Index 
Texts adopted
Tuesday, 10 December 2013 - Strasbourg
Justice Programme 2014-2020 ***I
 Rights and Citizenship Programme 2014-2020 ***I
 Autonomous trade preferences for Moldova ***I
 EU-Morocco Fisheries Partnership Agreement: protocol setting out fishing opportunities and financial contributions ***
 ILO Convention concerning safety in the use of chemicals at work ***
 Illicit manufacturing of and trafficking in firearms, their parts and components and ammunition ***
 EU-China Agreement relating to the modification of concessions in the schedules of Bulgaria and Romania in the course of their accession to the EU ***
 Importation of beef from animals not treated with certain growth-promoting hormones and increased duties applied by the United States to certain products of the European Union ***
 EU-Côte d’Ivoire Fisheries Partnership Agreement: protocol setting out the fishing opportunities and financial contribution ***
 Imports of certain fishery products into the Canary Islands from 2014 to 2020 *
 Mobilisation of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund – application EGF/2013/001 FI/Nokia from Finland
 Mobilisation of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund – application EGF/2013/003 DE/First Solar from Germany
 Mobilisation of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund - application EGF/2012/011 DK/Vestas from Denmark
 Negotiations for an EU-Canada strategic partnership agreement
 Recovery and resolution framework for non-bank institutions
 EU space industrial policy
 Cloud computing
 Evaluation report regarding BEREC
 Common Fisheries Policy ***II
 Common organisation of the markets in fishery and aquaculture products ***II
 North-East Atlantic: deep-sea stocks and fishing in international waters ***I
 Civil protection mechanism ***I
 Credit agreements relating to residential property ***I
 Imports of rice from Bangladesh ***I
 Timing of auctions of greenhouse gas allowances ***I
 Defining criteria determining when recovered paper ceases to be waste pursuant to Article 6(1) of Directive 2008/98/EC on waste
 Gender aspects of the European framework of national Roma inclusion strategies
 Development of 'state building' in South Sudan
 CARS 2020: towards a strong, competitive and sustainable European car industry
 Sexual and reproductive health and rights
 Volunteering and voluntary activity in Europe
 Reports on fact-finding visits for the investigation of petitions (interpretation of Rule 202(5) of the Rules of Procedure)

Justice Programme 2014-2020 ***I
PDF 200kWORD 59k
Resolution
Text
European Parliament legislative resolution of 10 December 2013 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing for the period 2014 to 2020 the Justice Programme (COM(2011)0759 – C7-0439/2011 – 2011/0369(COD))
P7_TA(2013)0519A7-0396/2013

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to the European Parliament and the Council (COM(2011)0759),

–  having regard to Article 294(2), Article 81(1) and (2), Article 82(1) and Article 84 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C7‑0439/2011),

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

–  having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 11 July 2012(1),

–  having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions of 18 July 2012(2),

–  having regard to the undertaking given by the Council representative by letter of 6 November 2013 to approve Parliament’s position, in accordance with Article 294(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the joint deliberations of the Committee on Legal Affairs and the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs under Rule 51 of the Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs and of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs and the opinions of the Committee on Budgets and of the Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality (A7-0396/2013),

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

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

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

Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 10 December 2013 with a view to the adoption of Regulation (EU) No .../2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a Justice Programme for the period 2014 to 2020

P7_TC1-COD(2011)0369


(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Regulation (EU) No 1382/2013.)

(1) OJ C 299, 4.10.2012, p. 103.
(2) OJ C 277, 13.9.2012, p. 43.


Rights and Citizenship Programme 2014-2020 ***I
PDF 200kWORD 60k
Resolution
Text
European Parliament legislative resolution of 10 December 2013 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing for the period 2014 to 2020 the Rights and Citizenship Programme (COM(2011)0758 – C7-0438/2011 – 2011/0344(COD))
P7_TA(2013)0520A7-0397/2013

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2011)0758),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Articles 19(2), 21(2), 114, 168, 169 and 197 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C7‑0438/2011),

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

–  having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 26 April 2012(1),

–  having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions of 18 July 2012(2),

–  having regard to the undertaking given by the Council representative by letter of 6 November 2013 to approve Parliament’s position, in accordance with Article 294(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs and the opinions of the Committee on Budgets, the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, the Committee on Legal Affairs, the Committee on Women's Rights and Gender Equality and the Committee on Petitions (A7-0397/2013),

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

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

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

Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 10 December 2013 with a view to the adoption of Regulation (EU) No .../2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a Rights, Equality and Citizenship Programme for the period 2014 to 2020

P7_TC1-COD(2011)0344


(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Regulation (EU) No 1381/2013.)

(1)OJ C 191, 29.6.2012, p. 108.
(2)OJ C 277, 13.9.2012, p. 43.


Autonomous trade preferences for Moldova ***I
PDF 193kWORD 38k
Resolution
Text
European Parliament legislative resolution of 10 December 2013 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Regulation (EC) No 55/2008 introducing autonomous trade preferences for the Republic of Moldova (COM(2013)0678 – C7-0305/2013 – 2013/0325(COD))
P7_TA(2013)0521A7-0422/2013

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2013)0678),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 207(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C7‑0305/2013),

–  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 5 December 2013 to approve Parliament's position, in accordance with Article 294(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on International Trade (A7-0422/2013),

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

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

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

Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 10 December 2013 with a view to the adoption of Regulation (EU) No .../2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Regulation (EC) No 55/2008 introducing autonomous trade preferences for the Republic of Moldova

P7_TC1-COD(2013)0325


(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Regulation (EU) No 1384/2013.)


EU-Morocco Fisheries Partnership Agreement: protocol setting out fishing opportunities and financial contributions ***
PDF 196kWORD 36k
European Parliament legislative resolution of 10 December 2013 on the draft Council decision on the conclusion, on behalf of the European Union, of the Protocol between the European Union and the Kingdom of Morocco setting out the fishing opportunities and financial contribution provided for in the Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Union and the Kingdom of Morocco (14165/2013 – C7-0415/2013 – 2013/0315(NLE))
P7_TA(2013)0522A7-0417/2013

(Consent)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the draft Council decision (14165/2013),

–  having regard to the draft protocol between the European Union and the Kingdom of Morocco setting out the fishing opportunities and financial contribution provided for in the Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Union and the Kingdom of Morocco (14162/2013),

–  having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Article 43(2) and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a) and (7) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C7‑0415/2013),

–  having regard to its resolution of 14 December 2011 on the draft Council decision on the conclusion of a Protocol between the European Union and the Kingdom of Morocco setting out the fishing opportunities and financial compensation provided for in the Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Community and the Kingdom of Morocco(1),

–  having regard to its resolution of 14 December 2011 on the future Protocol setting out the fishing opportunities and financial compensation provided for in the Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Community and the Kingdom of Morocco(2),

–  having regard to Rules 81 and 90(7) of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on Fisheries and the opinions of the Committee on Development and the Committee on Budgets (A7-0417/2013),

1.  Consents to conclusion of the protocol;

2.  Recalls the European Parliament's right to be kept punctually and fully informed about the application of the Protocol and its results, and therefore insists once again that representatives of the European Parliament should have the opportunity to attend meetings of the joint committee provided for in Article 10 of the Fisheries Agreement as observers. Further calls for Parliament to be provided with documentation on the guidelines, objectives and indicators concerning the chapter relating to support for the fisheries sector in Morocco, and all the information necessary for the proper monitoring of the aspects included in Article 6 of the Protocol, including the final report that Morocco is to submit on the implementation of the sectoral support programme. Also reiterates its request to the Commission that it submit a full report on the results and operation of the current Protocol to the European Parliament, before opening negotiations on a new protocol.

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

(1) OJ C 168 E, 14.6.2013, p. 155.
(2) OJ C 168 E, 14.6.2013, p. 8.


ILO Convention concerning safety in the use of chemicals at work ***
PDF 191kWORD 32k
European Parliament legislative resolution of 10 December 2013 on the draft Council decision authorising Member States to ratify, in the interests of the European Union, the Convention concerning Safety in the Use of Chemicals at Work, 1990, of the International Labour Organisation (Convention No 170) (11463/2013 – C7-0236/2013 – 2012/0320(NLE))
P7_TA(2013)0523A7-0400/2013

(Consent)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the draft Council decision (11463/2013),

–  having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Article 114 in conjunction with Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a)(v) and Article 218(8), first subparagraph, of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C7‑0236/2013),

–  having regard to Rules 81 and 90(7) of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs (A7-0400/2013),

1.  Consents to the draft Council decision,

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


Illicit manufacturing of and trafficking in firearms, their parts and components and ammunition ***
PDF 197kWORD 35k
European Parliament legislative resolution of 10 December 2013 on the draft Council decision on the conclusion, on behalf of the European Union, of the Protocol against the Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking in Firearms, Their Parts and Components and Ammunition, supplementing the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime (12324/2013 – C7-0379/2013 – 2013/0083(NLE))
P7_TA(2013)0524A7-0359/2013

(Consent)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the draft Council Decision (12324/2013),

–  having regard to the Protocol against the Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking in Firearms, Their Parts and Components and Ammunition, supplementing the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime,

–  having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Article 114(1) and Article 207, and with Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a), of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C7‑0379/2013),

–  having regard to the Stockholm Programme and its implementing Action Plan(1),

–  having regard to its resolution of 12 September 2013 on the Second Report on the implementation of the EU Internal Security Strategy(2),

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

–  having regard to Rules 81 and 90(7) of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (A7-0359/2013),

1.  Consents to the conclusion of the Protocol;

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

(1)COM(2010)0171.
(2)Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0384.
(3)Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0444.


EU-China Agreement relating to the modification of concessions in the schedules of Bulgaria and Romania in the course of their accession to the EU ***
PDF 196kWORD 34k
European Parliament legislative resolution of 10 December 2013 on the draft Council decision on the conclusion of the Agreement in the form of an Exchange of Letters between the European Union and the People's Republic of China pursuant to Article XXIV: 6 and Article XXVIII of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994 relating to the modification of concessions in the schedules of the Republic of Bulgaria and Romania in the course of their accession to the European Union (16112/2012 – C7-0285/2013 – 2012/0304(NLE))
P7_TA(2013)0525A7-0332/2013

(Consent)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the draft Council decision (16112/2012),

–  having regard to the draft Agreement in the form of an Exchange of Letters between the European Union and the People's Republic of China pursuant to Article XXIV: 6 and Article XXVIII of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994 relating to the modification of concessions in the schedules of the Republic of Bulgaria and Romania in the course of their accession to the European Union (16118/2012),

–  having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Article 207(4), first subparagraph and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a)(v), of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C7‑0285/2013),

–  having regard to Rules 81 and 90(7) of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on International Trade and the opinion of the Committee on Foreign Affairs (A7-0332/2013),

1.  Consents to conclusion of the agreement;

2.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and of the People's Republic of China.


Importation of beef from animals not treated with certain growth-promoting hormones and increased duties applied by the United States to certain products of the European Union ***
PDF 193kWORD 34k
European Parliament legislative resolution of 10 December 2013 on the draft Council decision on the conclusion of a revised Memorandum of Understanding with the United States of America Regarding the Importation of Beef from Animals Not Treated with Certain Growth-Promoting Hormones and Increased Duties Applied by the United States to Certain Products of the European Union (14374/2013 – C7-0377/2013 – 2013/0324(NLE))
P7_TA(2013)0526A7-0427/2013

(Consent)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the draft Council decision (14374/2013),

–  having regard to the draft revised Memorandum of Understanding with the United States of America Regarding the Importation of Beef from Animals Not Treated with Certain Growth-Promoting Hormones and Increased Duties Applied by the United States to Certain Products of the European Union (14375/2013),

–  having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Article 207(4), first subparagraph and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a)(v) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C7-0377/2013),

–  having regard to Rules 81 and 90(7) of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on International Trade and the opinion of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development (A7-0427/2013),

1.  Consents to conclusion of the revised Memorandum of Understanding;

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


EU-Côte d’Ivoire Fisheries Partnership Agreement: protocol setting out the fishing opportunities and financial contribution ***
PDF 194kWORD 35k
European Parliament legislative resolution of 10 December 2013 on the draft Council Decision on the conclusion of the Protocol setting out the fishing opportunities and financial contribution provided for in the Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Côte d’Ivoire (2013-2018) (08701/2013 – C7-0216/2013 – 2013/0102(NLE))
P7_TA(2013)0527A7-0416/2013

(Consent)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the draft Council decision (08701/2013),

–  having regard to the draft Protocol setting out the fishing opportunities and financial contribution provided for in the Agreement between the between the European Union and the Republic of Côte d'Ivoire (2013-2018) (08699/2013),

–  having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Article 43(2) and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a), of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C7-0216/2013),

–  having regard to Rules 81 and 90(7) of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on Fisheries and the opinions of the Committee on Development and the Committee on Budgets (A7-0416/2013),

1.  Consents to conclusion of the Protocol;

2.  Calls on the Commission to provide the European Parliament with relevant information on the meetings of the Joint Committee provided for in Article 9 of the Agreement, in particular the corresponding minutes and conclusions, together with an annual report on the results of the practical implementation of the multiannual sectoral support programme referred to in Article 3 of the Protocol; calls further on the Commission, during the final year of the Protocol’s validity and before the opening of negotiations on its renewal, to submit to the European Parliament and the Council an ex-post assessment report containing a cost-benefit analysis of the implementation of the Protocol;

3.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and Commission, and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and of the Republic of Côte d'Ivoire.


Imports of certain fishery products into the Canary Islands from 2014 to 2020 *
PDF 190kWORD 33k
European Parliament legislative resolution of 10 December 2013 on the proposal for a Council regulation opening and providing for the administration of autonomous tariff quotas of the Union on imports of certain fishery products into the Canary Islands from 2014 to 2020 (COM(2013)0552 – C7-0262/2013 – 2013/0266(CNS))
P7_TA(2013)0528A7-0415/2013

(Special legislative procedure – consultation)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to the Council (COM(2013)0552),

–  having regard to Article 349 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C7-0262/2013),

–  having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Fisheries (A7-0415/2013),

1.  Approves the Commission proposal;

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

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

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


Mobilisation of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund – application EGF/2013/001 FI/Nokia from Finland
PDF 214kWORD 44k
Resolution
Annex
European Parliament resolution of 10 December 2013 on the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council on mobilisation of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund in accordance with point 28 of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline and sound financial management (application EGF/2013/001 FI/Nokia from Finland) (COM(2013)0707 – C7-0359/2013 – 2013/2264(BUD))
P7_TA(2013)0529A7-0411/2013

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to the European Parliament and the Council (COM(2013)0707 – C7‑0359/2013),

–  having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline and sound financial management(1) (IIA of 17 May 2006), and in particular point 28 thereof,

–  having regard to Regulation (EC) No 1927/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 December 2006 on establishing the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund(2) (the EGF Regulation),

–  having regard to the trilogue procedure provided for in point 28 of the IIA of 17 May 2006,

–  having regard to the letter of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgets (A7-0411/2013),

A.  whereas the Union has set up legislative and budgetary instruments to provide additional support to workers who are suffering from the consequences of major structural changes in world trade patterns and to assist their reintegration into the labour market,

B.  whereas the Union’s financial assistance to workers made redundant should be dynamic and made available as quickly and as efficiently as possible, in accordance with the Joint Declaration of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission adopted during the conciliation meeting on 17 July 2008, and having due regard to the IIA of 17 May 2006 in respect of the adoption of decisions to mobilise the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (EGF),

C.  whereas Finland submitted application EGF/2013/001 FI/Nokia for a financial contribution from the EGF, following 4 509 redundancies in Nokia, with 3 719 workers targeted for EGF co-funded measures during the reference period 1 August 2012 to 30 November 2012,

D.  whereas the application fulfils the eligibility criteria laid down in the EGF Regulation,

1.  Agrees with the Commission that the conditions laid down in point (a) of Article 2 of the EGF Regulation are met and that Finland is therefore entitled to a financial contribution under that Regulation;

2.  Notes that the Finnish authorities submitted the application for an EGF financial contribution on 1 February 2013 and that its assessment was made available by the Commission on 16 October 2013; regrets the lengthy evaluation period and inquires as to why this particular application required eight months of assessment, whereas an application relating to Nokia Salo in 2012 was evaluated within three months;

3.  Considers that the redundancies in Nokia plc, Nokia Siemens Networks and 30 of its suppliers and subcontractors involved in the mobile phone sector are linked to major structural changes in world trade patterns due to globalisation, in particular the transfer of functions within the sector to third countries and a decrease in Nokia’s market share for basic mobile phones and smartphones;

4.  Notes that Nokia Finland (Salo area) was already subject to large scale redundancies in 2012 (EGF/2012/006 FI/Nokia Salo) with this new wave bringing the number of affected Nokia employees to more than 6 000, which presents a great challenge for the affected localities, as well as for the Finnish economy as a whole;

5.  Regrets the fact that the redundancies in Nokia stem from its corporate decision to move its production plants, as well as design and product development, to Asia and are part of its plan to reduce global employment in the Nokia Corporation by 17 000 workers by the end of 2013; notes that that decision has given rise to three EGF mobilisations in favour of 6 138 Nokia workers;

6.  Recalls that the EGF already acted in favour of 1 337 workers who were dismissed as a result of the relocation of Nokia from Germany to Romania in 2008; notes that five years later, the EGF is being mobilised for the fourth time in relation to dismissals in Nokia;

7.  Welcomes the fact that the Finnish authorities started the implementation of the coordinated package of personalised service when the dismissals started on 1 August 2012 in order to assist workers before they ceased working at Nokia;

8.  Notes that the coordinated package of personalised services to be co-funded includes measures for the reintegration of 3 719 redundant workers into employment such as coaching and other preparatory measures, training and retraining, entrepreneurship promotion and services for new entrepreneurs, support for starting independent business operations, mobility assistance, employment services at the Service Point, pay subsidies and a company-based data acquisition scheme;

9.  Welcomes the fact that the package contains innovative measures such as Protomo, a matching service for new business start-ups;

10.  Notes that the financial allowances to be covered by the EGF are limited and that the majority of support will be devoted to training and entrepreneurship;

11.  Welcomes the fact that the social partners i.e. the Council of Finnish Industrial Unions (e.g. Trade Union Pro, the Finnish Metalworkers' Union) were consulted in relation to the preparation of the EGF application and that a policy of equality between women and men as well as the principle non-discrimination will be applied during the various stages of the implementation of and in access to the EGF;

12.  Welcomes the fact that the redundancies and the preparation of the coordinated package of personalised services are addressed by a dedicated working group comprising the social partners (including Nokia representatives) and regional authorities;

13.  Recalls the importance of improving the employability of all workers by means of adapted training and the recognition of skills and competences gained throughout a worker's professional career; expects the training on offer in the coordinated package to be adapted not only to the needs of the dismissed workers but also to the actual business environment;

14.  Notes that the information provided on the coordinated package of personalised services to be funded from the EGF includes information on complementarity with actions funded by the Structural Funds; stresses that the Finnish authorities confirm that the eligible actions do not receive assistance from other Union financial instruments; reiterates its call to the Commission to present a comparative evaluation of those data in its annual reports in order to ensure full respect of the existing regulations and that no duplication of Union-funded services can occur;

15.  Requests that the institutions involved make the necessary efforts to improve procedural arrangements in order to accelerate the mobilisation of the EGF; appreciates the improved procedure put in place by the Commission, following Parliament's request for the accelerated release of grants, which aims to present to the budgetary authority the Commission's assessment of eligibility of an EGF application together with the proposal to mobilise the EGF; hopes that further improvements in the procedure will be integrated in the new Regulation on the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (2014-2020) and that greater efficiency, transparency and visibility of the EGF will be achieved;

16.  Stresses that in accordance with Article 6 of the EGF Regulation, it shall be ensured that the EGF supports the reintegration of individual redundant workers into stable employment; stresses, furthermore, that EGF assistance can co-finance only active labour market measures which lead to durable, long-term employment; reiterates that assistance from the EGF must not replace neither actions which are the responsibility of companies by virtue of national law or collective agreements, nor measures restructuring companies or sectors;

17.  Welcomes the agreement reached in the Council on reintroducing in the EGF Regulation for the period 2014-2020 the crisis mobilisation criterion, which allows for the provision of financial assistance to workers made redundant as a result of the current financial and economic crisis in addition to those losing their job because of changes in global trade patterns.

18.  Approves the decision annexed to this resolution;

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

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

ANNEX

DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL

on the mobilisation of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund, in accordance with point 28 of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline and sound financial management (application EGF/2013/001 FI/Nokia from Finland)

(The text of this annex is not reproduced here since it corresponds to the final act, Decision 2013/788/EU.)

(1) OJ C 139, 14.6.2006, p. 1.
(2) OJ L 406, 30.12.2006, p. 1.


