximise prevention, reuse, separate collection and recycling with a view to boosting the transition towards a circular economy; reiterates its call on the Commission to use the full potential of the early warning system as laid down in the revised waste directives; draws attention to the final report of the fact-finding visit to Valledora (Italy), adopted on 11 April 2019, and calls on the competent national, regional and local authorities to ensure the full and consistent implementation of all recommendations contained therein;

19. Draws attention to the hearing on ‘Climate Change Denial’ which the Committee on Petitions held on 21 March 2019 jointly with the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety; believes that the Committee on Petitions must continue to counter climate denialism, including by promoting the adoption of effective and dissuasive sanctions against interest groups lobbying the EU institutions whose activities are directly or indirectly related to climate change denial; stresses that it is of paramount importance to ensure that the future work of the Committee on Petitions guarantees a specific focus on climate change with a view to strengthening the overall activities of the EU institutions aimed at consistently implementing the European Green Deal and the Paris Agreement;

20. Points to the studies on ‘Cross-border nuclear safety, liability and cooperation in the European Union’ and ‘Endocrine Disruptors: From Scientific Evidence to Human Health Protection’, which the Committee on Petitions commissioned as a follow-up to a significant number of petitions raising concerns over these matters and which were presented at its meetings on 20 February 2019 and on 2 April 2019; regrets the fact that environmental rules are not always correctly implemented in the Member States, as described in numerous petitions; stresses the importance of delivering on EU citizens’ expectations on the protection of the environment, and therefore urges the Commission, together with the Member States, to ensure the correct implementation of EU legislation in this field; is convinced that the Commission must step up its activities to make sure that environmental assessments conducted by Member States for the authorisation of infrastructure projects concerning which petitioners have highlighted serious risks for human health and the environment are based on accurate and comprehensive analyses in full compliance with EU law;

21. Is seriously concerned about the severe health damage suffered by citizens - the highest negative impact being registered among children - who live in areas where huge amounts of carcinogenic substances are produced; strongly believes that the Commission must make full use of and consistently implement the provisions of Annex XIV to Regulation No 1907/2006 (REACH) regarding substances subject to authorisation as being carcinogenic, persistent and bio-accumulative, ensuring their substitution by non-toxic alternative substances, including by promoting industrial processes with this in view;

22. Draws attention to the large number of petitions on Brexit submitted in 2019, mostly calling for the protection of EU citizens’ rights before and after Brexit; welcomes the excellent work done by the Committee on Petitions, which by giving voice to the concerns raised by these petitioners contributed to ensuring that citizens’ rights remained one of Parliament’s main priorities in the Brexit negotiations; stresses that there are many citizens – both in the EU and in the United Kingdom – who, in view of the uncertainty of a no-deal Brexit, have turned to the Committee on Petitions because of the fear of seeing their rights endangered due to the lack of agreement; points out that in order to preserve the rights enjoyed by EU citizens resident in a Member State other than their own, it can be helpful to have appropriate legislation in case the Member State changes its status vis-à-vis the EU;

23. Recalls the specific role of protection played by the Committee on Petitions within the EU in the framework of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities; points to the committee’s important ongoing work in connection with petitions concerning issues relating to disabilities; notes that the number of petitions on disability decreased in 2019 in comparison with the previous year; notes however, that accessibility and discrimination remain among the main challenges faced by persons with disabilities; recalls that in 2019 the Committee on Petitions paid specific attention to the discussion of petitions on inclusive education for disabled children; calls for a new skills agenda, to be positioned at the very heart of Europe, and for concrete proposals on how to foster inclusiveness and facilitate the recognition and portability of skills within Europe;

24. Welcomes the fact that in 2019 the Committee on Petitions dealt with citizens’ concerns regarding transparency and accountability of the EU institutions, as raised in several petitions; recalls in this regard that at its meeting of 2 April 2019 the committee hosted a workshop on ‘Conflicts of Interest - Integrity, Accountability and Transparency in the EU institutions and agencies’, which examined the achievements reached in relation to conflicts of interest, integrity, accountability, transparency, codes of conduct and revolving doors in the EU institutions and agencies; points to the important contribution made to the debate by the European Ombudsman, who gave a keynote speech on achievements and challenges for EU institutions;

25. Calls for the swift adoption of legal reforms aimed at dealing with lack of transparency of the EU decision-making process, conflicts of interest, and all ethical issues at EU level that affect the legislative process in relation to matters raised by citizens through petitions;

26. Draws attention to the majority support that the plenary of Parliament gave to the resolution of 17 January 2019 on the strategic investigation OI/2/2017 of the European Ombudsman on the transparency of legislative discussions in the preparatory bodies of the Council of the European Union[9]; recalls that the Council, as co-legislator, is an indispensable institution for the citizens of the Union; regrets the fact that numerous Council discussions and meetings still take place behind closed doors; invites the Council to implement a policy of greater transparency in order to improve citizens' trust in public institutions; encourages the Council to publicise certain meetings and documents more widely in order to achieve a better communication with European citizens and with national parliaments;

27. Acknowledges the outcome of the public hearing held by the Committee on Petitions on 12 November 2019 on the US Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA) and its extraterritorial impact on EU citizens; deplores the fact that the Commission and Council seem to value international relations with the US more than the rights and interests of EU citizens, particularly in the case of FATCA, and calls on them to assume their responsibility and take immediate and meaningful action in support of the citizens concerned, as called for by Parliament in its resolution of 5 July 2018 on the adverse effects of the US Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act on EU citizens[10];

28. Points to the important ongoing work of the Committee on Petitions aimed at ensuring the protection of animal welfare in the EU, as demonstrated by the significant number of petitions on this topic discussed in its meetings in 2019; believes it is of paramount importance to launch a new EU strategy on animal welfare to bridge all the existing gaps and ensure full and effective protection of animal welfare through a clear and comprehensive legislative framework that is fully in line with the requirements of Article 13 of the TFEU; draws attention to the public hearing on ‘Revaluation of the wolf population in the EU’, which the Committee on Petitions held on 5 December 2019 jointly with the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety and in association with the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development, in order to give voice to citizens’ concerns about the legal framework for the protection of the wolf as well as the impact of wolves and other large carnivores such as the brown bear population on the environment and rural communities; emphasises that in the framework of the Habitats Directive large carnivores are protected species in most of the Member States; calls on the Member States to make better use of the tools under the existing EU legislation to address possible conflicts concerning the conservation of protected large carnivores; invites the Commission to present as soon as possible an updated EU guidance on species protection rules in order to achieve a satisfactory coexistence between people and large carnivores in affected areas;

29. Considers it essential that citizens are able to be involved directly in the initiation of legislative proposals; stresses that the ECI is a fundamental instrument for active citizenship and public participation; welcomes the adoption on 17 April 2019 of the new rules for the ECI, which bring a number of structural and technical improvements aimed at making this instrument more user-friendly and accessible and facilitating increased participation of EU citizens in the legislative process of the Union; notes the significant number of new ECIs registered by the Commission in 2019, which shows that citizens are seizing the opportunity to use participatory instruments to have a say in policymaking and lawmaking processes; calls for more dissemination campaigns on the role of the ECI in order to promote the use of this resource by European citizens; regrets that so far the majority of successful ECIs did not end with a legislative proposal by the Commission; encourages the Commission to approach ECIs as openly and responsively as possible in order to make this instrument a real success of European participatory democracy in the eyes of the citizens; therefore calls on the Commission to initiate a legislative proposal on the basis of any successful ECI that was supported by the European Parliament;

30. Recalls that relations with the European Ombudsman are one of the responsibilities conferred by Parliament’s Rules of Procedure on the Committee on Petitions; welcomes Parliament’s fruitful cooperation with the European Ombudsman, as well as its involvement in the European Network of Ombudsmen; underlines the excellent relations between the European Ombudsman and the Committee on Petitions; notes the key role played by the Committee on Petitions in ensuring that the public hearings of the candidates in the framework of the election procedure for the European Ombudsman in 2019 were conducted in a transparent and efficient manner;

31. Appreciates the European Ombudsman’s regular contributions to the work of the Committee on Petitions throughout the year; firmly believes that the Union’s institutions, bodies and agencies must ensure consistent and effective follow-up to the recommendations of the Ombudsman;

32. Recalls that the Petitions Web Portal is an essential tool for ensuring a smooth, efficient and transparent petition process; welcomes, in this regard, its alignment with the ‘look and feel’ of the European Parliament’s website (Europarl); recalls that since the end of 2017, documents such as agendas, minutes and communications from the Committee on Petitions have been automatically uploaded to the portal, providing citizens with a portal which is more responsive, transparent and accessible; stresses that efforts must be continued to make the portal more accessible to persons with disabilities, including developments which allow petitioners to submit petitions in the EU's national sign languages, in order to ensure that all citizens of the Union can exercise their right to petition the European Parliament as contained in Article 20 and 24 of the TFEU and in Article 44 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union; suggests ensuring more visibility for the Petitions Web Portal on the European Parliament’s website; is of the opinion that the right to petition is directly linked to the institution’s activities and deserves a visible and easily accessible place on the EP’s website; calls for investigation into how to prevent the use of stolen or fake identities;

33. Underlines that, although the number of people supporting one or more petitions on Parliament’s Petitions web portal has increased by comparison with 2018, some petitioners are still reporting technical problems with supporting several petitions;

34. Underlines that the ePetitions instrument is an important database for the Committee on Petitions to function, but calls for the improvement and modernisation of the interface in order to make it easier to use and more accessible;

35. Congratulates the secretariat of the Committee on Petitions for handling petitions efficiently and with great care, in accordance with the committee’s guidelines and the petitions lifecycle in the EP administration;

36. Instructs its President to forward this resolution and the report of the Committee on Petitions to the Council, the Commission, the European Ombudsman, the governments and parliaments of the Member States, and the Member States’ committees on petitions, national Ombudsmen or similar competent bodies.


EXPLANATORY STATEMENT

Pursuant to Rule 227 (7) of the Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament, the Committee on Petitions shall report annually on the outcome of its deliberations. The report aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the work carried out by the committee in 2019 and includes a statistical analysis of the petitions received and processed as well as a stocktaking of other parliamentary activities such as the adoption of reports and opinions, the organisation of hearings and the committee’s relations with other EU institutions. It is worth recalling that the core work of the Committee on Petitions generates from the right to petition the European Parliament exercised by EU citizens and residents under Article 227 TFEU and is not directly linked to the work programme of the Commission.