Mobilisation of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund – application EGF/2013/003 DE/First Solar from Germany
PDF 213kWORD 45k
Resolution
Annex
European Parliament resolution of 10 December 2013 on the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council on mobilisation of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund, in accordance with point 28 of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline and sound financial management (application EGF/2013/003 DE/First Solar from Germany) (COM(2013)0706 – C7-0358/2013 – 2013/2263(BUD))
P7_TA(2013)0530A7-0408/2013

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to the European Parliament and the Council (COM(2013)0706 – C7‑0358/2013),

–  having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline and sound financial management(1) (IIA of 17 May 2006), and in particular point 28 thereof,

–  having regard to Regulation (EC) No 1927/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 December 2006 on establishing the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund(2) (the EGF Regulation),

–  having regard to the trilogue procedure provided for in point 28 of the IIA of 17 May 2006,

–  having regard to the letter of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgets (A7-0408/2013),

A.  whereas the Union has set up legislative and budgetary instruments to provide additional support to workers who are suffering from the consequences of major structural changes in world trade patterns and to assist their reintegration into the labour market,

B.  whereas the Union’s financial assistance to workers made redundant should be dynamic and made available as quickly and as efficiently as possible, in accordance with the Joint Declaration of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission adopted during the conciliation meeting on 17 July 2008, and having due regard to the IIA of 17 May 2006 in respect of the adoption of decisions to mobilise the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (EGF),

C.  whereas Germany submitted application EGF/2013/003 DE/First Solar for a financial contribution from the EGF following 959 redundancies in First Solar Manufacturing GmbH, with 875 workers targeted for EGF co-funded measures during the reference period 15 November 2012 to 15 March 2013,

D.  whereas the application fulfils the eligibility criteria laid down in the EGF Regulation,

1.  Agrees with the Commission that the conditions laid down in point (a) of Article 2 of the EGF Regulation are met and that Germany is therefore entitled to a financial contribution under that Regulation;

2.  Notes that the German authorities submitted the application for an EGF financial contribution on 12 April 2013 and that its assessment was made available by the Commission on 16 October 2013; welcomes the speedy evaluation period of six months;

3.  Notes that the redundancies in First Solar Manufacturing GmbH led to an immediate increase of the rate of unemployment by 4 percentage points, while the area concerned (Land of Brandenburg) is already suffering from an above-average rate of unemployment (11,3 % compared with a national average of 7,4 % in February 2013);

4.  Considers that the redundancies in First Solar Manufacturing GmbH involved in solar energy production are linked to major structural changes in world trade patterns, the build up of huge overcapacities in solar modules in China and a worldwide decline in demand, which has led to a collapse in prices by about 40 %, compared with the previous year which also caused the closure of the two plants in 2013;

5.  Notes that the redundancies concerned are part of a broad restructuring plan which cut the global work force of First Solar Manufacturing GmbH by 30 % to sharply reduce its global production capacity and resulted in closing both sites located in Germany; stresses the added value of EGF in reacting to redundancies caused by unexpected market changes linked to globalisation;

6.  Welcomes the fact that in order to provide workers with speedy assistance, the German authorities decided to initiate the implementation of the personalised services to the affected workers on 1 January 2013, well ahead of the final decision on granting the EGF support for the proposed coordinated package; notes that redundant workers have also benefitted from the ESF support before participating in the EGF measures; welcomes the fact that the German authorities confirmed that the necessary precautions have been taken to avoid double financing from Union funds;

7.  Notes that the coordinated package of personalised services to be co-funded includes measures for the reintegration of 875 redundant workers into employment such as training courses leading to qualifications, training management, workshops and peer groups, support services and international job searches, in-depth business creation advice, job searches, activation grants, follow-up and aftercare, and subsistence allowances;

8.  Notes that more than half of the EGF support will be spent on allowances that 875 workers are said to receive during their active participation in the measures as a subsistence allowance (estimated cost EUR 2 714 per worker over nine months); further notes that the application includes a lump sum of EUR 1 869 as an activation premium for 200 workers who quickly find a job without further assistance after the conclusion of those measures;

9.  Recalls that the EGF support should primarily be allocated to job searches and training programmes instead of contributing directly to financial allowances; notes that, if included in the package, such allowances should be of a complementary nature and should never replace allowances under the responsibility of Member States or companies by virtue of national law or collective agreements; stresses, in this context, that the new EGF regulation for 2014-2020 will limit the inclusion of financial allowances in the package to a maximum of 35 % of the cost of the measures and that a disproportionate rate of allowances will not be repeated under the new regulation;

10.  Welcomes the fact that the social partners adopted a social plan for the redundancies in First Solar Manufacturing GmbH and that a transfer company will design and manage the coordinated package of personalised services; notes that its operation during the first six months is paid by First Solar Manufacturing GmbH and the ESF via its federal programme and that the services of the transfer company will be extended to new measures financed by the EGF; notes that a policy of equality between women and men as well as the principle of non-discrimination will be applied during the various stages of the implementation of and in access to the EGF;

11.  Recalls the importance of improving the employability of all workers by means of adapted training and the recognition of skills and competences gained throughout a worker's professional career; expects the training on offer in the coordinated package to be adapted not only to the needs of the dismissed workers but also to the actual business environment;

12.  Notes that the information provided on the coordinated package of personalised services to be funded from the EGF includes information on complementarity with actions funded by the European Structural Funds; stresses that the German authorities confirm that the eligible actions do not receive assistance from other Union financial instruments; reiterates its call to the Commission to present a comparative evaluation of those data in its annual reports in order to ensure full respect of the existing regulations and that no duplication of Union-funded services can occur;

13.  Requests that the institutions involved make the necessary efforts to improve procedural arrangements in order to accelerate the mobilisation of the EGF; appreciates the improved procedure put in place by the Commission, following Parliament's request for the accelerated release of grants, which aims to present to the budgetary authority the Commission's assessment of the eligibility of an EGF application together with the proposal to mobilise the EGF; hopes that further improvements in the procedure will be integrated in the new Regulation on EGF (2014-2020) and that greater efficiency, transparency and visibility of the EGF will be achieved;

14.  Stresses that, in accordance with Article 6 of the EGF Regulation, it shall be ensured that the EGF supports the reintegration of individual redundant workers into stable employment; stresses, furthermore, that EGF assistance can co-finance only active labour market measures which lead to durable, long-term employment; reiterates that assistance from the EGF must replace neither actions which are the responsibility of companies by virtue of national law or collective agreements, nor measures restructuring companies or sectors;

15.  Welcomes the agreement reached in the Council on reintroducing in the EGF Regulation for the period 2014-2020 the crisis mobilisation criterion, which allows for the provision of financial assistance to workers made redundant as a result of the current financial and economic crisis in addition to those losing their job because of changes in global trade patterns.

16.  Approves the decision annexed to this resolution;

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

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

ANNEX

DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL

on mobilisation of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund, in accordance with point 28 of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline and sound financial management (application EGF/2013/003 DE/First Solar from Germany)

(The text of this annex is not reproduced here since it corresponds to the final act, Decision 2013/789/EU.)

(1) OJ C 139, 14.6.2006, p. 1.
(2) OJ L 406, 30.12.2006, p. 1.


Mobilisation of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund - application EGF/2012/011 DK/Vestas from Denmark
PDF 219kWORD 48k
Resolution
Annex
European Parliament resolution of 10 December 2013 on the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council on mobilisation of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund, in accordance with point 28 of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline and sound financial management (application EGF/2012/011 DK/Vestas from Denmark) (COM(2013)0703 – C7-0357/2013 – 2013/2262(BUD))
P7_TA(2013)0531A7-0410/2013

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2013)0703 – C7‑0357/2013),

–  having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline and sound financial management(1) (IIA of 17 May 2006), and in particular point 28 thereof,

–  having regard to Regulation (EC) No 1927/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 December 2006 on establishing the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund(2) (the EGF Regulation),

–  having regard to the trilogue procedure provided for in point 28 of the IIA of 17 May 2006,

–  having regard to the letter of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgets (A7-0410/2013),

A.  whereas the Union has set up legislative and budgetary instruments to provide additional support to workers who are suffering from the consequences of major structural changes in world trade patterns and to assist their reintegration into the labour market,

B.  whereas the Union’s financial assistance to workers made redundant should be dynamic and made available as quickly and as efficiently as possible, in accordance with the Joint Declaration of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission adopted during the conciliation meeting on 17 July 2008, and having due regard to the IIA of 17 May 2006 in respect of the adoption of decisions to mobilise the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (EGF),

C.  whereas Denmark submitted application EGF/2012/011 DK/Vestas for a financial contribution from the EGF, following 611 redundancies in the Vestas Group, with 611 workers targeted for EFG co-funded measures during the reference period 18 September 2012 to 18 December 2012,

D.  whereas the application fulfils the eligibility criteria laid down in the EGF Regulation,

1.  Agrees with the Commission that the conditions laid down in point (a) of Article 2 of the EGF Regulation are met and that Denmark is therefore entitled to a financial contribution under that Regulation;

2.  Notes that the Danish authorities submitted the application for an EGF financial contribution on 21 December 2012 and that its assessment was made available by the Commission on 16 October 2013; notes that the evaluation of that application took much longer compared to the Vestas case submitted by Denmark in May 2012;

3.  Considers that the redundancies in the Vestas Group concerning wind turbine manufacturing are linked to major structural changes in world trade patterns due to globalisation, in particular a stagnation of demand for wind turbine installations in the Union and a growth of the Asian market, the penetration of the Union market by Chinese wind turbine manufacturers at more competitive prices and a significant reduction of the Union market share in total capacity from 66 % in 2006 to 27,5 % in 2012(3);

4.  Is of the opinion that the Union wind energy market is set to grow further, generating demand for the Union's wind turbine manufacturers and associated industries through the ongoing promotion of energy from renewable sources at Union level; notes, in this respect, the mandatory national targets for the use of renewable energy by 2020; therefore expresses concern about this particular relocation and points out the risk of importation of wind turbines produced in Asia into the Union market;

5.  Notes that the dismissals concerned are the direct result of the strategic decision taken by the Vestas Group in November 2011 to reorganise its structure and increase proximity to its customers in the regional markets, especially in China; notes that the affected region of Ringkøbing-Skjern made considerable investments in infrastructure to attract an innovative enterprise such as the Vestas Group and that the decision of the Vestas Group puts the region into difficulties;

6.  Notes that the Vestas Group was already subject to large scale redundancies in 2009/2010, with a new wave from 2012 bringing the number of affected Vestas Group employees to approximately 2 000, which presents a great challenge for the affected municipalities already subject to a rapid increase of unemployment(4);

7.  Notes that this is the third EGF case involving the Vestas Group and the fourth EGF case in the wind turbines sector (EGF/2010/003 DK/Vestas(5), EGF/2010/022 DK/LM Glasfiber(6), EGF/2010/017 DK/Midtjylland Machinery(7));

8.  Welcomes the fact that, in order to provide workers with speedy assistance, the Danish authorities decided to initiate the implementation of the personalised services to the affected workers on 1 March 2013, well ahead of the final decision on granting the EGF support for the proposed coordinated package;

9.  Notes that the coordinated package of personalised services to be co-funded includes measures for the reintegration of 611 redundant workers into employment such as counselling, mentoring and coaching, individualised targeted training packages (intercultural training courses, language courses, entrepreneurship training, off-the-shelf courses and training programmes), entrepreneurship allowances, measures relating to workers aged 55 or older with special mentoring and outplacement and subsistence allowances;

10.  Welcomes the fact that the workers will follow individualised targeted training packages to meet their needs as defined during the counselling and coaching phase;

11.  Welcomes the fact that the coordinated package provides for measures with special mentoring and outplacement for workers aged 55 years or older who are likely to experience additional difficulties in finding new jobs due to their age;

12.  Notes that the package contains considerable financial incentives for setting up own businesses (up to EUR 25 000) which will strictly be linked to participation in entrepreneurship courses and monitoring exercise at the end of the EGF project;

13.  Regrets, however, that more than half of the EGF support will be spent on financial allowances - all workers are said to receive subsistence allowance which is estimated at EUR 10 400 per worker;

14.  Recalls that the EGF support should primarily be allocated to job searches and training programmes instead of contributing directly to financial allowances; notes that, if included in the package, such allowances should be of a complementary nature and should never replace allowances under the responsibility of Member States or companies by virtue of national law or collective agreements; stresses, in this context, that the new EGF regulation for 2014-2020 will introduce a cap on financial allowances which will not constitute more than 35 % of the cost of the package and that a disproportionate rate of allowances will not be repeated under the new regulation;

15.  Welcomes the fact that the social partners, including trade unions, were consulted during the preparation of the EGF application, and that a policy of equality between women and men as well as the principle non-discrimination will be applied during the various stages of the implementation of and in access to the EGF;

16.  Recalls the importance of improving the employability of all workers by means of adapted training and the recognition of skills and competences gained throughout a worker's professional career; expects the training on offer in the coordinated package to be adapted not only to the needs of the dismissed workers but also to the actual business environment;

17.  Notes that the information provided on the coordinated package of personalised services to be funded from the EGF includes information on complementarity with actions funded by the European Structural Funds; stresses that the Danish authorities confirm that the eligible actions do not receive assistance from other Union financial instruments; reiterates its call to the Commission to present a comparative evaluation of those data in its annual reports in order to ensure full respect of the existing regulations and that no duplication of Union-funded services can occur;

18.  Requests that the institutions involved make the necessary efforts to improve procedural arrangements in order to accelerate the mobilisation of the EGF; appreciates the improved procedure put in place by the Commission, following Parliament's request for the accelerated release of grants, which aims to present to the budgetary authority the Commission's assessment of the eligibility of an EGF application together with the proposal to mobilise the EGF; hopes that further improvements in the procedure will be integrated in the new EGF Regulation for 2014-2020 and that greater efficiency, transparency and visibility of the EGF will be achieved;

19.  Stresses that, in accordance with Article 6 of the EGF Regulation, it shall be ensured that the EGF supports the reintegration of individual redundant workers into stable employment; stresses, furthermore, that EGF assistance can co-finance only active labour market measures which lead to durable, long-term employment; reiterates that assistance from the EGF must replace neither actions which are the responsibility of companies by virtue of national law or collective agreements, nor measures restructuring companies or sectors;

20.  Welcomes the agreement reached in the Council on reintroducing in the EGF Regulation for the period 2014-2020 the crisis mobilisation criterion, which allows for the provision of financial assistance to workers made redundant as a result of the current financial and economic crisis in addition to those losing their job because of changes in global trade patterns;

21.  Approves the decision annexed to this resolution;

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

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

ANNEX

DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL

on mobilisation of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund, in accordance with point 28 of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline and sound financial management (application EGF/2012/011 DK/Vestas from Denmark)

(The text of this annex is not reproduced here since it corresponds to the final act, Decision 2013/787/EU.)

(1) OJ C 139, 14.6.2006, p. 1.
(2) OJ L 406, 30.12.2006, p. 1.
(3)'World Wind Energy association' The World Wind Energy Association 2012 Annual Report', Bonn, May 2013. http://www.wwindea.org/webimages/WorldWindEnergyReport2012_final.pdf
(4)www.dst.dk
(5)COM(2012)0502 – Decision 2012/731/EU (OJ L 328, 28.11.2012, p. 19).
(6)COM(2011)0258 – Decision 2011/469/EU (OJ L 195, 27.7.2011, p. 53).
(7)COM(2011)0421 – Decision 2011/725/EU (OJ L 289, 8.11.2011, p. 31).


Negotiations for an EU-Canada strategic partnership agreement
PDF 232kWORD 41k
European Parliament resolution of 10 December 2013 containing the European Parliament’s recommendation to the Council, the Commission and the European External Action Service on the negotiations for an EU-Canada Strategic Partnership Agreement (2013/2133(INI))
P7_TA(2013)0532A7-0407/2013

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the ongoing negotiations between the EU and Canada for a Strategic Partnership Agreement (SPA),

–  having regard to its resolution of 14 February 2006 on the human rights and democracy clause in European Union agreements(1),

–  having regard to its recent resolutions on relations with Canada, in particular those of 5 May 2010 on the EU-Canada Summit(2), of 8 June 2011 on EU-Canada trade relations(3) and of 13 June 2013 on the role of the EU in promoting a broader transatlantic partnership(4),

–  having regard to the 1976 Framework Agreement for Commercial and Economic Cooperation between the EEC and Canada(5),

–  having regard to the 1990 Declaration on transatlantic relations between the EC and Canada,

–  having regard to the 1996 Joint Political Declaration and Joint Action Plan,

–  having regard to the Communication from the Commission on EU-Canada Relations (COM(2003)0266),

–  having regard to the 2004 EU-Canada Partnership Agenda,

–  having regard to the 2011 Report to the EU-Canada Joint Cooperation Committee,

–  having regard to the outcomes of the EU-Canada inter-parliamentary meeting of April 2013,

–  having regard to Article 21 of the Treaty on European Union,

–  having regard to Rules 90(4) and 48 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Foreign Affairs (A7-0407/2013),

A.  whereas the relations between the EU and Canada are historical, strong and built on shared interests and values; whereas the shared values of democracy and the protection of human rights should form a core part of any agreement between the two parties aiming to provide a framework for that relationship;

B.  whereas the EU and Canada have a long history of extensive political and economic cooperation, formally dating back to 1976 when the EU signed a Framework Agreement with Canada, the first with an OECD country; whereas this agreement has for a long time constituted the appropriate framework to deepen relations, enhance political association and further cooperation;

C.  whereas Canada is a consolidated parliamentary democracy; whereas Canada shares similar democratic values and principles with the EU;

D.  whereas the SPA currently under negotiation would update and revitalise the relationship between the EU and Canada and considerably contribute to the deepening of political, economic and cultural relations and the improvement of our cooperation in many areas; whereas it codifies the status of the EU and Canada as strategic partners;

E.  whereas the SPA, beyond improving the institutional structure of relations, alongside the CETA, would provide Europe’s and Canada’s citizens with tangible benefits and opportunities as long as all stakeholders are involved in the process; whereas the opening of markets and regulatory cooperation is expected to generate important economic gains and have positive effects on employment for both Canada and the EU and, in light of broadening the transatlantic partnership and given the existing NAFTA-framework, may lead to the creation of a transatlantic market, a win-win situation for all actors involved as long as current social and environmental standards are not lowered;

F.  whereas the benefits and opportunities of intensified EU-Canada relations should be equally distributed among all sections of both the European and Canadian population according to their living conditions and requirements; whereas the different economic and industrial conditions of both the EU and Canada should be recognised and whereas respect for a sustainable and responsible use of resources needs to be guaranteed;

G.  whereas on 18 October 2013 the President of the Commission and the Canadian Prime Minister reached a political agreement on the key elements of a Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA), while the negotiations on the Strategic Partnership Agreement are continuing; whereas the CETA and the SPA are complementary in strengthening the EU-Canada relationship;

H.  whereas in parallel to the negotiations on the SPA, an EU-Canada PNR agreement has been negotiated which is supposed to deepen the relationship also in the field of counter-terrorism and to provide proper safeguards against disproportionate targeting practices based on the retention of EU passenger data;

I.  whereas Canada formally withdrew from the Kyoto Protocol in 2011; whereas the EU has repeatedly called on Canada to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions in line with its international commitments;

J.  whereas the issue of a full visa waiver should be swiftly resolved ensuring that persons and enterprises from all EU Member States, including Romania and Bulgaria, have equal opportunities for cooperation with Canadian counterparts;

K.  whereas the EU-Canada strategic partnership should be duly reflected in international fora and organisations; whereas, in this connection, the Arctic Council’s decision, supported by Canada, on EU observer status is regrettable; whereas the EU has committed itself to collaborating with the Canadian authorities to resolve this issue;

1.  Addresses the following recommendations to the Council, the Commission and the European External Action Service:

   (a) to make all necessary progress in order to swiftly conclude the agreement;
   (b) to insist that all EU agreements with third countries should include reciprocal conditionality and political clauses on human rights and democracy, as a common reaffirmation of the mutual commitment to these values and regardless of the state of protection of human rights in those countries; to adopt appropriate safeguards to ensure that the suspension mechanism cannot be abused by either side;
   (c) to insist that such conditionality should form part of the SPA with Canada, to ensure the consistency of the EU’s common approach on the matter;
   (d) to encourage, if possible, all the parties involved to initial and sign the SPA and the CETA at their earliest convenience and to underline their complementary nature;
   (e) to ensure that civil society and the main stakeholders are fully involved, informed and consulted in the process;
   (f) to ensure that the agreement contains a solid commitment to inter-parliamentary cooperation that recognises the important role of the European Parliament and the Canadian Parliament in EU-Canada relations, especially through the long- established inter-parliamentary delegation;
   (g) to provide periodic reports on the implementation of the agreement to Parliament, which should present an overview of activities carried out and results achieved with regard to the different areas of the agreement, based on objective metrics;

2.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution containing the European Parliament’s recommendation to the Council, the Commission and the European External Action Service, the Member States and the Government and Parliament of Canada.

(1) OJ C 290 E, 29.11.2006, p. 107.
(2) OJ C 81 E, 15.3.2011, p. 64.
(3) OJ C 380 E, 11.12.2012, p. 20.
(4) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0280.
(5) OJ L 260, 24.9.1976, p. 2.