 

2019 was an important year for European democracy, as EU citizens were called on to renew the composition of the European Parliament. On 23-26 May 2019, more than 200,000,000 people in 28 EU countries went to the polls to elect members of the European Parliament. Following the European elections, in which 51% of voters - notably the highest turnout in twenty years - cast a ballot to choose their representatives, the new Parliament held its constitutive session on 2 July 2019.

 

The Committee on Petitions held its constitutive meeting on 10 July 2019 and elected Ms Dolors Montserrat as Chair, Ms Tatjana Ždanoka, as First Vice-Chair, Ms Yana Toom, as second Vice-Chair, Mr Ryszard Czarnecki as third Vice-Chair and Ms Cristina Maestre Martín de Almagro, as fourth Vice-Chair.

 

In order to enable the organisation of the European elections, a recess period took place from 19 April to 1 July 2019, during which parliamentary activities were interrupted. This explains the reduced number of reports, opinions, resolutions and hearings, which were adopted and took place in 2019. On the contrary, EU citizens and residents continued exercising their right to petition during the recess period as demonstrated by the continuous petitions’ flow registered in 2019, which significantly increased in comparison with the previous two years.

 

Statistical analysis of petitions received in 2019 compared to 2018

 

According to the statistics, the European Parliament received 1 357 petitions in 2019 which represents an increase by 11,23% compared to the 1 220 petitions submitted in 2018.

 

Users of the Petitions Web Portal have the possibility to support petitions. In 2019, 28 075 users acted as supporters. In 2018, 4 893 users of the portal supported one or several petitions as compared to 15 540 users in 2017 and to 6 132 in 2016. With the exception of the year 2018, statistics show a steady increase in the number of users supporting petitions in the web portal.

 

In 2019, 41 petitions were co-signed by one or more citizens, 8 petitions by more than 100 citizens and 3 petitions by more than 10 000 citizens. In 2018, 41 petitions were co-signed by one or more citizens, 14 petitions by more than 100 citizens, 5 petitions by more than 10 000 citizens and 2 petitions by more than 100 000 citizens.

 

Format of petitions

In 2019, almost 3/4 of the petitions were submitted via the Petitions Web Portal while 1/4 of petitions were submitted by post. The figures in the two tables reveal that in 2019 the number of petitions submitted via the Petitions Web Portal increased by 3.2% in comparison with 2018.

 

2019

 

2018

Petition Format

Number of petitions

%

Petitions portal

1003

73.9

Letter

354

26.1

Petition Format

Number of petitions

%

Petitions portal

863

70.7

Letter

357

29.3


Status of petitions per calendar year[11]

The following table shows the status of petitions from 2003 to 2019. It can be noted that in 2019, the majority of petitions were closed within a year after being received and examined by the committee. As a result of the comparison with the data on the status of petitions included in the annual reports from 2010 to 2018, it can be concluded that the majority of petitions are closed within a year after being received and examined. Very small percentages (from 0.3 % to 13.7%) of petitions from 2004 to 2015 remain open. Most of these open petitions relate to environmental issues and ongoing infringement procedures before the Court of Justice of the European Union or to issues that members of the committee want to follow closely.

 

Status of petitions

Year

Number of petitions

Open procedure

Closed procedure

2019

1 357

508

37.4%

849

62.6%

2018

1 220

313

25.7%

907

74.3%

2017

1 271

260

20.5%

1 011

79.5%

2016

1 569

482

30.7%

1 087

69.3%

2015

1 431

196

13.7%

1 235

86.3%

2014

2 715

232

8.5%

2 483

91.5%

2013

2 891

309

10.7%

2 582

89.3%

2012

1 986

128

6.4%

1 858

93.6%

2011

1 414

73

5.2%

1 341

94.8%

2010

1 656

38

2.3%

1 618

97.7%

2009

1 924

14

0.7%

1 910

99.3%

2008

1 886

19

1.0%

1 867

99.0%

2007

1 506

25

1.7%

1 481

98.3%

2006

1 021

5

0.5%

1 016

99.5%

2005

1 016

3

0.3%

1 013

99.7%

2004

1 002

3

0.3%

999

99.7%

2003

1 315

0

0%

1 315

100.0%

 


Outcome of petitions[12]

 


2019

Outcome of petitions

Number

%

Admissible and Closed

430

31.6%

Admissible and Open

508

37.4%

Inadmissible

406

29.9%

Withdrawn

13

0.9%

Sent to EC for opinion

537

47.4%

Sent for opinion to other bodies

42

3.7%

Sent for information to other bodies

554

48.9%

2018

Outcome of petitions

Number

%

Admissible and Closed

475

38.9%

Admissible and Open

313

25.6%

Inadmissible

409

33.5%

Withdrawn

23

1.8%

Sent to EC for opinion

555

34.9%

Sent for opinion to other bodies

29

1.8%

Sent for information to other bodies

1 002

63.1%


 

 

The tables show that the percentage of petitions declared inadmissible in 2019 is slightly lower than the percentage of petitions, which were declared inadmissible in 2018. Lower is also the percentage of admissible petitions (31.6 %), which were closed immediately by providing information to the petitioner in 2019, as compared to the 38.9 % in 2018. It follows that more petitions (37.4%) have been kept open in 2019 as compared to 2018, when 25.6% of petitions were kept open.