Recovery and resolution framework for non-bank institutions
PDF 142kWORD 57k
European Parliament resolution of 10 December 2013 on recovery and resolution framework for non-bank institutions (2013/2047(INI))
P7_TA(2013)0533A7-0343/2013

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the consultative report of July 2012 by the Committee on Payment and Settlement Systems (CPSS) and the International Organisation of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) entitled ‘Recovery and resolution of financial market infrastructures’,

–  having regard to the CPSS-IOSCO consultative report of August 2013 entitled ‘Recovery of financial market infrastructures‘,

–   having regard to the reports of July 2013 by the International Association of Insurance Supervisors (IAIS) entitled ‘Global Systemically Important Insurers: Initial Assessment Methodology‘ and ‘Global Systemically Important Insurers: Policy Measures‘,

–   having regard to the publication of 18 July 2013 by the Financial Stability Board entitled ‘Global systemically important insurers (G-SIIs) and the policy measures that will apply to them’(1),

–   having regard to the consultative report of August 2013 by the Financial Stability Board entitled ‘Application of the Key Attributes of Effective Resolution Regimes to Non-Bank Financial Institutions‘,

–  having regard to the consultation carried out by the Commission’s services on a possible recovery and resolution framework for financial institutions other than banks,

–  having regard to Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2012 on OTC derivatives, central counterparties and trade repositories (EMIR)(2),

–  having regard to the Commission‘s proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on improving securities settlement in the European Union and on central securities depositories (CSDs) and amending Directive 98/26/EC (CSDR),

–  having regard to the Commission’s proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a framework for the recovery and resolution of credit institutions and investment firms (COM(2012)0280) (BRRD), and the report of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs thereon(3),

–  having regard to Rule 48 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (A7-0343/2013),

A.  whereas assessments of financial market infrastructure are now included in the IMF’s and World Bank’s financial sector assessment programmes;

B.  whereas effective recovery plans and resolution tools are crucial for improving the stability of the non-bank financial sector globally;

C.  whereas financial market infrastructures are organised along widely differing lines; whereas to facilitate the formulation of appropriate plans for recovery and, above all, resolution, it is necessary to make a distinction between them based on organisational complexity, geographical scope and business model;

D.  whereas while EMIR and CSDR aim to reduce systemic risk through well-regulated market infrastructure, there is a possibility of unintended consequences;

E.  whereas while mandatory central clearing contributes positively to decreasing the overall systemic risk of financial markets, it has also increased the concentration of systemic risk in CCPs, recalling that all CCPs are systemically important in their own markets;

F.  whereas the largest clearing members typically participate in more than one CCP, so that if one CCP fails others are also likely to face difficulties;

G.  whereas multiple failures of CCP members will have devastating consequences not only for financial market participants but for the societies concerned as a whole;

H.  whereas the rationale for using a CCP is to reduce counterparty risk by correctly margining products before offering to centrally clear them so that the default of any counterparty does not affect the rest of the market;

I.  whereas risk management processes show that CCPs reduce counterparty risk and uncertainty and prevent contagion;

J.  whereas EMIR does not fully address the risks arising from a CCP wrongly assessing the margin requirements for a whole product class;

K.  whereas CCPs have incentives to apply lower margins, particularly when entering new products or asset classes, in order to attract custom; whereas the effectiveness of default funds segregated by product or asset class is yet to be assessed;

L.  whereas the risks of cross-margining of products (portfolio margining) using ringfencing of assets within the default fund of a CCP are untested, and, therefore, while reducing collateral demand in the short term may reduce costs, the use of cross-margining should not jeopardise the ability of a CCP to correctly manage risk and should recognise the limitations of VaR analytics;

M.  whereas one of the key benefits that clients derive from the clearing member lies in their provision of a firewall against counterparty risk in relation to both the CCP and other clearing members;

N.  whereas the EU’s ICSDs are globally systemically important institutions as facilitators of the Eurobond market and currently operate with banking licences;

O.  whereas central clearing has increased the need for collateral management and related services which are now being performed by CSDs as well as custodian banks;

P.  whereas the impending introduction of Target2Securities has caused CSDs to explore new services;

Q.  whereas standard insolvency regimes will not provide a complete framework for treatment of client assets should a CSD fail without implementation of the Securities Law Legislation;

R.  whereas the IAIS reported in July 2013 on ‘Globally Systemic Insurance Institutions’ and concluded that, while the traditional insurance business model has proven considerably less fragile in financial crises than that of banks, nevertheless, large, highly interconnected cross-border insurers, especially those that have significant activities outside traditional underwriting such as credit and investment guarantees, can pose a significant systemic risk; whereas on the basis of the IAIS assessment method the FSB has identified nine large insurers as being systemic, of which five are headquartered in the Union;

S.  whereas while the systemic risk of an asset manager failing is not as pronounced as for critical market infrastructure, as asset managers’ business models evolve they could become more systemically important, a factor which has been addressed in FSB work on shadow banking;

1.  Calls on the Commission to prioritise recovery and resolution of CCPs and of those CSDs which are exposed to credit risk, and, when considering whether it is appropriate to develop similar legislation for other financial institutions, to differentiate appropriately between each type, giving due consideration to those which have the potential to pose systemic risks to the economy;

2.  Emphasises the importance of EU legislation following internationally agreed principles, as agreed in CPSS-IOSCO, FSB and IAIS;

3.  Stresses the importance of clear provisions for a ‘ladder of intervention’ in any recovery provisions for non-bank financial institutions under which competent authorities monitor appropriately designed indicators of financial health and have the power to intervene early in cases of financial stress of an entity and require it to take corrective measures according to a pre-approved recovery plan, in order to stave off the potentially disruptive last resort of putting such an entity into resolution;

4.  Believes that non-bank financial institutions themselves should develop comprehensive and substantive recovery plans that identify critical operations and services and develop strategies and measures necessary to ensure continued provision of critical operations and services, and that these recovery plans should be reviewed by the relevant supervisory authority; considers that the supervisory authority should be able to request changes to the recovery plan and should lead and consult with the resolution authority, which, if different, could make recommendations to the supervisor;

5.  Considers that supervisory authorities should have the power to intervene on financial stability grounds, and to require the implementation of parts of recovery plans which have not yet been activated or take other actions if necessary; the authorities should, however, also be aware of the risk of creating market uncertainty in already stressed circumstances;

6.  Takes the view that resolution and supervisory authorities in each country should strive to cooperate and keep each other informed;

7.  Believes that for groups with entities in different jurisdictions, a group resolution plan should be agreed between different resolution authorities; such plans should be based on the presumption of cooperation between authorities in different jurisdictions;

8.  Considers that resolution measures should differentiate between different services and activities which the financial market infrastructure institution in question is authorised to provide or perform;

9.  Stresses the need to avoid any conflicts between the recovery and resolution plans and the existing legislation, in particular the Financial Collateral Arrangements Directive (FCAD) and the European Market Infrastructure Regulation (EMIR), since these could lead to constraints on the recovery and resolution powers for CCPs and CSDs or prevent them from being effective;

10.  Underlines the urgent need, in the context of assessing the relevance of specific resolution regimes for market infrastructure, financial institutions and shadow banking entities, for the development of tools for effective near-time monitoring of the stock and flow of financial risk within and across corporate, sectoral and national boundaries in the Union and between the Union and other global regions; urges the Commission to ensure that the relevant data provided under banking, insurance and market infrastructure legislation is used efficiently for this purpose by the ESRB, ESAs and other competent authorities;

CCPs

11.  Calls upon the Commission to ensure that CCPs have a default management strategy for all products that are cleared by the CCP as part of a wider recovery plan approved by the supervisor, with a particular focus on those products that are mandated for central clearing, as there is a higher likelihood of risk concentration in these cases;

12.  Underlines the importance of monitoring risks to CCPs arising from a concentration of clearing members, and calls on supervisors to inform the EBA of the largest 10 clearing members of each CCP so that risks such as interlinkages, contagion and the potential for failure of more than one CCP at a time can be centrally monitored and assessed;

13.  Calls on the Commission to develop tools for measuring CCPs’ intraday risk, to ensure that intraday balances held by CCPs with commercial banks for account management and payment services do not exceed predefined limits that could otherwise threaten the functioning of the CCP;

14.  Believes that in order to maintain incentives for good governance of CCPs the default waterfall established in EMIR needs to be respected such that the CCP’s pre-funded own financial resources are used before any non-defaulting members’ default fund contributions;

15.  Calls on the Commission to ensure that CCPs act in the general public interest and adopt their business strategies accordingly, in order to significantly reduce the likelihood of triggering recovery and resolution scenarios;

16.  Calls on the Commission to recognise that while the aim of ringfencing asset classes within a default fund of a CCP is to limit contagion, it is unclear whether this will be sufficient to prevent such contagion in practice, given that commercial incentives related to cross-margining could increase risk in the system; calls on the Commission to propose further measures in order to minimise this contagion risk;

17.  Calls on the Commission to ensure that sound principles are established to govern contractual arrangements between a CCP and its clearing members, as well as how clearing members pass on losses to their clients, in such a way that the clearing member’s default fund will have to be exhausted before any losses from a defaulting clearing member can be passed on to the client as part of a transparent loss allocation process;

18.  Believes that any contractual arrangements between a CCP and its clearing members should distinguish between losses arising from a member default and those arising from other reasons such as losses incurred as a result of poor investment choices by the CCP; calls on the Commission to ensure that the CCP’s risk committee is kept fully apprised of the CCP’s investments in order to maintain appropriate oversight; considers that recovery tools such as suspension of dividends and payment of variable remuneration or voluntary restructuring of liabilities through debt-to-equity conversion should be considered the most appropriate tools to be used in these circumstances;

19.  Believes that all CCPs should have in place comprehensive recovery arrangements which provide protection over and above the funds and resources required by EMIR; these recovery plans should provide protection against all foreseeable circumstances, and should be included and published as part of the CCP’s rules;

20.  Asserts that the dividing-line between recovery and resolution in the case of CCPs is when the default waterfall is exhausted, and the loss absorption capacity of the CCP has been depleted; takes the view that at this point the supervisor should actively consider the option of removing the CCP’s management board and whether to transfer critical services of the CCP or hand over operational control of the CCP to another provider; believes that the resolution authorities should be given the necessary degree of discretion in assessing the situation, as well as a certain margin of manoeuvre, enabling them to justify their decisions;

21.  Believes that in exercising such discretion the resolution authorities should apply the following very specific criteria:

   (i) where the sustainability of the market financial infrastructure in question is in the process of being, or is already, seriously compromised because of their inability to comply with the prudential requirements applicable;
   (ii) where there is no alternative to entry into the resolution phase if the situation is to be rectified effectively and without compromising the stability of the financial system;
   (iii) where a resolution measure is necessary in the public interest insofar as it makes it possible to achieve one or more objectives of the resolution using proportionate means;

22.  Stresses the need to treat ‘continuity of service’ as a key resolution objective;

23.  Emphasises that any participation of clearing members in loss allocation before removal of the CCP’s management should not involve the money or assets of direct or indirect clients, while the resolution authority, once responsible, may employ resolution tools for loss allocation such as variation margin cutting or refilling of the default fund by the non-defaulting clearing members, following the resolution plan as closely as possible;

24.  Believes that if the resolution authority had the ability to impose a stay on early termination rights which would pause the CCP for a maximum period of two days, this could permit the market to correctly re-price the contracts, thus allowing for a more orderly diffusion of risk; the availability and exercise of such a power should be carefully considered so that it is, at a minimum, conditional on the resolution authority determining that imposition of a stay is necessary in the interests of financial stability, having regard to the resolution objectives, interplay with relevant bank or other resolution regimes applicable to clearing members, default and risk management of the CCP and the impact on each of the CCP’s markets, clearing participants and financial markets generally; this would necessarily be accompanied by the power to lift the clearing obligation as a last resort after it has at least been examined whether another CCP could provide the clearing in the short term;

25.  Acknowledges that CCPs have clearing members from a large number of countries; considers, therefore, that a CCP resolution framework will be effective when it is effective in all the jurisdictions involved; believes that, consequently, national insolvency frameworks have to be updated to accommodate the new European resolution regime;

26.  Considers that central counterparties with a banking licence should be subject to a central counterparty-specific regime and not to the proposed bank recovery and resolution regime of the bank recovery and resolution directive (BRR); of particular concern in this sense is the fact that the proposed regime for banks would require them to hold an aggregate amount of debt that can be bailed-in; believes such a power would be inappropriate for central counterparties holding a banking licence because they do not tend to issue such debt instruments;

CSDs

27.  Establishes that it is the responsibility of a CSD to ensure that its recovery plan clearly provides for operational continuity in reasonable crisis scenarios so that, even if other parts of its business can be disposed of, its primary settlement function as well as the other core services of the CSD can continue to be performed by the CSD or an existing third party provider, as authorised under CSDR;

28.  Calls, if no separate legislative proposal is imminent, for inclusion in the CSDR of a requirement for national competent authorities to ensure the establishment of appropriate recovery and resolution plans in line with FSB and CPSS-IOSCO international standards for all CSDs, including references to the articles of the BRR that should apply to those CSDs operating under a banking licence;

29.  Calls on the Member States, in the absence of Securities Law Legislation, to develop and coordinate their existing special administration regimes for CSDs in order to improve certainty as to how operational continuity will be maintained in a crisis, in particular by ensuring access to the registries, records or accounts of the CSD so that the resolution authority or national competent authority is easily able to identify the owners of assets;

30.  Calls on the Commission to ensure that the proposal for a recovery and resolution framework for CSDs ensures – as far as possible – the continuity of the CSDs during the recovery and resolution;

31.  Calls on the Commission to ensure that the proposal for a recovery and resolution framework for CSDs ensures continuity of the CSDs’ legislative environment, in particular by respecting the Settlement Finality Directive, Delivery versus Payment arrangements, the operation of any CSD link, and contracts with critical service providers during the recovery and resolution;

Insurance undertakings

32.  Notes that in the EU there is longstanding prudential regulation for insurance; stresses the importance of a consistent and convergent approach by Member States towards the implementation of Solvency II within a reasonable time-frame as set out in Omnibus II; calls for the completion of negotiations on Omnibus II so that levels two and three of Solvency II can be finalised in a timely manner, thus keeping to a minimum the probability of resolution authorities having to step in;

33.  Calls on the Commission to closely take into account the IAIS’s work on recovery and resolution of insurers, and to consider it within the context of level two of Solvency II, Financial Conglomerates legislation, and the Insurance Mediation Directive and work with international partners to follow the timetable established by the FSB to implement the policy recommendations including requiring systemic insurers to have recovery and resolution plans as well as resolvability assessments in place, enhanced group supervision and higher loss absorbency requirements; recognises that the long-term nature of insurance liabilities, the different timescales, long run-off periods and business nature of insurance compared to banking, along with the tools available to regulators, already provide for efficient resolution practices; believes the focus should therefore be on recovery;

34.  Regrets that the IAIS and FSB have postponed the publication of guidelines on the assessment of the systemic status of and policy recommendations for reinsurers until July 2014; calls on the Commission to look carefully at the systemic risk posed by reinsurers, especially with regard to their central role in insurance risk management and their high degree of interconnectedness and poor substitutability;

Asset management

35.  Calls on the Commission to assess carefully whether any asset managers should be designated as systemically important, taking into account the scope of their activity and using a comprehensive set of indicators such as: size, business model, geographical scope, risk profile, creditworthiness, and whether or not they trade on their own account and are subject to requirements regarding the segregation of the assets of their clients, as well as other relevant factors;

36.  Notes that client assets are segregated and held with custodians, and that, therefore, the ability for these assets to be transferred to another asset manager is a substantial safeguard;

37.  Believes that an effective securities law regime could mitigate many of the issues involved in case of failure of a large crossborder asset manager;

Payment systems

38.  Calls on the Commission to engage with the relevant international financial supervisors and authorities in order to identify any weaknesses in globally systemically important payment systems and the arrangements in place to ensure continuity of service in the event of failure;

39.  Believes that, since payment systems are at the heart of all cash transfers, it is clear that a market perturbation in such a system would have significant spillovers on other financial market actors; notes that the 1998 Settlement Finality Directive already aims to mitigate potential risks in payment systems, but considers that it does not go sufficiently into recovery and resolution, and that specific provisions therefore need to be made in order to allow payments systems to react adequately to adverse circumstances;

o
o   o

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

(1) http://www.financialstabilityboard.org/publications/r_130718.pdf
(2) OJ L 201 27.7.2012, p. 1.
(3) A7-0196/2013.


EU space industrial policy
PDF 158kWORD 61k
European Parliament resolution of 10 December 2013 on EU Space Industrial Policy, releasing the Potential for Growth in the Space Sector (2013/2092(INI))
P7_TA-PROV(2013)0534A7-0338/2013

The European Parliament,

—  having regard to Title XIX, Article 189 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, as it relates to research and technological development and space policy and with particular reference to the drawing-up of a European space policy in order to promote scientific and technical progress, industrial competitiveness and the implementation of European Union policies,

—  having regard to the Commission communication of 28 February 2013 entitled ‘EU Space Industrial Policy’ (COM(2013)0108),

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

—  having regard to the Commission communication of 28 October 2010 entitled ‘An integrated industrial policy for the Globalisation Era – Putting Competitiveness and Sustainability at Centre Stage’ (COM(2010)0614),

—  having regard to the Commission communication of 10 October 2012 entitled ‘A Stronger European Industry for Growth and Economic Recovery’ (COM(2012)0582),

—  having regard to the Commission communication of 4 April 2011 entitled ‘Towards a space strategy for the European Union that benefits its citizens’ (COM(2011)0152),

—  having regard to the Commission communication of 14 November 2012 entitled ‘Establishing appropriate relations between the EU and the ESA’ (COM(2012)0671),

—  having regard to Council Decision 2004/578/EC of 29 April 2004 on the conclusion of the Framework Agreement between the European Community and the European Space Agency(1),

—  having regard to the Council conclusions of 11 October 2010, 31 May 2011, 2 December 2011 and 30 May 2013,

—  having regard to its resolution of 19 January 2012 on a space strategy for the European Union that benefits its citizens(2),

–  having regard to Rule 48 of its Rules of Procedure,

—  having regard to the report of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy and the opinion of the Committee on Foreign Affairs (A7-0338/2013),

A.  whereas Article 189 TFEU gives the European Union an explicit role in drawing up a European space policy, in order to promote scientific and technical progress, industrial competitiveness and the implementation of its policies;

B.  whereas, in view of increasing competition from newly emerging space-faring nations such as China and India, the political weight of the EU Member States in national terms may no longer suffice to address the challenges ahead in this sector;

C.  whereas space policy is a key element in the Europe 2020 strategy;

D.  whereas innumerable services which are used by members of the public in everyday life are directly or indirectly dependent on the space industry, such as television, high-speed internet, navigation systems or the Europe-wide automatic emergency call system eCall;

E.  whereas the European space industry has a consolidated turnover of EUR 6,5 billion and employs over 34 500 highly skilled people, and whereas in this period of economic difficulty the importance of that industry as a sector with strong growth and innovation potential, and as a creator of jobs with high added value, should be brought to the fore;

F.  whereas at present there is still not sufficient coordination of measures in the field of space policy between the EU, the Member States and the ESA, and whereas this has resulted in duplication of structures and prevented synergies from being sufficiently exploited; stresses that the introduction of a clear governance framework in the space sector would make for huge efficiency savings;

G.  whereas the ESA, as an intergovernmental organisation, has no formal relationship with the European Parliament, so that there is no direct feedback to citizens such as otherwise exists in all fields of Union policy;

H.  whereas the space industry is investment-intensive and has unusually long development cycles, so that consistency of planning plays a decisive role for it; whereas the visibility this provides will benefit greatly from the existence of a stable regulatory framework and a clear governance framework;

I.  whereas the operation of a European launcher system could help to secure independent access to space;

J.  whereas the EU is currently dependent on non-European military GNSS, and Galileo was conceived and developed and will remain under civilian control;

K.  whereas commercial sales play a substantially more important role for the European space industry than for its main international competitors;

L.  whereas satellite-based services play an important part in providing information for the growth sectors of the digital society and contribute to achieving the aims of the EU’s Digital Agenda;

M.  whereas experts estimate that in ten years’ time the market for satellite navigation and earth observation services could have a volume of USD 300 billion, and whereas even today between 6 % and 7 % of GDP in the western EU Member States is dependent on satellite navigation;

N.  whereas, because of growing demand for wireless communication services and the physical properties of wave propagation and the associated shortage of radio frequencies, the international coordination of spectrum use is increasingly important;

Basing space policy on European priorities

1.  Welcomes the Commission communication on EU Space Industrial Policy; considers that the Commission should concentrate on a limited number of space industrial policy measures as referred to in that communication, in order to genuinely exploit the potential for growth in the space industry;

2.  Stresses that all the actors involved in the governance of future EU space policies, including the Commission, the European GNSS Agency, the ESA, the national agencies and the specialised agencies such as EUMETSAT, must be interlinked and must operate on a long-term basis;

3.  Considers that the national agencies could come up with concrete proposals in this direction so that the Commission could streamline the input coming from the Member States and define an EU vision;

4.  Stresses that the Commission must, as soon as possible, give us a clear roadmap for GMES/Copernicus and for the development and deployment of the various Satellite Sentinels, as well as the legal and operational framework proposed for this complex system;

5.  Endorses the Commission’s intention of taking steps towards the establishment of a coherent EU space regulatory framework; advocates establishing a genuine EU internal market for space products and space-based services; considers it important that policy should be formulated and developed without its implementation adversely affecting or distorting commercial market conditions; observes that competitive neutrality and transparency are both cornerstones of the development of European space policy;

6.  Observes that the Commission does not yet have a horizontal approach with a view to mainstreaming space policy and its objectives into the various fields of policy of the Union; calls on the Commission to do so in future by taking space policy into account in such fields as telecommunications, transport, environment, agriculture, safety or culture;