It is also to be noted that in 2019, almost half of the admissible petitions were sent to the Commission for opinion, which represents an increase by 12.5% as compared to 2018.

Finally, the percentage of petitions sent to other bodies for opinion was slightly higher in 2019, while the number of petitions sent to other bodies for information decreased by 14.2%.

 

Number of petitions by country

The following two tables illustrate in numbers and in percentage terms changes of petitions by country from 2019 to 2018. A large number of petitions submitted in 2019 and 2018 concern the EU. It means that these petitions either raise EU-wide issues or call for common measures to be implemented throughout the EU. Petitions concerning the EU may also relate to one or more Member States and are therefore registered under both the EU and the concerned Member State(s). This explains why the sum of the petitions concerning the EU and of those only related to Member States exceeds the total number of petitions submitted in 2019 and 2018.

Additionally, it is worth stressing that the nine countries mostly concerned by petitions remained the same in 2019 and in 2018. However, their order changed considerably. While the majority of petitions submitted in 2019 concern Germany, the number of petitions related to Spain and Italy decreased respectively by 3.6% and 3.5% in comparison with 2018.

Another remarkable difference concerns the United Kingdom. Petitions concerning the UK in 2019 increased by 3.2% in comparison with 2018. There were also some changes in the bottom of the list. While in 2019, Estonia, Slovenia and Latvia were the least countries concerned, in 2018, it was Malta, Estonia and Finland.

Finally, the proportion of petitions that concern non-EU countries slightly raised in 2019.

 



2019

Concerned Country

Petitions

%

European Union

599

34.6

Germany

203

11.7

Spain

164

9.5

Italy

103

5.9

United Kingdom

90

5.2

Romania

80

4.6

Bulgaria

52

3.0

Poland

51

 2.9

Greece

46

2.7

France

40

2.3

Other EU countries

218

12.6

Non-EU countries

86

5.0

 

 

 

2018

Concerned Country

Petitions

%

European Union

473

30.1

Spain

206

13.1

Germany

172

11.0

Italy

147

9.4

Greece

69

4.4

Poland

63

4.0

France

51

3.2

Romania

51

3.2

Bulgaria

42

2.7

United Kingdom

32

2.0

Other EU countries

200

13.0

Non-EU Countries

62

3.9

 

 


 

 


Languages of petitions

In 2019 and in 2018, petitions were submitted in 22 of the official languages of the European Union. While in 2017 and 2016, the majority of petitions were submitted in English, German became the most used language in 2019 and 2018. In addition, the tables illustrate that German, English, Spanish and Italian languages accounted for almost 3/4 (71.8%-71%) of the petitions received in both years. Slovak, Latvian and Slovenian were the least used languages in 2019 while in 2018 it were Swedish, Slovenian and Maltese.

 


2019

Petition Language

Number of petitions

%

German

337

24.8

English

331

24.4

Spanish

183

13.5

Italian

123

9.1

Romanian

60

4.4

Polish

56

4.1

French

53

3.9

Others

214

15.8

Total

1 357

100

 

2018

Petition Language

Number of petitions

%

German

275

22.5

English

217

17.8

Spanish

204

16.7

Italian

171

14.0

Greek

63

5.2

French

61

5.0

Polish

61

5.0

Others

168

13.8

Total

1 220

100



Nationality of petitioners

As regards nationality, petitions submitted by German citizens represent the highest number in both years with an increase by 3% in 2019. By contrast, the number of petitioners from Spanish and Italian citizens decreased respectively by 2.5% and by 4.3% in 2019 in comparison with 2018. In addition, the tables below reveal an increase by 3.7% in the number of petitions submitted by British citizens in 2019. In 2019, 54 out of 88 petitions submitted by British citizens raised questions about Brexit.

 

 


2019

Prime petitioner nationality

Number of petitions

%

Germany

345

25.4

Spain

201

14.8

Italy

139

10.2

Romania

97

7.1

United Kingdom

88

6.5

Poland

72

5.3

Greece

55

4.0

Bulgaria

52

3.8

France

51

3.8

Other EU nationalities

231

17.1

Non-EU nationalities

28

2.0

2018

Prime petitioner nationality

Number of petitions

%

Germany

274

22.4

Spain

212

17.3

Italy

177

14.5

Poland

73

6.0

Greece

71

5.8

Romania

61

5.0

France

57

4.7

Bulgaria

44

3.6

United Kingdom

34

2.8

Other EU nationalities

193

15.9

Non-EU nationalities

26

2.0


 

 

Main subjects of petitions

The tables below include the top ten petition themes. From the tables it can be concluded that the main areas of concern for petitioners in 2019 and 2018 were environment, fundamental rights and justice. While the number of petitions on fundamental rights amounts to the same percentage, in 2019 petitions on environment and on justice increased by respectively 1.9% and 2.3%. By contrast, in 2019 petitions on internal market and health issues slightly decreased by respectively 1.9% and 0.7%.

Among the other themes, in 2019 the committee received a higher number (98) of petitions on constitutional affairs as compared to the 62 petitions received under the same theme in 2018. Under this category, petitioners expressed their concerns over a number of EU constitutional law issues, such as the UK withdrawal from the EU, EU citizenship and a few questions on the working of the EU institutions. As regards more specifically Brexit, in 2019, petitions raising questions about Brexit and its consequences amounted to 73.

Finally, it is worth recalling that in 2019, the European elections took place, which explains the reason why in 2019 the number of petitions on voting rights and elections was higher (49) than in 2018, when 13 petitions were registered under this theme.


 

 

2019

 

2018

Top 10 Petition themes

Number of petitions

%

Environment

252

12.2

Fundamental Rights

189

9.2

Justice

184

8.9

Health

97

4.7

Transport

90

4.4

Internal Market

89

4.3

Employment

79

3.8

Education & Culture

62

3.0

Social Affairs

45

2.2

Property & Restitution

33

1.6

Top 10 Petition themes

Number of petitions

%

Environment

199

10.3

Fundamental Rights

186

9.6

Justice

129

6.6

Internal Market

120

6.2

Health

104

5.4

Employment

89

4.6

Transport

88

4.5

Social Affairs

61

3.1

Education & Culture

49

2.5

Property & Restitution

39

2.0

 

 

 


 

Petitions web portal

The Petitions web portal, established at the end of 2014, has been further improved in order to make it more user friendly and more accessible for citizens. In 2019, important technical upgrades have been made. First of all, the portal has been developed into a responsive web design version compliant and in line with the new ‘look and feel’ of the European Parliament’s website (Europarl). The Portal has therefore become more responsive and can be used on any device. Secondly, the new privacy statement has been uploaded in all linguistic versions in the email templates and on the registration page and audio Captcha for registration of user accounts has been enabled. Finally, the Petitions web portal and ePetition have been further integrated by improving their synchronisation mechanism. However, the accessibility of the petitions web portal for petitioners with disabilities needs to be further enhanced.

 

Relations with the Commission

The Commission remains the natural partner of the Committee on Petitions in processing petitions as the responsible EU institution for ensuring the implementation of and compliance with EU law. The committee and the Commission have a well-established and consistently maintained level of cooperation. The main contact point in the Commission is the Secretariat-General, which coordinates the distribution of petitions to the relevant Commission’s services and transmits the Commission’s replies to the secretariat of the committee. While the Commission has stepped up its efforts to provide timely responses, the committee considers that the handling process of petitions by the Commission could be further improved. The committee, also, reiterates its calls for regular updates on developments in infringement proceedings and for access to relevant Commission documents on infringements and EU pilot procedures, which relate to open petitions.

Following the European elections and the establishment of the new Parliament, the commissioners-designate appeared before the parliamentary committees in their prospective fields of responsibility and took part in hearings to enable the recently elected MEPs to evaluate their competence and suitability for their positions. In this respect, the Committee on Petitions participated on 30 September 2019 in the hearing of the Vice-President-designate for Interinstitutional Relations and Foresight, Maroš Šefčovič, as associated committee. During the hearing, Mr Šefčovič pledged to improve the Commission’s handling of petitions. More specifically, he committed to work closely with the Committee on Petitions and to attend its presentation of the annual report. In addition, he promised to encourage the participation of the Commissioners responsible in the debate of those topics raised in a significant number of petitions. Finally, he pledged to do his utmost to submit accurate answers within the three-month deadline.

In its written question sent ahead of the hearing, the committee reiterated its concerns over the Commission’s practice of referring a significant number of petitioners to other bodies at national, regional or local level and put into question the compatibility of this approach with the Commission’s enforcement responsibility. While acknowledging that petitions provide a valuable contribution to Commission’s role as guardian of the Treaty, Commission’s Vice-President referred to the Commission’s new strategic approach to its enforcement policy announced in its 2016 communication ‘EU Law: Better Results through Better Application’, which aims at targeting the most important breaches of EU law affecting the interests of citizens and businesses.

 

Relations with the Council

Members of the Council’s Secretariat occasionally attended the meetings of the Committee on Petitions and Council’s participation in debates has been very limited. In this respect, the committee considers that a more active cooperation with Member States would be necessary to unblock those petitions requiring prompt responses and reactions from the national authorities. Nevertheless, the committee acknowledges the efforts by some Member States to actively contribute to the discussion on respective petitions in committee meetings. In this regard, it is worth recalling the participation of the Permanent Representation of Bulgaria in the discussion on petition No 0527/2018 on the impact of Struma motorway on Kresna Gorge and the region in Bulgaria at the committee meeting on 2 December 2019.

Relations with the European External Action Service

 

The Committee on Petitions and the European External Action Service have established a constructive cooperation. The committee called on the European External Action Service to provide its expertise for the treatment of a number of petitions having an external dimension, including the follow-up of the recommendation included in the report on the Fact-finding Visit to Famagusta, Cyprus (7-8.05.2018).

 

Relations with the European Ombudsman

The Committee on Petitions has very good working relations with the office of the European Ombudsman. In 2019, the Ombudsman, Emily O’Reilly, appeared before the Committee on Petitions on several occasions.