7.  Welcomes the statement by the Commission that space-based telecommunications, navigation and earth observation provide the EU with strategically important knowledge underpinning its external relations in the field of development assistance and humanitarian aid;

8.  Calls on the Commission to assign priority to the following aspects: institutional issues; Galileo and Copernicus; the space industry as a generator of growth and employment; impact assessment of space-related activities; independent access to space; the role of R&D; satellite communication; space surveillance and tracking; and space debris;

9.  Supports the point made by the Commission that many components of space systems are dual-use or of a military nature and are hence subject to Directive 2009/43/EC of 6 May 2009 simplifying terms and conditions of transfers of defence-related products within the Community(3), as amended by Directive 2012/47/EU of 14 December 2012 as regards the list of defence-related products, Council Regulation (EC) No 428/2009 of 5 May 2009 setting up a Community regime for the control of exports, transfer, brokering and transit of dual-use items(4), or the Common Position on arms exports; welcomes the proposal made in the communication to submit a formal report to Parliament on the dual-use export control system before the end of 2013; calls on the Commission, the Member States and the EU Council Working Party on Conventional Arms Exports (COARM) to clarify what regulatory framework should apply to each category of goods and technology;

Institutional affairs

10.  Recognises the successes which the ESA has achieved for Europe in the field of space missions in recent decades, and encourages non-ESA Member States to consider accession and increased cooperation; observes, however, that, in the long term, ways of achieving greater operational efficiency and political coordination and responsibility can be achieved by bringing the ESA and the EU closer together in their cooperation, inter alia so as to avoid duplication of activities and overlaps; calls on the Commission to investigate very carefully whether the ESA could, for example, in future be linked to the Union’s governance structures as an inter-state organisation as long as it is not felt to be appropriate to convert the ESA into a European agency;

11.  Considers that, in the meantime, the EU, in very close cooperation with the ESA, should coordinate the space policies and programmes of the Member States more than hitherto in order to adopt a genuine European approach, while ensuring that the interests of ESA and its member states are respected; observes that it is only by means of a European approach that the space industry can be given the opportunity to become, and also remain, competitive;

12.  Calls on the Commission, the Member States and the ESA to establish a form of coordination group whose members should coordinate strategies and measures in the field of space at regular meetings in order to avoid duplication of structures and develop a common approach to international issues and forums;

13.  Notes that any increase in the use of space assets by the military must not reduce or limit civilian use and possible future civilian applications; calls on the Member States and the VP/HR to initiate a review of the now outdated 1967 Outer Space Treaty, or else to create a new regulatory framework that takes account of technological progress since the 1960s;

Galileo and Copernicus (GMES)

14.  Stresses that the completion of Galileo and the continuation of Copernicus should be assigned the highest priority as the flagships of European space policy, so that the first Galileo services can in practice be opened to the public in 2014;

15.  Underlines the fact that EGNOS is the first operational European GNSS programme; calls on the Commission and the Member States to promote and implement the use of EGNOS in various areas, such as transport;

16.  Deplores the fact that, in the past, delays have occurred in establishing the European satellite navigation programme Galileo; welcomes the fact that four satellites have now been launched into earth orbit; stresses that the advantages and utility of Galileo in particular and of a European space industry in general should be communicated to society more effectively, and calls on the Commission, in conjunction with future launches of Galileo satellites, to organise high-profile public events in EU capitals to promote Galileo and its potential applications;

17.  Stresses that the EU needs to inform people, attract future engineers, spread information about EU satellite navigation and propose a set of incentives for all users in order to use Galileo and EGNOS enabled technologies;

18.  Is convinced that the aim of Full Operating Capacity (FOC), based on a constellation of 27 satellites plus a suitable number of spare satellites and adequate ground infrastructure, is a prerequisite in order to realise the added value of Galileo, in terms in particular of high precision and uninterrupted service and thus reap numerous economic and societal benefits;

19.  Regrets that not all of the EU is currently covered by the EGNOS system, and calls for that system to be extended to southern, eastern and south‑eastern Europe, hence enabling its use throughout Europe;

20.  Calls on the Commission and the Member States to inform Parliament about plans to use the Copernicus programme and the public-regulated service of the Galileo programme in support of CSDP missions and operations;

The role of the space industry in driving growth and creating employment

21.  Observes that SMEs (not only SMEs, but nonetheless SMEs in particular) require a kind of pump-priming funding from the public sector to give them sufficient funds for long-term investment in R&D; is convinced that public funding and the existence of public customers for products and services of the space industry can drive innovation and thus generate growth and create jobs;

22.  Reiterates that the EU must not miss the opportunity to develop the satellite navigation downstream market, and underlines the importance of an action plan for the European GNSS Agency in order to expand the GNSS market, which will be crucial for the future of the EU economy;

23.  Recalls that new applications of satellite navigation can increase the safety, efficiency and reliability in areas including the aviation, maritime, road and agriculture sectors, road safety, fee collection, traffic and parking management, fleet management, emergency calls, goods tracking and tracing, online booking, safety of shipping, digital tachographs, animal transport, and sustainable land;

24.  Notes the fact mentioned in the communication that 60 % of electronics on board European satellites are currently imported from the US; calls for an initiative on how to protect sensitive or personal data in this context, and for use of the current public procurement process to ensure wherever possible that the purchase of space infrastructure from Member States is used as a further driver of growth in the sector;

25.  Urges the Commission, the ESA, the EDA and the Member States to identify critical technologies in the context of the joint European non-dependence process and to develop alternatives which are less dependent on third countries; recalls the risk that the US might, in the event of disagreement, close down or block European space infrastructure;

26.  Calls on the Commission and the Member States to create incentives for European industry to develop space components at European level in order to reduce dependence on imports from third countries;

27.  Observes that undertakings from outside the space industry can benefit from products derived from space research; calls on all parties concerned, therefore, to develop exchanges between actors in the space and non-space industries and to work in partnership to develop technologies which can lead to pioneering innovations for the benefit of society; stresses the value of better publicising the tangible benefits that the space industry can bring to the daily lives of Europeans;

28.  Stresses that the space-based services and robotics industries, in particular, create numerous market opportunities, above all for SMEs;

29.  Stresses that autonomous and intelligent robotic systems are key technologies for the further exploration of space; points in this context to the efficient use of European funding from Horizon 2020, particularly for operations close to the market;

30.  Stresses that a suitable pool of highly skilled employees is key to a competitive European space industry; calls therefore on all parties concerned to step up cooperation between universities and industry and to encourage young talent, in particular female talent, to commit to this sector (e.g. by establishing national graduate programmes and training schemes as well as competitions for European and non-European researchers); observes furthermore that the acquisition of talent from third countries (including by attracting back European talent) is indispensable;

Access to space

31.  Stresses the importance of access to space for all Member States and of commercial sales for the European space industry; observes at the same time that access to institutional markets in third countries remains partially closed to the European industry; stresses the importance of equal initial conditions for the European industry at international level; calls on the Commission, therefore, to promote reciprocity and to ensure equal opportunities and fair competitive conditions in the context of trade agreements (e.g. TTIP);

32.  Stresses the importance of developing and operating European launchers for independent access to space; calls, therefore, on the Commission and the Member States, jointly with the ESA, to maintain and expand a European launcher system and a rocket-launching service in the long term;

33.  Considers that the European space industry should make use of existing European space infrastructure, part of which was paid for using European public funds;

The role of research and development

34.  Welcomes, additionally, the fact that under the new Framework Programme for Research (Horizon 2020) the sum of EUR 1,5 billion is to be invested in space research and innovation; calls on the Commission, furthermore, in the context of Horizon 2020, to make part of the budget available for R&D relating to applications of satellite communication;

35.  Considers that, particularly in the field of research, greater coordination between the EU, the ESA and the Member States is needed; calls on all three parties to develop a joint ‘research roadmap’ for the period ending in 2020, and to define priorities and objectives for space policy which should be attained jointly, in order to provide consistency of planning for the actors involved, particularly in industry; stresses the importance of research cooperation with third countries;

36.  Stresses that the development of GNSS applications and services is essential in order to ensure that the infrastructure investment which Galileo represents is fully exploited and that the Galileo system is developed to its full capacity; stresses the need to ensure that the appropriate funding is provided for research and development in respect of GNSS and for its implementation; regrets the fact that the reduction in the funding allocated to research and innovation for applications based on EGNOS and Galileo is considerably delaying technological progress and the growth of industrial capacity, as well as environmentally effective implementation, in the EU, and therefore urges the Commission to introduce arrangements enabling SMEs to access funding more easily;

37.  Observes that the development of innovative applications in Europe is hampered by various obstacles; reminds the Commission, therefore, that there is an untapped market for the commercial exploitation of space-based data generated by earth observation and satellite programmes; calls on the Commission to conduct a study to identify these obstacles (such as: liability for damage caused by space objects/debris; uncertainty regarding the availability of services; reservations with regard to security and data protection; inadequate awareness of potential; and lack of interoperability), and to put forward possible proposals concerning ways of opening up such markets;

Satellite communication

38.  Stresses that satellite communication plays an important role within the European space industry, as orders from this sector provide continuous uses for spacecraft and launchers and thus contribute to the objective of independent access to space for the EU; draws attention, in this context, to the role of independent payload capacity which becomes available when launching commercial satellites (for ‘hosted payloads’) which can be used to try out new products and technologies in space and thus helps to reduce both the costs and the time required to be able to offer new services;

39.  Stresses that satellite communication is an efficient way of providing multimedia services, also to those in industry and society whom it has hitherto been impossible to serve by means of terrestrial technologies;

40.  Stresses that satellite networks help to meet the EU Digital Agenda targets with a view to achieving total broadband internet coverage in the EU, particularly in remote areas; calls on the Commission, therefore, to ensure that, with reference to technological neutrality, the satellite internet is appropriately taken into account in the technology mix to be used to expand broadband, for example in the EU’s cohesion policy;

41.  Observes that satellite communication is taking on an increasingly important logistical function in crises such as natural disasters or in maintaining internal security, as its data and communication links are vital in situations in which no terrestrial infrastructure exists or it has been destroyed;

42.  Calls on the Commission, therefore, to analyse the current availability of, and future need for, radio frequencies for satellite communication, and to ensure at the next ITU World Radio Communications Conference that the EU’s interests and those of the satellite communication industry in the field of global and regional spectrum allocation are defended appropriately;

43.  Considers that the potential for innovation in the field of satellite communication has not by any means been exhausted; draws attention to the potential of the latest technologies, such as Laser Communication Terminals (LCT) or High Throughput Satellites (HTS), to meet the need for ever-increasing exchanges of data at ever-higher data rates;

44.  Stresses that Europe can only maintain its technological advance in satellite communication if research efforts in this field are continued at European level;

Space debris

45.  Stresses that space-based infrastructure constitutes the backbone of many services used by industry and society in everyday life; observes that loss of access to this infrastructure, for example due to collisions between satellites and other space objects or debris, could impair the safety of economic actors and members of the public;

46.  Observes that space debris is a growing problem; calls on the Commission and the Member States to work towards global governance for space; calls on the Commission and the Member States, at the same time, to encourage third countries to sign the Code of Conduct for Outer Space Activities drawn up by the EU through all diplomatic channels;

47.  Calls on the Commission to support the establishment at European level, as quickly as possible, of the programme proposed at the beginning of this year to support observation and tracking of objects in space, in order to ensure greater independence from the institutions in the US that issue warnings of collisions;

o
o   o

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

(1) OJ L 261, 6.8.2013, p. 63.
(2) OJ C 227 E, 6.8.2013, p. 16.
(3) OJ L 146, 10.6.2009, p.1.
(4) OJ L 134, 29.5.2009, p.1.


Cloud computing
PDF 171kWORD 83k
European Parliament resolution of 10 December 2013 on unleashing the potential of cloud computing in Europe (2013/2063(INI))
P7_TA(2013)0535A7-0353/2013

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission communication of 27 September 2012 entitled ‘Unleashing the potential of cloud computing in Europe’ (COM(2012)0529) and the accompanying working document,

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

–  having regard to the Commission communication of 19 May 2010 entitled ‘A digital agenda for Europe’ (COM(2010)0245),

–  having regard to its resolution of 5 May 2010 on a new digital agenda for Europe: 2015.eu(1),

–  having regard to Decision No 243/2012/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 March 2012 establishing a multiannual radio spectrum policy programme,

–  having regard to the Commission’s proposal of 25 January 2012 for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data (General Data Protection Regulation) (COM(2012)0011),

–  having regard to the Commission’s proposal of 19 October 2011 for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the Connecting Europe Facility (COM(2011)0665),

–  having regard to Directive 1999/5/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 1999 on radio equipment and telecommunications terminal equipment and the mutual recognition of their conformity,

–  having regard to the work by the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI) on a cloud standards mapping,

–  having regard to Directive 2011/83/EU of Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2011 on consumer rights, amending Council Directive 93/13/EEC and Directive 1999/44/EC of Parliament and of the Council, and repealing Council Directive 85/577/EEC and Directive 97/7/EC of Parliament and of the Council

–  having regard to Directive 1999/44/EC of Parliament and of the Council of 25 May 1999 on certain aspects of the sale of consumer goods and associated guarantees(2),

–  having regard to Directive 95/46/EC of Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data(3),

–  having regard to Directive 2000/31/EC of Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market(4),

–  having regard to Directive 2001/29/EC of Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society(5),

–  having regard to Rule 48 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy and the opinions of the Committee on Legal Affairs, the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs and the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection (A7-0353/2013),

A.  whereas while remote computing services in various forms, now commonly known as ‘cloud computing’, are not new, the scale, performance and content of cloud computing constitute a significant advancement in information and communication technologies (ICT);

B.  whereas cloud computing has nonetheless attracted attention in recent years owing to the development of new and innovative large-scale business models, a strong push by cloud vendors, technological innovations and increased computing capabilities, lower prices and high-speed communications, as well as to the potential economic and efficiency benefits, including in terms of energy consumption, that cloud services offer all kinds of users;

C.  whereas the deployment and development of cloud services in sparsely populated and remote areas can contribute to reducing their isolation, while at the same time pose particularly serious challenges given the insufficient availability of necessary infrastructure;

D.  whereas the vendor benefits of cloud services consist of e.g. service fees, monetisation of underutilised and excess computing resources, economies of scale, the possibility of a captive customer base (so called lock-in effect) and secondary uses of user information, such as for advertising, with due regard for the requirements of personal data privacy and protection; whereas a lock-in effect can have competitive disadvantages that nevertheless can be dealt with through reasonable standardisation measures and better transparency on intellectual property licensing agreements;

E.  whereas the user benefits of cloud services consist of potentially lower costs, ubiquitous access, convenience, reliability, scalability and security;

F.  whereas cloud computing also entails risks for users, in particular as regards sensitive data, and users need to be aware of those risks; whereas if cloud processing is done in a particular country, the authorities of that country can have access to the data; whereas this should be taken into account by the Commission when issuing proposals and recommendations regarding cloud computing;

G.  whereas cloud services oblige users to hand over information to the cloud storage provider, a third party, raising issues relating to the continued control over and access to the information of individual users and its protection against the provider itself, other users of the same service and other parties; whereas encouragement of services which allow for the user and only the user to hold keys to the information stored, without the cloud storage providers themselves being able to access that information, could solve some of the issues pertaining to this problem;

H.  whereas the increased use of cloud services provided by a limited number of large providers means that increasing amounts of information is aggregated in the hands of those providers, thus magnifying their efficiencies but also increasing the risks of catastrophic losses of information, of centralised points of failure that could undermine the stability of the internet and of access to the information by third parties;

I.  whereas the responsibilities and liabilities of all the stakeholders involved in cloud computing services should be clarified, in particular as they apply to security and to respect of data protection requirements;

J.  whereas the market for cloud services appears bifurcated along consumer and business lines;

K.  whereas for business users, standardised cloud services can, if they meet the particular needs of the user, be an attractive means of converting capital cost to operating expense and of enabling fast availability and scaling of additional storage and processing capacity;

L.  whereas for consumers, the fact that providers of operating systems for various types of consumer devices, in particular, are increasingly steering consumers – through the use of default settings, etc. – towards using proprietary cloud services, means that these providers are creating a captive consumer-base and aggregating the information of their users;

M.  whereas the use of external cloud services in the public sector has to be weighted carefully against any increased risks with regard to information on citizens and against the ensured performance of public service functions;

N.  whereas, from a security perspective, the introduction of cloud services means that the responsibility for maintaining the security of information belonging to each individual user is shifted from the individual to the provider, thereby raising the need to ensure that service providers have the legal ability to provide secure and robust solutions for communication;

O.  whereas the development of cloud services will increase the amount of transmitted data and the demand for bandwidth, higher upload speeds and more available high-speed broadband;

P.  whereas the achievement of Europe’s digital agenda targets, in particular broadband uptake and access for all, cross-border public services and research and innovation goals, is a necessary step if the EU is fully to reap the benefits that cloud computing has to offer;

Q.  whereas there have recently been developments involving security breaches, in particular the PRISM spying scandal;

R.  whereas there is a lack of server farms on European soil;

S.  whereas the Digital Single Market is a key factor in attaining the targets of the Europe 2020 strategy, which would provide a significant boost in efforts to meet the objectives of the Single Market Act and respond to the economic and financial crisis affecting the EU;

T.  whereas EU-wide broadband provision, universal and equal access to internet services for all citizens, and a guarantee of network neutrality are the essential prerequisites for the development of a European cloud computing system;

U.  whereas the Connecting Europe Facility is intended, among other things, to increase broadband uptake in Europe;

V.  whereas cloud computing should stimulate the integration of SMEs through the reduction of market entry barriers (e.g. by decreasing IT infrastructure costs);

W.  whereas it is essential for a European cloud computing system that EU legal standards on data protection are guaranteed;

X.  whereas the development of cloud computing should help promote creativity for the benefit of both rights-holders and users; whereas, furthermore, distortions in the Single Market should be avoided in the process and consumer and business confidence in cloud computing should be boosted;

General

1.  Welcomes the Commission’s communication on unleashing the potential of cloud computing in Europe and approves the Commission’s ambition to develop a coherent approach to cloud services, but considers that, in order to achieve the ambitious goals set out by the strategy, a legislative instrument would have been more adequate for some aspects;

2.  Underlines that policies enabling high-capacity and secure communications infrastructure are a crucial element for all services relying on communications, including cloud services, but highlights that, owing to the limited budget of the Connecting Europe Facility, support for broadband deployment needs to be supplemented with assistance provided under other Union programmes and initiatives, including the European Structural and Investment Funds;

3.  Underlines that cloud services must offer security and reliability commensurate to the increased risks flowing from the concentration of data and information in the hands of a limited number of providers;

4.  Underlines that Union law should be neutral and, absent compelling reasons of public interest, not be adapted to either facilitate or hinder any legal business model or service;

5.  Stresses that a strategy on cloud computing should encompass collateral aspects such as the energy consumption of data centres and related environmental issues;

6.  Emphasises the vast possibilities that having access to data from any device connected to the internet offers;

7.  Stresses the obvious interest, from a dual perspective, for the EU in having more server farms on its soil: in terms of industrial policy, it would allow for enhanced synergies with the roll-out objectives for Next Generation Access Networks (NGA) set out in the digital agenda, and in terms of the Union’s data protection regime, it would foster trust by ensuring EU sovereignty over the servers;

8.  Underlines the importance of digital literacy among all citizens, and urges the Member States to develop concepts of how to promote the safe use of internet services, including cloud computing;

The cloud as an instrument for growth and employment

9.   Emphasises that, given the economic potential of the cloud for increasing Europe’s global competitiveness, it can become a powerful instrument for growth and employment;

10.  Stresses, therefore, that the development of cloud services, in the absence or insufficient availability of broadband infrastructure, risks widening the digital divide between urban and rural areas, which will make territorial cohesion and regional economic growth still harder to achieve;

11.  Highlights that the Union faces multiple, simultaneous pressures on GDP growth at a time when the scope to stimulate growth from public funds is limited by high debt and deficit levels, and calls on the European institutions and the Member States to mobilise every possible growth lever; notes that cloud computing can become a transformative development in all sectors of the economy, with special relevance in areas such as health care, energy, public services and education;

12.  Stresses that unemployment, including youth and long-term unemployment, has reached unacceptably high levels in Europe and is likely to remain high in the near future, and that determined and urgent action is needed at all political levels; notes that e-skills and digital education actions in cloud computing development can, consequently, be of extraordinary importance in order to tackle the rising unemployment, especially among young people;

13.  Underlines the need for greater e-skills among users and for training to show the benefits that cloud computing can offer; recalls the need to create more qualification schemes for specialists managing cloud computing services;

14.  Highlights that SMEs are at the heart of the EU’s economy and that more actions are needed to promote the global competitiveness of EU SMEs and to set the best possible environment for the uptake of new promising technological developments, such as cloud computing, which can have a high impact on the competitiveness of EU businesses;

15.  Insists on the positive impact of cloud computing services on SMEs, in particular those established in remote or outermost areas or facing economic difficulties, as such services contribute to the reduction of fixed costs for SMEs by allowing the rental of computing power and storage, and calls on the Commission to consider an appropriate framework allowing SMEs to increase their growth and productivity, as SMEs can benefit from reduced upfront costs and better access to analytics tools;

16.  Encourages the Commission and the Member States to communicate the economic potential of cloud computing to SMEs in particular;