On 2 April 2019, the Committee on Petitions held an exchange of views with the European Ombudsman, Emily O’Reilly, on her proposed new prerogatives. The European Ombudsmn was invited to react on the European Parliament’s resolution of 12 February 2019 on the revision of the Statute of the European Ombudsman. Ms O’Reilly supported the need to align the Statute of the European Ombudsman with the Lisbon Treaty, while underlining the following essential elements of the Ombudsman’s Office: - independence; - strong inquiry powers; - the need for increased resources; and - cross-party support from the European Parliament.

The European Ombudsman also gave a keynote speech on Achievements and Challenges for EU institutions at the Workshop on ‘Conflicts of Interest - Integrity, Accountability and Transparency in the EU institutions and agencies’, which took place in the committee meeting on 2 April 2019.

In addition, she presented her Annual Report 2018 in the committee’s meeting on 4 September 2019.

Finally, on 18 December 2019, Emily O’Reilly was re-elected European Ombudsman for the 2019-2024 parliamentary term. She was backed by 320 MEPs in a secret plenary vote. The election of the new European Ombudsman took place following a public hearing of the candidates by the Committee on Petitions. On 3 December 2019, the committee heard the following five admissible candidates: Mr. Giuseppe Fortunato, Ms. Julia Laffranque, Mr. Nils Muižnieks, Ms. Emily O’Reilly and Ms. Cecilia Wikström. As a follow-up of the hearings, the committee sent a letter to the European Parliament’s President confirming that the hearings were conducted and that Parliament could proceed with the election of the European Ombudsman during the December Plenary session in Strasbourg in line with the provisions of Rule 231 of Parliament’s Rules of Procedure. During the Petitions Committee’s public hearing on 3 December, Emily O’Reilly pledged to continue working to make the EU administration a role model for the whole EU, by putting citizens and their rights at the centre of its actions.

At its meeting on 12 November 2019, the committee adopted by a large majority the Report on the Annual report on the activities of the European Ombudsman in 2018. The Report highlights the Ombudsman’s work and commends her essential and fruitful dialogue with the Committee on Petitions, which constitutes an effective system of addressing the citizens’ concerns for guidance and help.

Fact-finding visits

In 2019, no fact-finding visits took place due to the European election recess period. However, the committee carried out the follow-up assessment of a number of previous fact-finding visits and adopted the reports on two fact-finding visits, which took place in 2018:

 On 21 January 2019, the committee discussed the follow-up of the recommendations of the Fact-Finding Visit to Galicia in 2013 in the presence of the petitioners.

 On 21 February 2019, the committee discussed the follow-up of the Fact-Finding Visit to London (5-6.11.2015), and of the Fact-Finding Visit to Slovakia (22-23.09.2016). In the presence of the petitioners, it also discussed the follow-up of the Fact-Finding Visit to Ebro and Tajo rivers (8-10.02.2016) and of the Fact-Finding Visit to Sweden (20-21.02.2017).

 On 21 March 2019, the committee adopted the report on the Fact-Finding Visit to Doñana National Park, Andalucia, Spain (19-21.09.2018) recommending to close the storage, prospection and gas extraction projects in the Doñana National Park, following the ‘precautionary principle.’

 On 11 April 2019, the committee adopted the report on the Fact-Finding Visit to Valledora, Piedmont, Italy (17-18.12.2018).

 On 2 December 2019, the committee discussed the follow-up of the Fact-finding Visit to Famagusta, Cyprus (7-8.05.2018) in the presence of the petitioner.

 

 

 

Public Hearings

In 2019, the Committee on Petitions organised three public hearings, partly jointly with other parliamentary committees. The public hearings covered a wide range of subjects raised in petitions.

 On 21 March 2019, the Committee on Petitions held a joint public hearing with the Committee on Environment, Public Health and Food Safety on Climate Change Denial. The Hearing was based on petition No 0900/2016, introduced on behalf of Food & Water Europe and bearing 732 signatures of petitioners from all over the EU. The petition called for action against a multinational oil company for its alleged climate change denial. Against this background, the hearing aimed to explore the topic of climate change denial under different perspectives and to examine the communication techniques used in politics or by private companies and other actors in society to mislead the public on the negative impact of certain industrial activities or policies on the climate. Members highlighted the leading role the EU has taken on the global stage in the climate change debate and stressed the need for swift action on this matter.

 On 12 November 2019, the Committee on Petitions held a Hearing on FATCA and its extraterritorial impact on EU citizens. In 2016, the Committee on Petitions was seized with Petition No 1088/2016 on the US’ Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act’s (FATCA) alleged infringement of EU rights and the extraterritorial effects of US laws in the EU. The aim of the hearing was to facilitate an exchange of views between the various stakeholders and discuss solutions to the issues faced by EU citizens affected by FATCA. The hearing was divided into two panels, one that focused on financial services and another on the indirect effects of FATCA on EU citizens, with a special emphasis on potential conflicts between the US law and European data protection rules. As a follow-up to the hearing, Members decided to write letters to the Finnish Presidency of the Council and to the European Commission calling on them to take action in support of the citizens concerned.

  On 5 December 2019, the Committee on Petitions and the Committee on Environment, Public Health and Food Safety, in association with the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development, held a joint public hearing on the Revaluation of the wolf population in the EU. The purpose of the hearing was to achieve a better understanding on the status of the wolf population in the EU and, potentially, to consider possible changes to the current management of the wolf population in Europe based on the concerns raised by a number of petitions. Specific attention was paid to the analysis of the wolf population in the EU, on the legal framework for the protection of the wolf as well as on the impact of the wolves’ population on the environment and rural communities with a view to presenting conclusions and recommendations for policy-makers and stakeholders.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Key issues

 Environmental issues

In 2019, the committee paid paramount attention to citizens’ concerns over the protection of the environment and climate change, which have been debated in every meeting very often in the presence of the petitioner. The committee dealt with the following main subjects: waste management, protection and preservation, plastics, water- and air pollution, nuclear energy and the impact of mining activities on the environment. On 20 February 2019, the committee examined a large number of petitions on nuclear energy raising serious concerns over the safety of nuclear power plants, transboundary impacts and differences between liability schemes in the Member States. In order to carry out an evidence-based assessment, the committee commissioned and heard an update of the study on ‘Cross-border nuclear safety, liability and cooperation in the European Union’. Subsequently, on 21 March 2019, the committee held a hearing on Climate Change Denial. Furthermore, as a follow up to the petitions on the exposure to dangerous substances, it commissioned a study on ‘Endocrine Disruptors: From Scientific Evidence to Human Health Protection’, which was presented in its meeting on 2 April 2019. Finally, waste management remained a recurring theme in 2019, which prompted the adoption on 21 March 2019 of a Short Motion for a Resolution on Waste Management. The resolution stresses that waste management is one of the main global socioeconomic and environmental challenges and pushes for a reduction of waste generation and a boost of reuse and recycling. It focuses on proper waste management and waste prevention as a top priority for the EU and on better implementation of waste legislation by Member States.

 Fundamental Rights and Constitutional Affairs

 

In 2019, the committee discussed a number of petitions on fundamental rights, including on the protection of whistle-blowers, children’s rights and homelessness. In addition, on 21 January 2019, the committee adopted an opinion for the Committee on Constitutional Affairs on the implementation of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union in the EU institutional framework.

 

As regards more specifically constitutional matters, several petitions raised citizens’ concerns over transparency and accountability of the EU institutions. In order to deal with these issues, on 2 April 2019 the committee requested and hosted a Workshop on ‘Conflicts of Interest - Integrity, Accountability and Transparency in the EU institutions and agencies’ organised by the Policy Department for Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs. The workshop examined the achievements reached in relation to the conflicts of interests in the EU institutions and agencies, as well integrity, accountability, transparency, code of conducts and revolving doors, while also discussing challenges for the future.

 

 Brexit

A significant number (73) of new petitions on Brexit was registered in 2019. In 2019, the Committee on Petitions continued examining and discussing the impact of Brexit on Citizens’ Rights on several occasions. In particular, at its meeting of 2 October 2019, the committee held an exchange of views with the European Parliament’s Brexit Steering Group. The members of the Group provided an update on the state of play of the negotiations carried out with the UK on citizens’ rights in the framework of the Withdrawal Agreement and highlighted the shortcomings and challenges of a ‘no-deal’ scenario. As a follow-up to the exchange of views, PETI members also discussed several petitions on Brexit, with a focus on citizen’s rights after the withdrawal of the UK from the EU. The Committee decided to keep monitoring the developments in the run-up to the Brexit deadline as well as the implementation of the EU Settlement Scheme by the UK.

 Animal welfare

In 2019, citizens’ concerns over animal welfare remained high in the committee’s agendas. The committee discussed a large number of petitions on various issues, including the protection of stray animals and honeybees in the EU. In particular, on 2 October 2019, it discussed a series of petitions on the protection of animals during transport and on banning animal experiments. As a follow-up, the committee decided to keep these petitions open and to ask the Commission for an updated assessment. On 11 November 2019, the committee discussed a petition submitted on behalf of Animal Welfare Foundation, seeking a ban on the import of Prgenant Mare’s Serum Gonadotropin from South America as a result of investigations showing inhuman treatment of mares in blood farms in Uruguay and Argentina. The committee decided to ask the Commission for information on the topic within the new EU-Mercosur trade agreement, to ask both the World Organisation for Animal Health and the World Trade Organisation for an opinion. Finally, on 5 December 2019, the Committee on Petitions and the Committee on Environment, Public Health and Food Safety, in association with the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development, held a joint public hearing on the Revaluation of the wolf population in the EU.

 Disability issues

The Committee on Petitions plays a specific protection role as regards compliance with the United Nations Convention on the Rights for Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) within the policymaking and legislative actions at EU level. Within this responsibility, the committee deals with petitions on disability issues. Although the number of petitions on disability almost halved in 2019 in comparison with the previous year (12 in 2019 and 23 in 2018), the committee continued examining petitions on disability revealing that the main challenges remain mobility, discrimination and access to education. For instance, the committee discussed a number of petitions on inclusive education for disabled children. Additionally, the Committee has received several petitions of citizens, alerting on the difficulties persons with disabilities face in their daily life situations, including in public transport. Following the debate on Petition No 0535/2017 in regard to the mobility of persons with disabilities in the European Union, the Committee on Petitions decided to address all Member States of the Union with the view to compiling an overview of the concrete steps each member state has taken (or intends to take) for the effective implementation of UNCRPD. The committee welcomes the replies sent by most Member States in the course of the year 2019. Finally, it may be worth recalling that at its meeting on 12 November 2019 the committee endorsed the coordinators’ decision to send a letter to the President of the European Parliament to raise his awareness regarding Petition No 1056/2016 for the tabling of petitions in national sign languages used in the EU.