17.  Points out that the EU must take advantage of the fact that this technology is at a relatively early stage and must work towards developing it in order to benefit from the economies of scale which it is expected to offer, thereby revitalising the Union’s economy, particularly in the ICT sector;

The EU market and the cloud

18.  Stresses that the internal market should remain open to all providers complying with Union law, as the global free flow of services and information increases the competitiveness of and opportunities for Union industry and benefits Union citizens;

19.  Regrets the indications of massive, pervasive and indiscriminate governmental access to information related to Union users stored in third-country clouds, and calls for cloud service providers to be transparent about how they manage the information that consumers make available to them through the use of cloud services;

20.  Insists that, in order to counter the risk that information is accessed directly or indirectly by foreign governments, where such access is not allowed under Union law, the Commission shall:

   (i) ensure that users are aware of this risk, including by supporting the European Network and Information Security Agency (ENISA) in activating the public interest information platform in the Universal Service Directive;
   (ii) sponsor research in and commercial deployment or public procurement of relevant technologies, such as encryption and anonymisation, enabling users to secure their information in an easy way; and
   (iii) involve ENISA in verifying the minimum security and privacy standards of cloud computing services offered to EU consumers and, in particular, to the public sector;

21.  Welcomes the Commission’s intention to establish an EU-wide certification system that would provide an incentive for developers and providers of cloud computing services to invest in better privacy protection;

22.  Calls on the Commission, in cooperation with Union industry and other stakeholders, to identify areas where a specific Union approach could prove particularly attractive globally;

23.  Emphasises the importance of ensuring a competitive and transparent Union market in order to provide all Union users with secure, sustainable, affordable and reliable services; calls for a simple, transparent method to identify security flaws in such a way that service providers on the European market have a sufficient and appropriate incentive to remedy such flaws;

24.  Underlines that all cloud providers operating in the Union must compete on an even playing field, with the same rules applicable to all;

Public procurement, and procurement of innovative solutions, and the cloud

25.  Stresses that the take-up of cloud services by the public sector has the potential to reduce costs for public administrations and provide more efficient services to citizens, whilst the digital leverage effect to all sectors of the economy would be extremely beneficial; points out that the private sector can also take advantage of those cloud services for the procurement of innovative solutions;

26.  Encourages public administrations to consider safe, reliable and secure cloud services in IT procurement, while underlining their particular responsibilities with respect to protection of information relating to citizens, accessibility and continuity of service;

27.  Calls, in particular, on the Commission to consider making use of cloud services, where appropriate, in order to provide an example to others;

28.  Calls on the Commission and the Member States to speed up the work of the European Cloud Partnership;

29.  Calls on the Commission and the Member States to make cloud computing a priority area for research and development programmes, and to promote it in the public administration sector as an innovative e-government solution of public interest, as well as in the private sector as an innovative tool for business development;

30.  Stresses that the use of cloud services by public authorities, including by law enforcement authorities and EU institutions, requires special consideration and coordination between the Member States; recalls that data integrity and security must be guaranteed and unauthorised access, including by foreign governments and their intelligence services without a legal basis under Union or Member State law, prevented; stresses that this also applies to the specific processing activities of certain essential non-governmental services, in particular the processing of specific categories of personal data, such as by banks, insurance companies, pension funds, schools and hospitals; stresses, furthermore, that all of the aforementioned is of particular importance if data is being transferred (outside the European Union between different jurisdictions); takes the view, therefore, that public authorities, as well as non-governmental services and the private sector, should, as far as possible, rely on EU cloud providers when processing sensitive data and information until satisfactory global rules on data protection have been introduced, ensuring the security of sensitive data and of data bases held by public entities;

Standards and the cloud

31.  Calls on the Commission to take the lead in promoting standards and specifications supporting privacy-friendly, reliable, highly interoperable, secure and energy-efficient cloud services as an integral part of a future Union industrial policy; stresses that reliability, security and protection of data is needed for consumer confidence and competitiveness;

32.  Stresses that standards are based on examples of best practices;

33.  Insists that standards should enable easy and complete data and service portability, and a high degree of interoperability between cloud services, in order to increase rather than limit competitiveness;

34.  Welcomes the mapping of standards that has been entrusted to ETSI, and highlights the importance of continuing to follow an open and transparent process;

Consumers and the cloud

35.  Calls on the Commission to ensure that consumer devices do not make use of cloud services by default and are not restricted to specific cloud service provider;

36.  Calls on the Commission to ensure that any commercial agreements between telecommunications operators and cloud providers are fully compliant with EU competition law and that they allow consumers full access to any cloud service, using an internet connection offered by any telecommunications operator;

37.  Reminds the Commission of its as yet unexploited prerogative, under Directive 1999/5/EC (the RTTE Directive), to require that equipment incorporates safeguards protecting users’ information;

38.  Calls on the Commission and the Member States to raise consumer awareness of all risks related to the use of cloud services;

39.  Calls on the Commission to ensure that consumers, when prompted to accept or otherwise offered a cloud service, are first given the information necessary for an educated decision, particularly when it comes to the jurisdiction covering the data stored in these cloud services;

40.  Stresses that the information thus provided should identify, among other things, who the ultimate provider of the service is and how the service is financed; stresses, furthermore, that if the service is financed by using users’ information to target advertising or enable others to do so, this should be disclosed to the user;

41.  Stresses that the information should be in a standardised, portable, easily comprehensible and comparable format;

42.  Calls on the Commission to explore appropriate measures to develop a minimum acceptable level of consumer rights in relation to cloud services, covering issues such as privacy, data storage in third countries, liability for data losses and other matters of significant interest to consumers;

43.  Calls on the Commission and the Member States to adopt specific measures on the use and promotion of cloud computing in relation to open access and open educational resources;

Intellectual property, civil law etc. and the cloud

44.  Urges the Commission to take action to further harmonise laws across the Member States in order to avoid jurisdictional confusion and fragmentation and to ensure transparency in the digital single market;

45.  Calls on the Commission to review other EU legislation to address gaps related to cloud computing; calls, in particular, for clarification of the intellectual property rights regime and for a review of the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive, the Unfair Contract Terms Directive and the E-Commerce Directive, which are the most relevant pieces of EU legislation that apply to cloud computing;

46.  Calls on the Commission to establish a clear legal framework in the field of copyright content in the cloud, especially with regard to licensing regulations;

47.  Acknowledges that the advent of the storage of copyright works by cloud computing services should not compromise the right of European right holders to receive fair compensation for the use of their work, but questions whether these services can be considered to be on par with traditional and digital recording and storage media and equipment;

48.  Calls on the Commission to investigate the different types of cloud computing services, how the cloud storage of copyrighted works affects the royalties systems and, more specifically, the ways in which private copying levies that are relevant for certain types of cloud computing services are imposed;

49.  Calls on the Commission to promote the development, jointly with stakeholders, of decentralised services based on free and open-source software that would help harmonise practices across cloud providers and enable EU citizens to regain control over their personal data and communication, for example by means of point-to-point encryption;

50.  Stresses that, owing to uncertainties regarding applicable law and jurisdiction, contracts are the main tools for establishing relations between cloud providers and their customers, and that there is therefore a clear need for common EU guidelines in that field;

51.  Calls on the Commission to work together with the Member States to develop EU best practice models for contracts, or ‘model contracts’, that will ensure complete transparency by providing all terms and conditions in a very clear format;

52.  Calls on the Commission to develop, together with stakeholders, voluntary certification schemes for provider security systems which would help to harmonise practices across cloud providers and which would make clients more aware of what they should expect from cloud service providers;

53.  Stresses that, owing to jurisdiction problems, EU consumers are in practice unlikely to be able to seek redress from cloud services providers in other jurisdictions; calls, therefore, on the Commission to provide adequate means of redress in the consumer services area, since there is a strong imbalance of power between consumers and providers of cloud computing;

54.  Calls on the Commission to ensure the speedy implementation of Alternative Dispute Resolution and Online Dispute Resolution and to make sure that consumers are equipped with adequate means of collective redress against security and privacy breaches as well as against illegal contract provisions for cloud services;

55.  Regrets the current lack of effective remedies for users in case of breach of contract;

56.  Calls for systematic consumer information regarding the processing activities of personal data to be included in contract proposals, as well as for users’ consent to be compulsory before the terms of a contract may be changed;

57.  Calls on the Commission, within the framework of its expert group discussions, to require cloud providers to include in contracts certain key clauses guaranteeing the quality of the service, such as obligations to update software and hardware where necessary, to determine what happens if data is lost, and to determine the time it would take to resolve a problem, or how rapidly the cloud service could take down offending materials, should the cloud user make such a request;

58.  Recalls that where a cloud provider uses the data for a purpose other than that agreed on in the service agreement, or communicates data or uses it in a way contrary to the terms of the contract, he should be considered data controller and should be held liable for the infringements and breaches incurred;

59.  Stresses that cloud services agreements must set out, in a clear and transparent manner, the duties and rights of the parties concerning data processing activities by cloud providers; points out that the contractual arrangements shall not entail a waiver of the safeguards, rights and protections afforded by Union data protection law; urges the Commission to come forward with proposals to restore the balance between cloud service providers and their customers as regards the terms and conditions used by cloud services, including provisions to:

   ensure protection against arbitrary cancellation of services and deletion of data;
   guarantee a reasonable chance for customers to recover stored data in cases of cancellation of service and/or removal of data;
   provide clear guidelines for cloud providers to facilitate the easy migration of their customers to other services;

60.  Highlights that the role of the cloud service provider under current Union legislation needs to be determined on a case-by-case basis, as providers can be both data processors and data controllers; calls for the terms and conditions for all users to be improved through the development of international best practice models for contracts and through the clarification of where the service provider stores data and under which area of law within the EU;

61.  Highlights that particular attention must be given to situations in which the imbalance in the contractual situation between the customer and the cloud provider leads the customer to enter into contractual arrangements imposing standard services and a contract to be signed in which the provider defines the purposes, conditions and means of the processing(6); stresses that, in such circumstances, the cloud provider should be considered data controller and become jointly liable with the customer;

Data protection, fundamental rights, law enforcement and the cloud

62.  Takes the view that access to a safe internet is a fundamental right of every citizen and that cloud computing will continue to play an important role in this aspect; reiterates, therefore, its call on the Commission and the Council unequivocally to recognise digital freedoms as fundamental rights and as indispensable prerequisites for enjoying universal human rights;

63.  Reiterates that, as a general rule, the level of data protection in a cloud computing environment must not be inferior to that required in any other data-processing context;

64.  Stresses that Union data protection law, since it is technologically neutral, already now fully applies to cloud computing services operating in the EU and must, therefore, be fully respected; stresses that the opinion of the Working Party of the Article 29 (WP29) on Cloud Computing(7) should be taken into account as it provides clear guidance for the application of Union data protection law principles and rules to cloud services, such as the concepts of controller/processor, purpose limitation and proportionality, integrity and data security, the use of subcontractors, allocation of responsibilities, data breaches and international transfers; underlines the need to close any gaps in the protection as regards cloud computing in the ongoing review of the Union data protection legal framework based on further guidance by the European Data Protection Supervisor and the WP29;

65.  Recalls its serious concern about the recent unveiling of US National Security Agency surveillance programmes, and of similar programmes operated by intelligence agencies in various Member States, in the recognition that, should the information available up to now be confirmed, these programmes entail a serious violation of the fundamental right of EU citizens and residents to privacy and data protection, as well as of the right to private and family life, the confidentiality of communications, the presumption of innocence, freedom of expression, freedom of information, and the freedom to conduct business;

66.  Reiterates its serious concerns about the compulsory direct disclosure of EU personal data and information, processed under cloud agreements, to third country authorities by cloud providers subject to third country laws or using storage servers located in third countries, and about direct remote access to personal data and information processed by third-country law enforcement authorities and intelligence services;

67.  Regrets that such access is usually attained by means of direct enforcement by third countries authorities of their own legal rules, without recourse to international instruments established for legal cooperation such as mutual legal assistance (MLA) agreements or other forms of judicial cooperation;

68.  Stresses that such practices raise questions of trust as regards non-EU cloud and online service providers, and as regards third countries that do not rely on international instruments for legal and judicial cooperation;

69.  Expects the Commission and the Council to take such measures as are necessary to solve this situation and to ensure the respect of the fundamental rights of EU citizens;

70.  Recalls that all companies providing services in the EU must, without exception, comply with EU law and are liable for any breaches;

71.  Stresses that cloud services that fall under third country jurisdiction should provide users located in the EU with a clear and distinguishable warning of the possibility that their personal data may be subject to intelligence and law enforcement surveillance by third country authorities under secret orders or injunctions, followed, where applicable, by a request for the data subject’s explicit consent for the processing of personal data;

72.  Urges the Commission, when negotiating international agreements that involve the processing of personal data, to take particular note of the risks and challenges that cloud computing poses to fundamental rights, in particular – but not exclusively – the right to private life and to the protection of personal data, as laid down in Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union; urges, furthermore, the Commission to take note of the negotiating partner’s domestic rules governing the access of law enforcement and intelligence agencies to personal data processed through cloud computing service, in particular by demanding that such access for law enforcement and intelligence authorities only be granted with full respect for the due process of law and on an unambiguous legal basis, as well as the requirement that the exact conditions of access, the purpose of gaining such access, the security measures put in place when handing over data and the rights of the individual, as well as the rules for supervision and for an effective redress mechanism, be specified;

73.  Stresses its serious concerns about the work carried out within the Council of Europe’s Cybercrime Convention Committee with a view to developing an additional protocol on the interpretation of Article 32 of the Convention on Cybercrime of 23 November 2001 on ‘trans-border access to stored computer data with consent or where publicly available’(8) in order to ‘facilitate its effective use and implementation in the light of legal, policy and technological developments’; calls on the Commission and the Member States, in view of the forthcoming consideration by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, to ensure the compatibility of the provision of Article 32 of the Convention on Cybercrime, and its interpretation in the Member States, with fundamental rights, including data protection and, in particular, the provisions on trans-border flows of personal data, as enshrined in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, the EU data protection acquis, the European Convention of Human Rights and the Council of Europe Convention on the Protection of Individuals with Regard to Automatic Processing (‘Convention 108’), which are legally binding upon the Member States; calls on the Commission and the Member States to reject firmly any measure that would put the application of these rights at risk; is alarmed by the fact that should such an additional protocol be endorsed, its implementation could result in unfettered remote access by law enforcement authorities on servers and computer systems located in other jurisdictions, without recourse to MLA agreements and other instruments of judicial cooperation put in place to guarantee the fundamental rights of the individual, including data protection and due process;

74.  Underlines that particular attention must be paid to SMEs which increasingly rely on cloud computing technology when processing personal data, and which may not always have the resources or the expertise to address security challenges adequately;

75.  Stresses that the qualification of data controller or processor needs to be reflected in an appropriate manner by the actual level of control it has over the means of processing, in order that the responsibilities for the protection of personal data with the use of cloud computing are clearly allocated;

76.  Stresses that all the principles laid down in EU data protection law, such as fairness and lawfulness, purpose limitation, proportionality, accuracy and limited data retention periods, must be taken fully into account by cloud computing service providers when processing personal data;

77.  Underlines the importance of having effective, proportionate and dissuasive administrative sanctions that may be imposed on cloud computing services that do not comply with EU data protection standards;

78.  Stresses that, in order to define the most appropriate safeguards to implement, the data protection impact of each cloud computing service must be assessed on an ad hoc basis;

79.  Stresses that a European cloud service provider should always act in conformity with EU data protection law, even if this conflicts with instructions by a client or controller established in a third country, or when the data subjects concerned are (solely) residents of third countries;

80.  Stresses the need to address the challenges raised by cloud computing at an international level, in particular as regards government intelligence surveillance and necessary safeguards;

81.  Stresses that EU citizens subject to intelligence surveillance by third country authorities should benefit from at least the same safeguards and remedies as are available to citizens of the third country concerned;

82.  Regrets the approach in the Commission’s communication whereby it fails to mention the risks and challenges attached to cloud computing, and urges the Commission to continue its work on cloud computing by developing a more holistic communication on cloud computing that takes into account the interests of all stakeholders, and that contains, alongside a standard reference to the protection of fundamental rights and compliance with data protection requirements, at least the following:

   guidelines to ensure full compliance with the EU’s fundamental rights and data protection obligations;
   limitative conditions under which cloud data may or may not be accessed for law enforcement purposes, in compliance with the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and with EU law;
   safeguards against illegal access by foreign and domestic entities, for instance by amending procurement requirements and applying Council Regulation (EC) No 2271/96(9) to counteract foreign laws that may result in massive illegal transfers of the cloud data of EU citizens and residents;
   proposals on how to define the ‘transfer’ of personal data and on how to update standard contractual clauses that are tailored to the cloud environment, as ‘cloud computing’ often involves massive flows of data from cloud clients to cloud providers’ servers and data centres, involving many different parties and crossing borders between EU and non-EU countries;

83.  Calls on the Commission to explore the adequacy of a review of the EU-US Safe Harbour Agreement, in order to adapt it to technological developments, especially with regard to aspects linked to cloud computing;

o
o   o

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

(1) OJ C 81 E, 15.3.2011, p. 45.
(2) OJ L 171, 7.7.1999, p. 12.
(3) OJ L 281, 23.11.1995, p. 31.
(4) OJ L 178, 17.7.2000, p. 1.
(5) OJ L 167, 22.6.2001, p. 10.
(6) Particularly in the case of consumers and SMEs using cloud services.
(7) Opinion 5/2012, WP 196, available at http://ec.europa.eu/justice/data-protection/article-29/documentation/opinion-recommendation/index_en.htm#h2-1
(8) http://www.coe.int/t/dghl/cooperation/economiccrime/Source/Cybercrime/TCY/TCY%202013/T CY(2013)14transb_elements_protocol_V2.pdf http://www.coe.int/t/DGHL/cooperation/economiccrime/cybercrime/default_en.asp
(9) Council Regulation (EC) No 2271/96 of 22 November 1996 protecting against the effects of the extra-territorial application of legislation adopted by a third country, and actions based thereon or resulting therefrom (OJ L 309, 29.11.1996, p. 1.).


Evaluation report regarding BEREC
PDF 123kWORD 44k
European Parliament resolution of 10 December 2013 containing its opinion on the evaluation report regarding BEREC and the Office (2013/2053(INI))
P7_TA(2013)0536A7-0378/2013

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission staff working document of 23 April 2013 on the Evaluation Report of the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC) and its office (SWD(2013)0152),

–  having regard to the Commission communication of 19 May 2010 entitled ‘A Digital Agenda for Europe’ (COM(2010)0245),

–  having regard to Article 114 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to its resolution of 5 May 2010 on ‘a new Digital Agenda for Europe: 2015.eu’(1),

–  having regard to the framework for electronic communications,

–  having regard to Regulation (EC) No 1211/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2009 establishing the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC) and the Office(2),

–  having regard to Rule 119(1) of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy and the opinion of the Committee on Budgets (A7-0378/2013),

A.  whereas the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC) was created to contribute to shaping technical and policy orientations for the completion of the internal market, with the twin aims of giving regulators the utmost possible independence and making their implementation of the regulatory framework more consistent throughout the EU;

B.  whereas the evaluation report appreciates and recognises the worth of BEREC and the BEREC Office, notably with respect to the Article 7/7a procedures and in the areas of net neutrality and international roaming;

C.  whereas only a short period of time has passed since BEREC and the BEREC Office were created;

D.  whereas the completion of the internal market is a continual process best served by improving regulation across individual national markets, and whereas the most robust and sustainable way to achieve this (thereby ensuring that regulatory decisions are seen as having legitimacy within national markets) is through the ‘bottom-up’ approach currently represented by BEREC;

E.  whereas BEREC can only be effective if its independence from the Member States and the EU institutions is guaranteed;

F.  whereas national considerations may complicate the definition of common positions, making agreement more difficult;

G.  whereas BEREC plays a fundamental role in enhancing the consistent application of the EU regulatory framework in all Member States, which is essential for the successful development of an internal market in electronic communications networks and services;

H.  whereas recent initiatives taken at national level, particularly with regard to spending review processes, could affect the implementation of the independence principle;

I.  whereas national regulatory authorities (NRAs) are not homogeneous, given that they sometimes have very different powers within their home countries, some dealing only with market regulation while others also deal with aspects such as market regulation, net security, privacy, domain register, spectrum and user services;

J.  whereas it is possible that optimal use is not being made of the BEREC Office at present;

K.  whereas some of the Union agencies based in other countries also have a satellite office in Brussels;

L.  whereas most of the expert working group meetings were held in Brussels or hosted by an NRA, and whereas videoconferencing should be developed;

M.  whereas consumer benefit is one of the main goals of the internal market in electronic communications;

N.  whereas decisions taken by BEREC at European level should create European added value;

1.  Considers that the evaluation report is, overall, relevant and balanced;

2.  Considers that time is needed to fully develop the requisite cooperation, coordination and informal aspects of regulation;

3.  Considers that there is still room for improvement in the functioning of BEREC and the BEREC Office, while acknowledging the limited resources available; stresses, however, that the use of the new procedure under Article 7/7a of Directive 2009/140/EC on a common regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services has worked effectively, justifying the two-tier set-up;