 Adopted Reports and Opinions

On 21 January 2019, the committee adopted an opinion for the Committee on Constitutional Affairs on the implementation of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union in the EU institutional framework (2017/2089(INI)).

 

On 22 January 2019, the committee adopted its report on the deliberations of the Committee on Petitions during the year 2018 (2018/2280(INI)).

 

On 20 February 2019, the committee adopted an opinion for the Committee on Transport and Tourism on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on discontinuing seasonal changes of time and repealing Directive 2000/84/EC (COM(2018)0639 – C8 0408/2018 – 2018/0332(COD)).

 

On 21 March 2019, the committee adopted a Motion for a Resolution on waste management (2019/2557(RSP)).

 

On 12 November 2019, the Committee adopted a Report on the Annual Report on the activities of the European Ombudsman in 2018 (2019/2134(INI)). The Report highlights the Ombudsman’s work and commends her essential and fruitful dialogue with the Committee on Petitions, which constitutes an effective system of addressing the citizens’ concerns for guidance and help. The Report also points out that transparency and accountability-related inquiries continue to account for the greatest proportion of cases handled by the Ombudsman in 2018.

 

 Studies

 

In 2019, the committee heard the presentations of the following studies commissioned by the Policy Department for Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs at its request:

 

- Quality Differences in Consumer Products in the EU Legislation, (presented on 22 January 2019);

 

- Cross-border nuclear safety, liability and cooperation in the European Union (presented on 20 February 2019);

 

- Endocrine Disruptors: From Scientific Evidence to Human Health Protection (presented on 2 April 2019);

 

- Food Labelling for Consumers – EU Law, Regulation and Policy Options (presented on 11 April 2019);

 

In July 2019, the Policy Department for Citizens Rights and Constitutional Affairs published at the request of Committee on Petitions an in-depth analysis on the Achievements of the Committee on Petitions during the 2014-2019 parliamentary term and the challenges for the future, which was distributed to the members of the committee at the end of its constitutive meeting.

 

 Workshops

 

On 2 April 2019, the Committee on Petitions hosted a Workshop on ‘Conflicts of Interest - Integrity, Accountability and Transparency in the EU institutions and agencies’ organised by the Policy Department for Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs at its request. The workshop examined the achievements reached during this parliamentary term in relation to the conflicts of interests in the EU institutions and agencies, as well integrity, accountability, transparency, code of conducts and revolving doors, while also discussing challenges for the future. Petition No 0224/2018 on the appointment of the Secretary-General of the European Commission was debated in the context of the Workshop on conflict of interests.

 


INFORMATION ON ADOPTION IN COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

Date adopted

10.11.2020

 

 

 

Result of final vote

+:

–:

0:

33

0

0

Members present for the final vote

Alex Agius Saliba, Andris Ameriks, Marc Angel, Andrus Ansip, Margrete Auken, Jordan Bardella, Alexander Bernhuber, Markus Buchheit, Eleonora Evi, Agnès Evren, Gheorghe Falcă, Emmanouil Fragkos, Mario Furore, Gianna Gancia, Ibán García Del Blanco, Radan Kanev, Stelios Kympouropoulos, Cristina Maestre Martín De Almagro, Dolors Montserrat, Ulrike Müller, Sira Rego, Frédérique Ries, Alfred Sant, Monica Semedo, Yana Toom, Loránt Vincze, Stefania Zambelli, Tatjana Ždanoka, Kosma Złotowski

Substitutes present for the final vote

Pernando Barrena Arza, Ioan-Rareş Bogdan, Diana Riba i Giner, Rainer Wieland

 


FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

33

+

EPP

Alexander Bernhuber, Ioan‑Rareş Bogdan, Agnès Evren, Gheorghe Falcă, Radan Kanev, Stelios Kympouropoulos, Dolors Montserrat, Loránt Vincze, Rainer Wieland,

 

S&D

Alex Agius Saliba, Andris Ameriks, Marc Angel, Ibán García Del Blanco, Cristina Maestre Martín De Almagro, Alfred Sant,

RENEW

Andrus Ansip, Ulrike Müller, Frédérique Ries, Monica Semedo, Yana Toom,

ID

Jordan Bardella, Markus Buchheit, Gianna Gancia, Stefania Zambelli,

GREENS/EFA

Margrete Auken, Diana Riba i Giner, Tatjana Ždanoka,

ECR

Emmanouil Fragkos, Kosma Złotowski,

EUL/NGL

Pernando Barrena Arza, Sira Rego,

NI

Eleonora Evi, Mario Furore,

 

0

-

-

-

 

0

0

-

-

 

 

 

Key to symbols:

+ : in favour

- : against

0 : abstention

 

Last updated: 2 December 2020
Legal notice - Privacy policy