4.  Emphasises that BEREC is the smallest EU agency, with an EU budget contribution of only EUR 3 768 696 and 16 authorised posts under the EU budget in 2013, primarily providing administrative support for the BEREC structure, which is composed of national regulatory authorities;

5.  Recalls the opinion of the Committee on Budgets of 29 May 2008 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the European Electronic Communications Market Authority (COM(2007)0699 – C6-0428/2007 – 2007/0249(COD)), by which the establishment of a new agency was rejected;

6.  Considers that NRAs play an important role within the regulatory system, as national markets have immutable differences related to network topology and also differ with respect to consumer demand patterns, demographics, etc.; stresses that in order to ensure structured cooperation within the EU, and thus a correctly functioning single market, it is essential to have independent, sector‑specific and properly resourced regulators;

7.  Considers that BEREC plays a crucial role within the regulatory system as the entity tasked with aligning national factual and regulatory differences with a view to completing the internal market in electronic communications;

8.  Recommends that BEREC’s role, in particular its relationship with NRAs, be better defined, and strengthened by broadening its responsibilities so as to facilitate the definition of common positions with a view to enhancing the internal market approach, including by evaluating the efficiency of current cooperation with NRAs and the Commission under the Article 7/7a procedures;

9.  Considers that greater harmonisation of the tasks carried out by NRAs in the Member States, giving them competence for relevant aspects directly related to security and resilience in the internal market in electronic communications, could contribute to better functioning of BEREC and greater predictability for market actors;

10.  Calls on the Member States and the Commission to ensure that the independence of NRAs at national and European level is strengthened, not weakened, as this is the only way to ensure the overall independence of BEREC;

11.  Considers that the roles and structure of BEREC and the BEREC Office should be adapted according to the level of completion of the internal market in electronic communications;

12.  Calls on the Commission to guarantee BEREC’s independence from the EU institutions in future proposals relating to the scope and mission of BEREC;

13.  Considers that BEREC should act in the interests of the European public, and that the mechanisms for accountability to the European Parliament, as the only EU institution directly elected to represent the interests of the European public, should be strengthened;

14.  Recommends that BEREC strengthen its internal accountability by clearly defining its objectives in its annual work programme and presenting in its annual report its achievements and progress on the basis of those objectives;

15.  Deems it to be of the utmost importance for the coherence and consistency of BEREC's work to better prioritise its tasks and to foster communication with all interested stakeholders at the development stage of its annual work programme;

16.  Considers that BEREC should have more room to take strategic decisions, meaning, among other things, that BEREC should produce its own analysis and studies enabling it to take such decisions, so that the decision-making process is more top-down and independent;

17.  Emphasises that BEREC’s advisory role upstream of legislative proposals affecting the electronic communications sector should be made methodical;

18.  Considers that BEREC's external communication should be clarified and improved in order to encourage stakeholder involvement at all levels of policymaking;

19.  Recommends formalising the role of the Independent Regulators Group (IRG) in Brussels, while ensuring that it does not duplicate the tasks entrusted to the BEREC Office;

20.  Recommends that greater use be made of teleworking, videoconferencing and other remote working techniques enabled by electronic communications, in order to cut costs and reduce the carbon footprint;

21.  Recommends that the Commission and the Member States ensure that adequate financing is made available for BEREC and for the NRAs;

22.  Considers that the location of the BEREC Office is not a barrier to monitoring the EU institutions’ day-to-day work on electronic communications, which is a matter of special interest to BEREC, and that it will not hamper the efficient use of the BEREC Office, provided that greater use is made of electronic communications strategies;

23.  Considers that the mission of the BEREC Office should be revised, reinforced and defined more precisely, taking particular account of the outcome of the BEREC audit on this matter;

24.  Recommends that the necessary changes be made, and the necessary resources considered, to enable the BEREC Office to support BEREC’s substantive work more effectively and efficiently, rather than simply providing administrative support;

25.  Considers that any discussions on the location of the BEREC Office should be conducted with a view to reinforcing its independence from the EU institutions and the Member States and with due regard to the principle of equal geographical distribution of the seats of the EU’s institutions, agencies and other entities;

26.  Considers that greater consolidation is needed to enable operators to exploit economies of scale more fully, and that BEREC should have a prominent role to play in that process;

27.  Considers that a clear and stable legislative framework is needed for a better internal market that will result in increased competition and improved services for consumers;

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

(1) OJ C 81 E, 15.3.2011, p. 45.
(2) OJ L 337, 18.12.2009, p. 1.


Common Fisheries Policy ***II
PDF 201kWORD 36k
Resolution
Annex
European Parliament legislative resolution of 10 December 2013 on the Council position at first reading with a view to the adoption of a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the Common Fisheries Policy, amending Council Regulation (EC) No 1954/2003 and (EC) No 1224/2009 and repealing Council Regulations (EC) No 2371/2002, (EC) No 639/2004 and Council Decision (EC) No 2004/585/EC (12007/3/2013 – C7-0375/2013 – 2011/0195(COD))
P7_TA(2013)0537A7-0409/2013

(Ordinary legislative procedure: second reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Council position at first reading (12007/3/2013 – C7‑0375/2013),

–  having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 28 March 2012(1),

–  having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions of 4 March 2012(2),

–  having regard to its position at first reading(3) on the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2011)0425),

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

–  having regard to Rule 72 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the recommendation for second reading of the Committee on Fisheries (A7-0409/2013),

1.  Approves the Council position at first reading;

2.  Approves the joint statement by Parliament and the Council, and the joint statement by Parliament, the Council and the Commission annexed to this resolution;

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

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

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

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

ANNEX TO THE LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION

Statement of the European Parliament and of the Council on data collection

The European Parliament and the Council request the Commission to fast track the adoption of a proposal to amend Council Regulation (EC) No 199/2008 in order that the principles and objectives for data collection that are essential to support the reformed Common Fisheries Policy and set out in the new Regulation on the CFP can be given practical effect as early as possible.

Statement of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on multi-annual plans

The European Parliament, the Council and the Commission are committed to working together to address inter-institutional issues and agree a way forward that respects the legal position of both the Parliament and the Council to facilitate the development and introduction of multi-annual plans on a priority basis under the terms of the Common Fisheries Policy.

The European Parliament, the Council and the Commission have established an inter-institutional taskforce, composed of the representatives from the three institutions, in order to help find practical solutions and the most appropriate way forward.

(1)OJ C 181, 21.6.2012, p. 183.
(2)OJ C 225, 27.7.2012, p. 20.
(3)Texts adopted of 6.2.2013, P7_TA(2013)0040.


Common organisation of the markets in fishery and aquaculture products ***II
PDF 201kWORD 35k
Resolution
Annex
European Parliament legislative resolution of 10 December 2013 on the Council position at first reading with a view to the adoption of a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the common organisation of the markets in fishery and aquaculture products, amending Council Regulations (EC) No 1184/2006 and (EC) No 1224/2009 and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 104/2000 (12005/2/2013 – C7-0376/2013 – 2011/0194(COD))
P7_TA(2013)0538A7-0413/2013

(Ordinary legislative procedure: second reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Council position at first reading (12005/2/2013 – C7‑0376/2013),

–  having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 28 March 2012(1),

–  having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions of 4 May 2012(2),

–  having regard to its position at first reading(3) on the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2011)0416),

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

–  having regard to Rule 72 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the recommendation for second reading of the Committee on Fisheries (A7-0413/2013),

1.  Approves the Council position at first reading;

2.  Approves the joint statement by Parliament and the Council annexed to this resolution;

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

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

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

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

ANNEX TO THE LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION

Statement by the European Parliament and by the Council on control rules in the area of product traceability and consumer information

As a follow-up to the reform of the Regulation on the common organisation of the markets in fishery and aquaculture products, the European Parliament and the Council invite the European Commission to submit to them a proposal aiming at amending the Control Regulation (Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009). Such amendment should take into account the need for regulating the provision of gear type information as regards products derived from wild capture fisheries.

The European Parliament and the Council also invite the Commission to adopt, in due time, the necessary amendments to the Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 404/2011 as regards the mandatory information to the consumer in order to take into account the provisions of this Regulation, the Control Regulation, as amended, and Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the provision of food information to consumers.

(1) OJ C 181, 21.6.2012, p. 183.
(2) OJ C 225, 27.7.2012, p. 20.
(3) Texts adopted of 12.9.2012, P7_TA(2012)0333.


North-East Atlantic: deep-sea stocks and fishing in international waters ***I
PDF 655kWORD 185k
Resolution
Consolidated text
European Parliament legislative resolution of 10 December 2013 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing specific conditions to fishing for deep-sea stocks in the North-East Atlantic and provisions for fishing in international waters of the North-East Atlantic and repealing Regulation (EC) No 2347/2002 (COM(2012)0371 – C7-0196/2012 – 2012/0179(COD))
P7_TA(2013)0539A7-0395/2013

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2012)0371),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 43(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C7‑0196/2012),

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

–  having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 13 February 2013(1),

–  having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the FAO's Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries and the European Commission's Code of Sustainable and Responsible Fisheries Practices,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Fisheries and the opinion of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (A7-0395/2013),

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

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

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

Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 10 December 2013 with a view to the adoption of Regulation (EU) No .../2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing specific conditions to fishing for deep-sea stocks in the North-East Atlantic and provisions for fishing in international waters of the North-East Atlantic and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 2347/2002

P7_TC1-COD(2012)0179


THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 43(2) thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,

After transmission of the draft legislative act to the national Parliaments,

Having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee(2),

Acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure(3),

Whereas:

(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002(4) requires the establishment of Community measures governing access to waters and resources and the sustainable pursuit of fishing activities and necessary to ensure the rational and responsible exploitation of resources on a sustainable basis. Article 2 of that Regulation requires applying the ecosystem and precautionary approaches in taking measures to minimise the impact of fishing activities on marine ecosystems.

(1a)  As established in Article 11 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), environmental protection requirements are to be integrated into the definition and implementation of the Union policies and activities, including deep sea fisheries conservation, in particular with a view to promoting sustainable development; [Am. 1]

(2)  The Union is committed to implement the Resolutions adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations, in particular Resolutions 61/105 and 64/72, which call on States and Regional Fisheries Management Organisations to ensure the protection of vulnerable deep-sea marine ecosystems from the destructive impact of bottom fishing gears, as well as the sustainable exploitation of deep-sea fish stocks. Recommendations with measures developed and adopted by the North East Atlantic Fisheries Commission (NEAFC) to protect deep water vulnerable marine ecosystems against the adverse effects of bottom fishing gear, in accordance with paragraph 83(a) of Resolution 61/105 and paragraphs 119(a) and 120 of Resolution 64/72, should be formally incorporated into Union law in their entirety. [Am. 2]

(2a)  Furthermore, the Union should act as a leader in the establishment and implementation of good-governance measures for the sustainable management of deep-sea fisheries within international fora in line with the Resolutions adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations and by FAO and reflected in this Regulation. [Am. 3]

(3)  The Commission evaluated Council Regulation (EC) No 2347/2002(5). The Commission found in particular, that the scope of the fleet concerned was too large, that there was guidance lacking on control in designated ports and on sampling programmes, and that the quality of Member States' reporting of effort levels was too variable.

(3a)  The capacity of vessels with deep-sea fishing permits has been limited since 2002 to the aggregate capacity of all the vessels that caught more than 10 tonnes of any mixture of deep sea species in any of the years 1998, 1999 or 2000. The Commission's evaluation concluded that this capacity ceiling has had no substantial positive effect. Given the past experience and the lack of accurate data in many deep sea fisheries, it is inadequate to manage these fisheries by means of effort limits only. [Am. 4]

(4)  In order to maintain necessary reductions in fishing capacity achieved so far in deep-sea fisheries, it is appropriate to provide that fishing for deep-sea species is subject to a fishing authorisation which limits the capacity of vessels eligible to land deep-sea species. With a view to focus management measures on the part of the fleet most relevant for deep-sea fisheries, the fishing authorisations should be issued according to target or by-catch fishery. However, the obligation to land all catches established in Regulation (EU) No .../2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council(6) should be taken into account so that vessels catching a small quantity of deep-sea species and which are not currently subject to a deep-sea fishing permit, are not deprived of the opportunity to continue their traditional fishing activities. [Am. 5]

(5)  Holders of a fishing authorisation allowing the catch of deep-sea species should cooperate in scientific research activities leading to an improvement in the assessment of deep-sea stocks and research into deep-sea ecosystems. [Am. 6]

(6)  When targeting other species in areas on the continental slope also authorised to deep-sea fisheries, vessel owners should keep a fishing authorisation allowing deep-sea by-catches.

(7)  Deep-sea fishing with bottom trawls carry carries the highest risk for vulnerable marine ecosystems among the different gears used and reports the highest rates of undesired catch of deep-sea species. Bottom trawls should therefore be permanently prohibited from the targeting of deep-sea species. [Am. 7]

(8)   Bottom-set gillnets are currently restricted in entering deep-sea fisheries by Council Regulation (EC) No 1288/2009 establishing transitional technical measures from 1 January 2010 to 30 June 2011(7). In view of the high rates of undesired catch when they were deployed unsustainably in deep waters, and in view of the ecological impact of lost and abandoned gear, this gear should also be permanently prohibited from the targeting of deep-sea species. [Am. 8]

(9)  However, in order to provide fishermen with Fishermen require sufficient time to adjust to the new requirements, and current fishing authorisations for fishing with bottom trawls and bottom-set gillnets should continue to be valid for a specified period of time, so as to minimise the negative consequences for the fleet engaging in this fishing activity. [Am. 9]

(10)  Moreover, vessels which have wish to change gear in order to be able to stay in the fishery should be eligible for receiving financial assistance from the European Fisheries Fund provided that the new gear reduces the impact of fishing on non-commercial species and provided also that the national operational programme allows contributing to such measures. [Am. 10]

(11)  Vessels targeting deep-sea species with other bottom gear should not extend their range of operation according to their fishing authorisation within Union waters unless, following an assessment in accordance with the 2008 FAO International Guidelines for the Management of Deep-Sea Fisheries in the High Seas ("the 2008 FAO Guidelines"), the extension is proven not to carry a significant risk of negative impact on vulnerable marine ecosystems. [Am. 11]

(12)  Scientific advice concerning certain fish stocks found in the deep-sea indicates that these stocks are particularly vulnerable to exploitation, and that fishing. Fishing for these stocks should be limited or reduced as a precautionary measure and should aim to achieve levels above those capable of producing maximum sustainable yield. Fishing opportunities for deep-sea stocks should not go beyond those levels which are scientifically advised as precautionary. In the case of advice being absent for lack of sufficient information about stocks or species, no fishing opportunities should be allocated. It should be noted however, that several stocks of deep-water species of significant commercial interest, such as Roundnose grenadier (Coryphaenoides rupestris), Blue ling (Molva dypterigia) and Black scabbardfish (Aphanopus carbo), have, according to ICES, stabilised over the last three years. [Am. 12]

(13)  Scientific advice further indicates that fishing effort limits are an appropriate instrument for fixing fishing opportunities for deep-sea fisheries. In view of the large variety of gears and fishing patterns present in deep-sea fisheries, and the need to develop accompanying measures tackling the environmentally weak points of the fisheries indivdually, fishing effort limits should only replace catch limits when it can be ensured that they are adapted to specific fisheries. The lack of accurate data in most deep sea fisheries and the mixed nature of most of them make it necessary to implement complementary management measures. Where appropriate, catch limits should be combined with effort limits. Both should be set at levels which minimise and prevent impact on non-target species and vulnerable marine ecosystems. [Am. 13]

(14)  In order to ensure an adapted management of the specific fisheries, Member States concerned should be empowered to take accompanying conservation measures and to annually assess the effort levels' consistency with scientific advice on sustainable exploitation. The regionally adapted effort limits should also replace the existing global limit on fishing effort agreed in NEAFC.

(15)  Given that biological information can best be collected by way of harmonised data collection standards, it is appropriate to integrate data collection on deep-sea métiers into the general framework of scientific data collection, while ensuring the provision of additional information necessary to understand the dynamics of the fisheries. For simplification purposes, the effort reporting by species should be discontinued and replaced by the analysis of recurrent scientific data calls to Member States which contain a specific chapter on deep-sea métiers. Member States should ensure compliance with data collection and reporting obligations, in particular with those related to the protection of vulnerable marine ecosystems. [Am. 14]

(15a)  A large number of species are caught in deep sea fisheries, including vulnerable species of deep sea sharks. It is necessary to ensure that the obligation to land all catches in deep sea fisheries covers species not subject to catch limits and that de minimis provisions are not applied to these fisheries. A fully implemented obligation to land could greatly contribute to filling the existing data gaps in these fisheries and to a better understanding of the impact of these fisheries on the wide range of species caught. [Am. 15]

(16)  Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009(8) lays down control and enforcement requirements concerning multiannual plans. Deep-sea species, by nature vulnerable to fishing, should receive the same attention in terms of control as other conservation species for which a multiannual management plan has been agreed.

(17)  Holders of a fishing authorisation allowing for the catch of deep-sea species should lose their authorisation as far as the catching of deep-sea species is concerned if they do not comply with relevant conservation measures.

(18)  The Convention on future multilateral cooperation in the North-East Atlantic fisheries was approved by Council Decision 81/608/EEC(9) and entered into force on 17 March 1982. That convention provides for an appropriate framework for multilateral cooperation on the rational conservation and management of fishery resources in international waters of the North-East Atlantic. Management measures adopted in NEAFC comprise technical measures for the conservation and management of species regulated within NEAFC and for the protection of marine vulnerable habitats, including precautionary measures.

(19)  The Commission should be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 290 TFEU to specify measures accompanying annual effort limits if Member States fail to take them or if the measures they adopt are deemed not to be compatible with the objectives of this regulation or insufficient in respect of the aims indicated in this regulation.

(20)  The Commission should be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 290 TFEU, which may be necessary to amend or supplement non-essential elements of this Regulation in cases of absence or insufficiency of the accompanying measures adopted by the Member States and linked to annual effort limits, when these replace catch limits.

(21)  It is therefore necessary to put in place new rules to regulate fishing for deep-sea stocks in the North-East Atlantic and to repeal Regulation (EC) No 2347/2002.

(22)  The Commission, when preparing and drawing up delegated acts, should ensure a simultaneous, timely and appropriate transmission of relevant documents to the European Parliament and to the Council,

HAVE ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

CHAPTER I

GENERAL PROVISIONS

Article 1

Objectives

The objectives of this Regulation are the following:

(a)  to ensure the sustainable management and exploitation of deep-sea species while minimising the impact of deep-sea fishing activities on the marine environment; [Am. 16]

(aa)  to prevent significant adverse impacts on vulnerable marine ecosystems and to ensure the long-term conservation of deep sea fish stocks; [Am. 17]

(b)  to improve the scientific knowledge on deep-sea species and their habitats for the purposes referred to in point (a);

(ba)  to minimise, and where possible prevent, by-catches; [Am. 18]

(c)  to implement technical measures on fisheries management recommended by the North East Atlantic Fisheries Commission (NEAFC);

(ca)  to apply the precautionary and ecosystem approaches to fisheries management and to ensure that the Union measures aimed at the sustainable management of deep-sea fish stocks are consistent with Resolutions adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations, in particular Resolutions 61/105 and 64/72. [Am. 19]

Article 2

Scope

This Regulation applies to fishing activities or intended fishing activities in the following waters:

(a)  Union waters of International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) sub-areas II to XI and of Fishery Committee for the Eastern Central Atlantic (CECAF) areas 34.1.1, 34.1.2 and 34.2, including the fishing activities carried out or intended to be carried out by fishing vessels flying the flag of, and registered in, a third country; [Am. 20]

(b)  international waters of CECAF areas 34.1.1, 34.1.2 and 34.2 and

(c)  the Regulatory Area of the NEAFC.

Article 3

Definitions

1.  For the purposes of this Regulation, the definitions laid down in Article 3 4 of Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002 .../2013 [on the Common Fisheries Policy] and Article 2 of Council Regulation (EC) No 734/2008(10) shall apply. [Am. 21]

2.  In addition, the following definitions shall apply:

(a)  "ICES zones, subzones, divisions and subdivisions" are as defined in Regulation (EC) No 218/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council(11); [Am. 22]

(b)  "CECAF areas, subareas and divisions" are as defined in Regulation (EC) No 216/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council(12); [Am. 23]

(c)  "Regulatory Area of the NEAFC" means the waters subject to the Convention on future multilateral cooperation in North-East Atlantic fisheries which lie beyond the waters under the fisheries jurisdiction of the contracting parties to that Convention;

(d)  "deep-sea species" means the species listed in Annex I;

(e)  "most vulnerable species" means the deep-sea species indicated in the third column 'Most vulnerable (x)' of the table in Annex I;

(f)  "métier" means fishing activities targeting certain species by a certain gear in a certain area;

(g)  "deep-sea métier" means a métier that targets deep-sea species according to the indications laid down in Article 4(1) of this regulation;

(h)  "fisheries monitoring centre" means an operational centre established by a flag Member State and equipped with computer hardware and software enabling automatic data reception, processing and electronic data transmission;

(i)  "scientific advisory body" means an international fisheries scientific body that meets international standards for research-based scientific advice;

(ia)  "sustainable exploitation" means the exploitation of a stock or group of fish stocks in a way that restores and maintains populations of fish stocks above levels capable of producing maximum sustainable yield and that does not have a negative impact on the marine ecosystems. [Am. 24]

(j)  "maximum sustainable yield" means the maximum catch that may be taken from a fish stock indefinitely. [Am. 25]

Article 3a

Transparency, public participation and access to justice

1.  When implementing this Regulation, the provisions of Directive 2003/4/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council(13) and Regulations 1049/2001/EC(14) and 1367/2006/EC(15) of the European Parliament and of the Council that concern access to environmental information shall apply.

2.  The Commission, and Member States, shall ensure that all data-handling and decision-making under this Regulation is conducted in full compliance with the Convention of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe on access to information, public participation in decision-making and access to justice in environmental matters (‘the Aarhus Convention’, approved on behalf of the Union by Council Decision 2005/370/EC(16). [Am. 26]

Article 3b

Identification of deep-sea species and most vulnerable species

1.  By …(17) and every two years thereafter, the Commission shall review the list of deep-sea species in Annex I, including the designation of most vulnerable species.

2.  The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts, in accordance with Article 20, amending the list of deep-sea species in Annex 1, including the designation of most vulnerable species, to incorporate new scientific information from Member States, from the scientific advisory body and from other relevant sources of information, including the IUCN Red List Assessments. When adopting such delegated acts, the Commission shall, in particular, take account of the IUCN Red List Criteria, the rarity of the species, its vulnerability to exploitation and whether the scientific advisory body has recommended a zero by-catch. [Am. 27]

CHAPTER II

FISHING AUTHORISATIONS

Article 4

Types of fishing authorisations

1.  Fishing activities targeting deep-sea species carried out by a Union fishing vessel, shall be subject to a fishing authorisation, issued by the flag Member State, which shall indicate deep-sea species as the target species. [Am. 28]

2.  For the purposes of paragraph 1, fishing activities are deemed to target deep-sea species, if:

(a)  deep-sea species are noted as target in the vessel's fishing calendar, or

(b)  a gear that is only used to catch deep-sea species is carried on board of the vessel or deployed in the area of operation, or

(c)  the vessel's master records in the logbook a percentage of the deep-sea species listed in Annex I, which is caught within the waters included in the scope of this Regulation and which is equal or superior to 10 % of the overall catch weight in the fishing day concerned one of the following thresholds:

–  15% of the overall catch weight in the fishing day concerned, or

–  8% of the overall catch weight in the fishing trip concerned,

the choice of threshold being at the discretion of the vessel's master, or [Am. 29]

(ca)  the vessel deploys bottom gears at depths of or below 600 meters. [Am. 30]

2a.  For the purpose of calculating the percentages referred to in point (c) of paragraph 2, the species in Annex I subject to deferred application, as indicated in the fourth column thereof, shall only be taken into account from ....(18). [Am. 31]

3.  Fishing activities not targeting deep-sea species but catching deep-sea species as a by-catch, carried out by a Union fishing vessel, shall be subject to a fishing authorisation, which shall indicate deep-sea species as by-catch. [Am. 32]

4.  The two types of fishing authorisations referred to in paragraphs 1 and 3 respectively shall be clearly distinguishable in the electronic database referred to in Article 116 of Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009.

5.  Notwithstanding paragraphs 1 and 3, fishing vessels may catch, retain on board, tranship or land any quantity of deep-sea species without a fishing authorisation, if that quantity is below a threshold set at 100 kg of any mixture of deep-sea species per fishing trip. Details of all such catches, whether retained or discarded, including species composition, weight and sizes, shall be recorded in the vessel's logbook and shall be reported to the competent authorities. [Am. 33]

Article 5

Capacity management

1.  The aggregate fishing capacity measured in gross tonnage and in kilowatt of all fishing vessels holding a fishing authorisation issued by a Member State, allowing the catch of deep-sea species, whether as target or by-catch species, shall at no time exceed the aggregate fishing capacity of vessels of that Member State which have landed 10 tonnes or more of deep-sea species during any of the two calendar years preceding the entry into force of this Regulation, whichever year provides the higher figure 2009-2011, whichever year provides the higher figure. [Am. 34]

1a.  In order to achieve the objective set out in paragraph 1, Member States shall conduct annual capacity assessments in accordance with Article 22 of Regulation (EU) No …/2013 [on the Common Fisheries Policy]. The resulting report, as referred to in paragraph 2 of that Article, shall seek to identify structural overcapacity by segment and shall estimate the long-term profitability by segment. The reports shall be made publicly available. [Am. 35]

1b.  Where the capacity assessments referred to in paragraph 1a indicate that the fishing mortality of deep sea stocks is above recommended levels, the Member State concerned shall prepare and include in the report an action plan for the affected fleet segment, in order to ensure that the fishing mortality exerted on the stocks concerned is consistent with the objectives of Article 10. [Am. 36]

1c.  The capacity assessments and action plans referred to in this Article shall be made publicly available. [Am. 37]

1d.  Where fishing opportunities for deep-sea species have been exchanged between Member States, the fishing capacity corresponding to the opportunities exchanged shall, for the purpose of establishing the aggregated fishing capacity according to paragraph 1, be attributed to the donor Member State. [Am. 38]

1e.  Notwithstanding paragraph 1, regional fleets in outermost regions where there is no continental shelf and virtually no alternatives to deep-sea resources shall be permitted an aggregate fishing capacity for deep-sea species which shall at no time exceed the aggregate fishing capacity of the current fleet in each outermost region. [Am. 39]

Article 6

General requirements for applications for fishing authorisations

1.   Each application for a fishing authorisation allowing for the catch of deep-sea species whether as target or by-catch species, and for its annual renewal shall be accompanied by a description of the area where it is intended to conduct fishing activities, indicating all the ICES and CECAF subareas, divisions and subdivisions covered, the type and the amount of gears, the depth range at which the activities will be deployed, and of carried out and the individual species targeted, as well as the intended frequency and duration of the fishing activity. This information shall be made publicly available. [Am. 40]

1a.  Any application for a fishing authorisation shall be accompanied by a record of the concerned fishing vessels' catches of deep-sea species in the area for which an application is sought for 2009-2011. [Am. 41]

Article 6a

Specific requirements for the protection of vulnerable marine ecosystems

1.  Member States shall use the best scientific and technical information available, including biogeographic information, to identify where vulnerable marine ecosystems are known or are likely to occur. In addition, the scientific advisory body shall carry out an annual assessment of where vulnerable marine ecosystems are known or are likely to occur.

2.  Where, based on the information referred to in paragraph 1, areas where vulnerable marine ecosystems are known or are likely to occur have been identified, Member States and the scientific advisory body shall inform the Commission in a timely manner.

3.  By ...(19), on the basis of the best scientific and technical information available and based on the assessments and identifications carried out by Member States and the scientific advisory body, the Commission shall establish a list of areas where vulnerable marine ecosystems are known to occur or are likely to occur. The Commission shall review this list annually, on the basis of advice received from the scientific advisory body.

4.  Fishing with bottom gears shall be prohibited in the areas identified in accordance with paragraph 3.

5.  The closures referred to in paragraph 4 shall apply to all Union vessels when they occur in the high seas, and to all vessels when the closure occurs in Union waters.

6.  By way of derogation from paragraph 4, if the Commission determines, based on an impact assessment and after consulting the scientific advisory body, that there is sufficient evidence that vulnerable marine ecosystems are not present in a particular area which appears on the list referred to in paragraph 3, or that appropriate conservation and management measures have been adopted which ensure that significant adverse impacts on vulnerable marine ecosystems in that area is prevented, it may reopen that area to fishing with bottom gears.

7.  Where, in the course of fishing operations, a fishing vessel encounters evidence of vulnerable marine ecosystems, it shall immediately cease fishing in the area concerned. It shall resume operations only when it has reached an alternative area at a minimum distance of five nautical miles from the fished area in which the encounter occurred.

8.  The fishing vessel shall immediately report each encounter with vulnerable marine ecosystems to the competent national authorities, who in turn shall notify the Commission, without delay.

9.  The areas referred to in paragraphs 4 and 7 shall remain closed to fishing until such time as the scientific advisory body carries out an assessment of the area and concludes that no vulnerable marine ecosystems are present, or that appropriate conservation and management measures have been adopted which ensure that significant adverse impacts on vulnerable marine ecosystems in that area are prevented, after which the Commission may reopen that area to fishing. [Am. 42]

Article 7

Specific requirements for applications for and issuance of fishing authorisations allowing the use use of bottom gears in fishing activities targeting deep-sea species

1.  In addition to the requirements set out in Article 6, each application for a fishing authorisation for targeted deep sea fisheries, as referred to in Article 4(1), issued in accordance with Article 4, that allows the use of bottom gears in Union waters as referred to in point (a) of Article 2, or in international waters as referred to in points (b) and (c) of Article 2, shall be accompanied by a detailed fishing plan, which shall be made publicly available, specifying: [Am. 43]

(a)  the locations of the intended activities targeting fishing for deep-sea species in the deep-sea métier. The location(s) which shall be defined by coordinates in accordance with the World Geodetic System of 1984 and shall include an indication of all the ICES and CECAF subareas, divisions and subdivisions covered; [Am. 44]

(b)  the locations, if any, of activities in the deep-sea métier during the last three full calendar years. Those location(s) 2009-2011 which shall be defined by coordinates in accordance with the World Geodetic System of 1984 and they shall circumscribe the fishing activities as closely as possible and shall include an indication of all the ICES and CECAF subareas, divisions and subdivisions covered; [Am. 45]

(ba)   the types of fishing gears and the depth at which they will be deployed, a list of the species to be targeted and the technical measures to be put in place, in accordance with the technical measures on fisheries management recommended by NEAFC and measures under Regulation (EC) No 734/2008, as well as the configuration of the bathymetric profile of the seabed in the intended fishing grounds, where this information is not already available to the competent authorities of the flag State concerned. [Am. 46]

1a.  Prior to issuing an authorisation Member States shall verify through the VMS record of such vessels that the information submitted in accordance with point (b) of paragraph 1 is accurate. If the information provided under point (b) of paragraph 1 does not match that in the VMS record the authorisation shall not be issued. [Am. 47]

1b.  Authorised fishing activities shall be limited to existing fishing areas established under point (b) of paragraph 1. [Am. 48]

1c.  Any modification to the fishing plan shall be subject to an evaluation by the flag Member State. A modified fishing plan shall only be accepted by the flag Member State if it does not allow for fishing operations in areas where vulnerable marine ecosystems occur or are likely to occur. [Am. 49]

1d.  Failure to comply with the fishing plan shall result in the withdrawal by the flag Member State of the fishing authorisation from the fishing vessel concerned. [Am. 50]

1e.  Small-scale vessels that, due to technical factors such as the type of gear used or the capacity of the vessel, do not have the capacity to catch more than 100 kg of deep-sea species per fishing trip are exempted from the obligation to present a fishing plan. [Am. 51]

1f.  Applications for the renewal of fishing authorisations for deep-sea species may be exempted from the requirement to submit a detailed fishing plan unless changes are planned in the fishing operations of the vessel concerned in which case a revised plan shall be submitted. [Am. 52]

2.  Any fishing authorisation issued on the basis of an application made in accordance with paragraph 1 shall specify the bottom gear to be used and limit the fishing activities authorised to the area in which the intended fishing activity, as set out in paragraph 1(a), and the existing fishing activity, as set out in paragraph 1(b), overlap. However, the area of the intended fishing activity can be extended beyond the area of the existing fishing activity if the Member State has assessed and documented, based on scientific advice, that such extension would not have significant adverse impacts on vulnerable marine ecosystems. Without prejudice to paragraph 1, fishing with bottom gear that is to take place in waters where deep-sea fisheries have not been carried out during 2009-2011, as referred to in point (b) of paragraph 1, shall require a fishing authorisation as established in accordance with Article 4. No fishing authorisation shall be issued unless the Member State has assessed and documented, on the basis of the best available scientific data and advice, that the fishing activities concerned will not have significant adverse impacts on the marine ecosystem. This assessment shall be conducted in accordance with this Regulation and the 2008 FAO Guidelines and shall be made publicly available. The Commission shall, in consultation with the Member State concerned and the scientific advisory body, review this assessment to ensure that all areas where vulnerable marine ecosystems are known or are likely to occur have been identified and that the proposed mitigation and management measures are sufficient to prevent significant adverse impacts on vulnerable marine ecosystems. [Am. 53]

2a.  Before …(20), no fishing authorisation targeting deep-sea species, including in areas defined in point (b) of paragraph 1, shall be issued or renewed unless the Member State has assessed and documented, on the basis of the best available scientific advice, that the fishing activities concerned would not have significant adverse impacts on the marine ecosystem. That assessment shall be conducted in accordance with the 2008 FAO Guidelines, including as set out in Annex IIa, and shall be made publicly available. [Am. 54]

2b.  Member States shall apply the precautionary approach when carrying out their impact assessments. In areas where no impact assessment has been carried out or where an impact assessment has been carried out but not in accordance with the 2008 FAO Guidelines, the use of bottom gears shall be prohibited. [Am. 55]

2c.  No fishing authorisations under Article 4 shall be issued for areas where vulnerable marine ecosystems are known to occur or are likely to occur, unless the Commission determines, after consulting the scientific advisory body, that there is sufficient evidence that appropriate conservation and management measures have been adopted which ensure that significant adverse impacts on vulnerable marine ecosystems are prevented. [Am. 56]

2d.  New impact assessments shall be required if there are significant changes to the way in which existing fisheries with bottom gear are carried out, or to the applicable technology, or where there is new scientific information indicating the presence of vulnerable marine ecosystems in a given area. [Am. 57]

2e.  In addition to the requirements in Article 6, details of all catches of deep-sea species, whether retained or discarded, including species composition, weight and sizes, shall be reported. [Am. 58]

Article 8

Participation by vessels in deep-sea fishery data collection activities

Member States shall implement measures to ensure that all vessels that catch deep-sea species, whether or not in accordance with a fishing authorisation issued under Article 4, record all of their catches of such species and report them to the relevant competent authority. [Am. 59]

Member States shall include the necessary conditions in all fishing authorisations issued in accordance with Article 4 to ensure that the vessel concerned participates, in cooperation with the relevant scientific institute, in any data collection scheme whose scope would comprise the fishing activities for which authorisations are delivered.

Member States shall put in place the necessary systems to ensure that, wherever possible, the data collected is reported to the relevant competent authorities as it is generated, in order to reduce risks to vulnerable marine ecosystems, minimise by-catch, and allow better fishing management through "real-time monitoring". [Am. 60]

The relevant data to be recorded and reported in accordance with this Article shall as a minimum include the weight and species composition of all deep-sea catches. [Am. 61]

Article 9

Expiry of fishing authorisations targeting deep-sea species for vessels using bottom trawls or bottom-set gillnets

Fishing authorisations referred to in Article 4(1) for vessels using bottom trawls or bottom-set gillnets shall expire at the latest two years after the entry into force of this Regulation. After that date,fishing authorisations targeting deep-sea species with those gears shall neither be issued nor renewed. By ...(21) the Commission shall evaluate the implementation of this Regulation in accordance with Article 21. The use of all types of fishing gear when targeting deep-sea species shall be evaluated with a particular emphasis on the impact on the most vulnerable species and on vulnerable marine ecosystems. If this evaluation shows that the deep-sea stocks listed in Annex I, excluding the species in Annex I subject to deferred application of point (c) of Article 4(2), are not exploited at maximum sustainable yield rates adequate for restoring and maintaining populations of deep-sea stocks above levels capable of producing maximum sustainable yield, and that vulnerable marine ecosystems are not protected from significant adverse impacts, by…(22)+ the Commission shall submit a proposal to amend this Regulation. This proposal shall ensure that fishing authorisations for vessels targeting deep-sea species, as referred to in Article 4, using bottom trawls or bottom-set gillnets shall expire and shall not be renewed and that any measures necessary regarding bottom gears, including longliners, are put in place to ensure the protection of the most vulnerable species. [Am. 62]

CHAPTER III

FISHING OPPORTUNITIES AND ACCOMPANYING MEASURES

Section 1

General provisions

Article 10

Principles

1.  Fishing opportunities shall be fixed at a rate of exploitation of the deep-sea species concerned that is consistent with ensures that populations of deep-sea species are progressively restored and maintained above biomass levels capable of producing the maximum sustainable yield. This exploitation rate shall contribute to achieving and maintaining a good environmental status in the Union’s marine environment by 2020 and shall be based on the best scientific information available. [Am. 63]

2.  Where, based on best scientific information available, it is not possible to identify exploitation rates consistent with maximum sustainable yield paragraph 1, the fishing opportunities shall be fixed as follows: [Am. 64]

(a)  where the best scientific information available identifies exploitation rates corresponding to the precautionary approach to fisheries management, the fishing opportunities for the relevant fishing management period may not be fixed higher than those rates;

(b)  where the best scientific information available does not identify exploitation rates corresponding to the precautionary approach to fisheries management due to lack of sufficient data concerning a certain stock or species, no the fishing opportunities may be allocated for the fisheries concerned for the relevant fishing management period shall not be fixed higher than the rates provided within the ICES approach for data limited stocks. [Am. 65]

2a.  Where ICES has not been able to identify exploitation rates as referred to in points (a) or (b) of paragraph 2, including for data limited stocks or species, no fishing opportunities shall be allocated for the fisheries concerned. [Am. 66]

2b.  Fishing opportunities set for deep sea species shall take into account the probable composition of the catch in these fisheries and shall ensure the long term sustainability of all harvested species. [Am. 67]

2c.  When allocating the fishing opportunities available to them Member States shall comply with the criteria set out in Article 17 of Regulation (EU) No .../2013 [on the Common Fisheries Policy]. [Am. 68]

2d.  Management measures, including the fixing of fishing opportunities for target and by-catch species in mixed species fisheries, area and seasonal closures, and the use of selective gears, shall be designed and established to avoid, minimise and eliminate by- catch of deep-sea species and to ensure the long-term sustainability of all species adversely affected by the fishery. [Am. 69]

Article 10a

Conservation Measures

1.  Member States shall apply the precautionary and ecosystem approaches to their fisheries management and shall adopt measures to ensure the long-term conservation and sustainable management of deep-sea fish stocks and non-target species. Those measures shall aim to rebuild depleted stocks, to minimise, prevent and, where possible, to eliminate by-catch, to protect spawning aggregations and to ensure the adequate protection and prevention of significant adverse impacts on vulnerable marine ecosystems. Such measures may include real time, seasonal or permanent prohibitions of certain fishing activities or gears in certain areas

2.  This Regulation shall contribute to the implementation of Council Directive 92/43/EEC(23) and Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council(24) and to the achievement and maintenance of good environmental status by 2020 at the latest as set out in Directive 2008/56/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council(25), including in particular that all stocks of harvested species exhibit a population age and size distribution that is indicative of a healthy stock, and descriptors 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 9, and 10. [Am. 70]

Article 10b

Obligation to land all catches

By way of derogation from Article 15 of Regulation (EU) No .../2013 [on the Common Fisheries Policy] all catches of fish and non-fish species, irrespective of whether they are subject to catch limits or not, made by a fishing vessel holding an authorisation to catch deep-sea species granted under Article 4(1) or 4(3) of this Regulation shall be brought and retained on board, recorded in the logbook and landed. The de minimis provisions shall not apply to such vessels. [Am. 71]

Section 2

Management by Fishing effort limits and accompanying measures [Am. 72]

Article 11

Fixing of fishing opportunities by means of fishing effort limits only [Am. 73]

1.  The Council, acting in accordance with the Treaty, may decide to switch from the fixing of annual Fishing opportunities for the deep-sea species shall be in terms of both fishing effort limits and catch limits to the fixing of only fishing effort limits for specific fisheries Total Allowable Catches (TACs). [Am. 74]

1a.  In addition to the TACs, fishing effort limits may be set. [Am. 75]

1b.  The fixing of fishing opportunities under paragraphs 1 and 1a shall comply with the objectives laid down in Article 16(4) of Regulation (EU) No .../2013 [on the Common Fisheries Policy]. [Am. 76]

2.  For the purposes of paragraph 1 1a, the fishing effort levels for each deep-sea métier that shall be used as a baseline for any adjustments required in order to follow the principles set out in Article 10 shall be the fishing effort levels assessed, based on scientific information, as consistent with the catches made by the relevant deep-sea métiers during the previous two calendar years 2009-2011.

For the assessment of the fishing effort levels referred to in the first subparagraph, the species in Annex I subject to the deferred application of point (c) of Article 4(2), as indicated in the fourth column of that Annex, shall only be taken into account from ....(26). [Am. 77]

2a.  Fishing effort limits for deep sea métiers shall take into account the probable composition of the catch in these fisheries and shall be set at a level capable of securing the long term sustainability of all harvested species. [Am. 78]

3.  Fishing effort limits fixed in accordance with paragraphs 1 and 2 shall indicate:

(a)  the specific deep-sea métier to which the fishing effort limit applies by reference to the regulated type and amount of gear, the species and specific stocks targeted, the depth and the ICES zones or CECAF areas within which the allowed effort may be deployed; and [Am. 79]

(b)  the fishing effort unit or combination of units to be used for management; and [Am. 80]

(ba)  the methods and protocols for the monitoring and reporting of effort levels during a fishing management period. [Am. 81]

Article 12

Accompanying measures

1.  Where annual fishing effort limits have replaced catch limits in accordance with Article 11(1), Member States shall maintain or put in place, in respect of their flagged vessels, the following accompanying measures: [Am. 82]

(a)  measures to avoid an increase of the overall catching prevent or eliminate overfishing and excess fishing capacity of the vessels concerned by the effort limits. [Am. 83]

(b)  measures to avoid an increase in prevent and minimise by-catches of, particularly by-catches of the most vulnerable species; and [Am. 84]

(c)  conditions for effective discard prevention. Those conditions shall aim at to avoid the catching of unwanted species in the first place and shall require the landing of all fish taken on board, unless this would be contrary to the rules in force under the Common Fisheries Policy or unless the species have a proven high long-term survival rate after discarding; [Am. 85]

(ca)  measures to prevent, deter and eliminate illegal, unregulated and unreported fishing in the deep-sea métier. [Am. 86]

2.  The measures shall remain in force for as long as the need remains to prevent or mitigate the risks identified in paragraphs paragraph 1(a), (b) and (c). [Am. 87]

2a.  Member States shall, without delay, notify the Commission of the measures adopted in accordance with paragraph 1. [Am. 88]

3.  The Commission shall assess the effectiveness of the accompanying measures adopted by Member States upon their adoption, and thereafter annually. [Am. 89]

Article 13

Commission measures in case of absence or insufficiency of the accompanying measures adopted by the Member States

1.  The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts to specify measures accompanying annual effort limits as referred to in point (a), (b) or (c) of Article 12(1), and in accordance with Article 20:

(a)  if the Member State concerned does not notify to the Commission any measures adopted pursuant to Article 12 by ...(27). [Am. 90]

(b)  if the measures adopted pursuant to Article 12 cease to be in force although the need remains to prevent or mitigate the risks identified in points (a), (b) and (c) of Article 12(1).

2.  The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 20 to specify measures accompanying annual effort limits, as referred to in points (a), (b) and (c) of Article 12(1), if, on the basis of an assessment carried out pursuant to Article 12(3),

(a)  Member State measures are deemed not to be compatible with the objectives of this regulation; or

(b)  Member State measures are deemed insufficient in respect of the aims stated in points (a), (b) and (c) of Article 12(1).

3.  The accompanying measures adopted by the Commission shall aim at ensuring that the objectives and aims set out in this regulation are met. Upon the adoption of the delegated act by the Commission, any Member State measures adopted shall cease to to apply.

Article 13a

Specific Union Measures

With a view to preventing and minimising by-catches, particularly by-catches of the most vulnerable species, modifications to gear or real-time closures of areas with high by-catch rates may be decided. [Am. 91]

CHAPTER IV

CONTROL

Article 14

Application of the control provisions for multiannual plans

1.  This Regulation shall be construed as a 'multiannual plan' for the purposes of Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 Regulation (EU) No .../2013 [on the Common Fisheries Policy]. [Am. 92]

2.  Deep-sea species shall be regarded as the 'species being ‘subject to a multiannual plan' and the 'stocks subject to a multiannual plan' for the purposes of Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 Regulation (EU) No .../2013 [on the Common Fisheries Policy]. [Am. 93]

Article 15

Designated ports

1.  Member States shall designate the ports in which any landing or transhipment of deep-sea species in excess of 100 kg is to take place. By …(28), Member States shall transmit to the Commission the list of these designated ports. [Am. 94]

2.   No quantity of any mixture of deep-sea species in excess of 100 kg may be landed at any place other than the ports which have been designated for landing deep-sea species by Member States pursuant to paragraph 1. [Am. 95]

3.  To improve coherence and coordination across the Union, the Commission shall establish measures for vessels, designated ports and relevant competent authorities regarding the inspection and surveillance procedures necessary for the landing or transhipment of deep-sea species and for recording and reporting landing or transhipment data, including, as a minimum, the weight and species composition. [Am. 96]

4.  Vessels that land or tranship deep-sea species shall adhere to the terms and conditions for recording and reporting the weight and composition of deep-sea species landed or transhipped, and shall comply with all inspection and surveillance procedures relating to the landing or transhipping of deep-sea species. [Am. 97]

Article 16

Prior notification

By way of derogation of Article 17 of Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009, The masters of all Union fishing vessels, regardless of their length, intending to land or tranship 100 kg or more of deep-sea species, whichever their length, shall be required to notify their flag Member State's the competent authority of their flag Member State, as well as the port state authority, of that intention. The master or any other person responsible for the operation of vessels of 12 meters in length or more shall notify the competent authorities at least four hours before the estimated time of arrival at port, in accordance with Article 17 of Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009. This notwithstanding, small-scale fishing vessels without an electronic fishing logbook and artisanal vessels shall be exempted from the notification requirement. [Am. 98]

Article 17

Logbook entries in deep waters

Without prejudice to Articles 14 and 15 of Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009, masters of fishing vessels holding an authorisation in accordance with Article 4(1) or 4(3) of this Regulation shall, when engaged in a deep-sea métier or when fishing below 400 m:

(a)  draw a new line in the paper logbook after each haul; or,

(b)  when they are subject to the electronic recording and reporting system, record separately after each haul.

Article 18

Withdrawal of fishing authorisations

1.  Without prejudice to Article 7(4) of Regulation (EC) 1224/2009, the fishing authorisations referred to in Article 4(1) and 4(3) of this Regulation shall be withdrawn for a duration of at least one year in any of the following cases: [Am. 99]

(a)  failure to conform to the conditions set in the fishing authorisation with regard to limits on the use of gears, allowed areas of operation or, as appropriate, catch or and effort limits on the species whose targeting is allowed; or [Am. 100]

(b)  failure to take on board a scientific observer or to allow sampling of catches for scientific purposes as specified in Article 19;

(ba)  failure to collect, record and report data in accordance with Article 8; [Am. 101]

(bb)  failure to comply with the requirements of the Common Fisheries Policy; [Am. 102]

(bc)  any of the cases specified in Council Regulation (EC) No 1005/2008(29), particularly under the provisions of Chapters VII-IX. [Am. 103]

2.  Paragraph 1 shall not apply if the failures referred to therein have been caused by force majeure. [Am. 104]

CHAPTER V

DATA COLLECTION AND COMPLIANCE [Am. 105]

Article 19

Rules on data collection and reporting

1.  Member States shall collect data on each deep-sea métier in accordance with the rules on data collection and the precision levels laid down in the multiannual Community programme for collection, management and use of biological, technical, environmental, and socio-economic data adopted in accordance with Council Regulation (EC) No 199/2008(30) and in other measures adopted under that Regulation. Member States shall ensure that the necessary systems are in place to facilitate the reporting of catches of target and by-catch species, and the reporting of evidence of any encounters with vulnerable marine ecosystems. Such reporting shall wherever possible be in real-time. [Am. 106]

1a.  Member States shall establish a programme for observer coverage to ensure the collection of relevant, timely and accurate data on the catch and by-catch of deep-sea species, encounters with vulnerable marine ecosystems and other relevant information for the effective implementation of this Regulation. Vessels using bottom trawls or bottom-set gillnets with a fishing authorisation to target deep-sea species shall be subject to 100 % observer coverage. All other vessels with an authorisation to catch deep-sea species shall be subject to 10 % observer coverage. [Am. 107]

2.  The master of a vessel, or any other person responsible for the vessel's operation, shall be required to take on board the scientific observer whom the Member State has assigned for his their vessel, unless this is not possible for security reasons in accordance with the conditions specified in paragraph 4. The master shall facilitate the discharging of the scientific observer's tasks. [Am. 108]

3.  The scientific observers shall:

(a)  be qualified to carry out their recurrent data collection tasks, as set out in paragraph 1 duties and tasks as scientific observers, including the ability to identify species found in deep-sea ecosystems; [Am. 109]

(aa)  record independently, in the same format as that used in the vessel's logbook, the catch information prescribed in Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009; [Am. 110]

(ab)  record any instances of alteration of the fishing plan referred to in Article 7; [Am. 111]

(ac)  document any unforeseen encounters with vulnerable marine ecosystems including the gathering of information that may be of use in relation to the protection of the area; [Am. 112]

(ad)  record depths at which gear is deployed; [Am. 113]

(ae)  present a report to the competent authorities of the flag Member State concerned within 20 days following the termination of the observation period, a copy of which shall be sent by those authorities to the Commission, within 30 days following receipt of the Commission's written request; [Am. 114]

(b)  identify and document the weight of any stony coral, soft coral, sponges or other organisms belonging to the same ecosystem taken on board by the vessel's gear.

3a.  It shall be prohibited for scientific observers to be any of the following:

(i)  a relative of the master of the vessel or other officer serving on the vessel to which the observer is assigned;

(ii)  an employee of the master of the vessel to which they are assigned;

(iii)  an employee of the master's representative;

(iv)  an employee of a company controlled by the master or their representative;

(v)  a relative of the master's representative. [Am. 115]

4.  In addition to their obligations referred to in paragraph 1, Member States shall be subject to the specific data collection and reporting requirements set out in Annex II for the deep sea métier.

4a.  Data collection may enable the creation of partnerships between scientists and fishermen and contribute to the area of research regarding the marine environment, biotechnology, food sciences, processing and the economy. [Am. 116]

5.  Data collected in relation to the deep-sea métier, including all data collected in accordance with Annex II to this Regulation, shall be treated in accordance with the data management process as laid down in chapter III of Regulation (EC) No 199/2008.

6.  Upon a request from the Commission, Member States shall submit monthly reports on of effort deployed and/or catches broken down by métier. These reports shall be made publicly available. [Am. 117]

CHAPTER Va

FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE [Am. 118]

Article 19a

Financial Assistance for changing of fishing gear

1.  Fishing vessels using bottom trawls or bottom-set gillnets in the deep-sea métier shall be eligible to receive financial assistance from the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund for the changing of fishing gears and related vessel modifications, and for necessary know-how and training, provided that the new gear has demonstrably better size and species selectivity, a lower and limited impact on the marine environment and vulnerable marine ecosystems and does not increase the fishing capacity of the vessel, as assessed by the Commission, after consulting the appropriate independent scientific body.

2.  Fishing vessels shall be eligible to receive financial assistance from the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund for the purpose of minimising and, where possible, eliminating unwanted catches of deep-sea species, particularly those that are most vulnerable.

3.  Support shall not be granted more than once for the same Union fishing vessel .

4.  Access to financial assistance from the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund shall be conditional upon full compliance with this Regulation, the Common Fisheries Policy and Union environmental law. [Am. 119]

CHAPTER VI

DELEGATED ACTS

Article 20

Exercise of delegated powers

1.  The power to adopt delegated acts is conferred on the Commission subject to the conditions laid down in this Article.

2.  The power to adopt delegated acts as referred to in Article 3b(2) and Article 13 shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time a period of three years from ...(31). The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power no later than nine months before the end of the three year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council oppose such extension no later than three months before the end of each period. [Am. 120]

3.  The delegation of power referred to in Article 3b(2) and Article 13 may be revoked at any time by the European Parliament or by the Council. A decision of revocation shall put an end to the delegation of the power specified in that decision. It shall take effect the day following the publication of the decision in the Official Journal of the European Union or at a later date specified therein. It shall not affect the validity of any delegated acts already in force.

4.  As soon as it adopts a delegated act, the Commission shall notify it simultaneously to the European Parliament and to the Council.

5.  A delegated act adopted pursuant to Article 3b(2) and Article 13 shall enter into force only if no objection has been expressed either by the European Parliament or the Council within a period of two months of notification of that act to the European Parliament and the Council or if, before the expiry of that period, the European Parliament and the Council have both informed the Commission that they will not object. That period shall be extended by two months at the initiative of the European Parliament or the Council.

CHAPTER VII

EVALUATION AND FINAL PROVISIONS

Article 21

Evaluation

1.  Within six years from the entry into force of this Regulation By …(32), the Commission shall, on the basis of Member States' reports and scientific advice that it shall request to this effect, evaluate the impact of the measures laid down in this Regulation and determine to what extent the objectives referred to in Article 1(a) and (b) have been achieved. [Am. 121]

2.  The evaluation shall focus on trends in the following subjects:

(a)  the vessels that have changed to using gears with a reduced impact on the sea bottom, and the development of their discard levels progress as regards the prevention, minimisation and, where possible, on the elimination of unwanted catches; [Am. 122]

(b)  the range of operation of vessels engaging in each deep-sea métier;

(c)  the completeness and reliability of data that Member States provide to scientific bodies for the purpose of stock assessment, or to the Commission in case of specific data calls;

(d)  the deep-sea stocks for which the scientific advice has improved;

(e)  the fisheries that are managed according to fishing effort limits only, and the effectiveness of accompanying measures to eliminate discards and reduce catches of most vulnerable species; [Am. 123]

(ea)  the quality of the impact assessments carried out pursuant to Article 7; [Am. 124]

(eb)  the number of vessels and ports in the Union directly affected by the implementation of this Regulation; [Am. 125]

(ec)  the effectiveness of measures established to ensure the long-term sustainability of deep-sea fish stocks and to prevent by-catch of non-target species, in particular by-catch of the most vulnerable species; [Am. 126]

(ed)  the extent to which vulnerable marine ecosystems have been effectively protected through the restriction of authorised fishing activities to existing deep-sea fishing areas, area closures, the move-on rule and/or by other measures; [Am. 127]

(ee)  the application of the 600 meter depth limitation. [Am. 128]

2a.  Based on the evaluation referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2, the Commission shall by...(33) make proposals for the amendment of this Regulation, as appropriate. [Am. 129]

Article 22

Transitional measures

Special fishing authorisations issued in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 2347/2002 shall remain valid until their replacement by fishing authorisations allowing the catch of deep-sea species issued in accordance with this Regulation, but shall in any case no longer be valid after 30 September 2012 (34). [Am. 130]

Article 23

Repeal

1.  Regulation (EC) No 2347/2002 is repealed.

2.  References to the repealed Regulation shall be construed as references to this Regulation in accordance with the correlation table set out in Annex III.

Article 24

Entry into force

This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at

For the European Parliament For the Council

The President The President

[…] […]

Annex I

Section 1: Deep-sea species

Scientific name

Common name

Most vulnerable (x)

Deferred Application of point (c) of Article 4(2)

Centrophorus granulosus

Gulper shark

x

Centrophorus squamosus

Leafscale gulper shark

x

Centroscyllium fabricii

Black dogfish

x

Centroscymnus coelolepis

Portuguese dogfish

x

Centroscymnus crepidater

Longnose velvet dogfish

x

Dalatias licha

Kitefin shark

x

Etmopterus princeps

Greater lanternshark

x

Apristuris spp

Iceland catchark

Chlamydoselachus anguineus

Frilled shark

Deania calcea

Birdbeak dogfish

Galeus melastomus

Blackmouth dogfish

Galeus murinus

Mouse catshark

Hexanchus griseus

Bluntnose six-gilled shark

x

Etmopterus spinax

Velvet belly

Oxynotus paradoxus

Sailfin roughshark (Sharpback shark)

Scymnodon ringens

Knifetooth dogfish

Somniosus microcephalus

Greenland shark

Alepocephalidae

Smoothheads (Slickheads)

Alepocephalus Bairdii

Baird's smoothhead

Alepocephalus rostratus

Risso's smoothhead

Aphanopus carbo

Black scabbardfish

Argentina silus

Greater silver smelt

Beryx spp.

Alfonsinos

Chaceon (Geryon) affinis

Deep-water red crab

x

Chimaera monstrosa

Rabbit fish (rattail)

x

Hydrolagus mirabilis

Large-eyed rabbitfish (Ratfish)

x

Rhinochimaera atlantica

Straightnose rabbitfish

x

Coryphaenoides rupestris

Roundnose grenadier

Epigonus telescopus

Black cardinalfish

x

Helicolenus dactilopterus

Bluemouth (Bluemouth redfish)

Hoplostethus atlanticus

Orange roughy

x

Macrourus berglax

Roughhead grenadier (Rough rattail)

Molva dypterigia

Blue ling

Mora moro

Common mora

x

Antimora rostrata

Blue antimora (Blue hake)

x

Pagellus bogaraveo

Red (blackspot) seabream

Phycis blennoides

Greater Forkbeard

Polyprion americanus

Wreckfish

Reinhardtius hippoglossoides

Greenland halibut

Cataetyx laticeps

x

Hoplosthetus mediterraneus

Silver roughy (Pink)

x

Macrouridaeother than Coryphaenoides rupestris and Macrourus berglax

Grenadiers (rattails)

other than roundnose grenadier and roughhead grenadier

Nesiarchus nasutus

Black gemfish

Notocanthus chemnitzii

Snubnosed spiny eel

Raja fyllae

Round skate

x

Raja hyperborea

Arctic skate

Raja nidarosiensus

Norwegian skate

Trachyscorpia cristulata

Spiny (deep-sea) scorpionfish

Section 2: Species regulated in NEAFC in addition

Brosme brosme

Tusk

Conger conger

Conger eel

Lepidopus caudatus

Silver scabbard fish (Cutless fish)

x

Lycodes esmarkii

Greater Eelpout

Molva molva

Ling

Sebastes viviparus

Small redfish (Norway haddock)

[Am. 131]

Annex II

Specific data collection and reporting requirements referred to in Article 18(4)

1.  Member States shall ensure that data collected for an area that comprises both Union waters and international waters shall be further disaggregated so that they refer either to Union waters or international waters separately.

2.  Where the activity in the deep-sea métier overlaps with activity in another métier in the same area, the data collection concerning the former shall be done separately from the data collection concerning the latter.

3.  Discards shall be sampled in all deep-sea métiers. The sampling strategy for landings and discards shall cover all the species listed in Annex I as well as species belonging to the seabed ecosystem such as deep-water corals, sponges or other organisms belonging to the same ecosystem .

4.  Where the applicable multiannual data collection plan requires the collection of fishing effort data in terms of hours fished by trawls and soak time for passive gear, the Member State shall collect and be ready to present, together with such fishing effort data, the following additional data:

(a)  geographical location of the fishing activities on a haul-by-haul basis, from vessel monitoring system data transmitted by the vessel to the fisheries monitoring centre;

(b)  the fishing depths at which the gears are deployed in case the vessel is subject to reporting by electronic logbook. The master of the vessel shall notify fishing depth following the standardised reporting format.

4a.  The Commission shall ensure that data is collected in a timely manner, in a way that is harmonised in all Member States, and that it is accurate, reliable and comprehensive. [Am. 132]

4b.  The Commission shall ensure safe storage of collected data, making it publicly available, save in exceptional circumstances where appropriate protection and confidentiality are required and where the reasons for such restrictions are declared. [Am. 133]

Annex IIa

Impact assessments referred to in Article 7(2)

The impact assessments to establish the deep-sea fishing activities referred to in Article 7(2) shall address, inter alia:

1.  the type(s) of fishing conducted, including vessels and gear types, fishing areas and the depth range at which the activities will be deployed, individual species targeted and potential by-catch species, fishing effort levels and the duration of fishing;

2.  best available scientific information on the current state of fish stocks and baseline information on the ecosystems and habitats in the fishing area, against which future changes are to be compared;

3.  identification, description and mapping of vulnerable marine ecosystems known or likely to occur in the fishing area;

4.  data and methods used to identify, describe and assess the impact of the activity, the identification of gaps in knowledge, and an evaluation of uncertainties in the information presented in the assessment;

5.  the identification, description and evaluation of the occurrence, scale and duration of likely impact by the fishing operations, including cumulative impact of fishing activities, particularly on vulnerable marine ecosystems and low-productivity fishery resources in the fishing area;

6.  the proposed mitigation and management measures to be used to prevent significant adverse impacts on vulnerable marine ecosystems and ensure long-term conservation and sustainable management of low-productivity fishery resources, and the measures to be used to monitor effects of the fishing operations. [Am. 134]

(1) OJ C 133, 9.5.2013, p. 41.
(2)OJ C 133, 9.5.2013, p. 41.
(3) Position of the European Parliament of 10 December 2013.
(4)Council Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002 of 20 December 2002 on the conservation and sustainable exploitation of fisheries resources under the Common Fisheries Policy (OJ L 358, 31.12.2002, p. 59).
(5)Council Regulation (EC) No 2347/2002 of 16 december 2002 establishing specific access requirements and associated conditions applicable to fishing for deep-sea stocks (OJ L 351, 28.12.2002, p. 6).
(6) Regulation (EU) No .../2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of ... on the Common Fisheries Policy, amending Council Regulations (EC) No 1954/2003 and (EC) No 1224/2009 and repealing Council Regulations (EC) No 2371/2002 and (EC) No 639/2004 and Council Decision 2004/585/EC (OJ L ...).
(7)OJ L 347, 24.12.2009, p. 6.
(8)Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 establishing a Community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy (OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 1).
(9) Council Decision 81/608/EEC of 13 July 1981 concerning the conclusion of the Convention on Future Multilateral Cooperation in the North-East Atlantic Fisheries (OJ L 227, 12.8.1981, p. 21).
(10)Council Regulation (EC) No 734/2008 of 15 July 2008 on the protection of vulnerable marine ecosystems in the high seas from the adverse impacts of bottom fishing gears (OJ L 201, 30.7.2008, p. 8).
(11)Regulation (EC) No 218/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2009 on the submission of nominal catch statistics by Member States fishing in the north-east Atlantic (OJ L 87, 31.3.2009, p. 70).
(12)Regulation (EC) No 216/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2009 on the submission of nominal catch statistics by Member States fishing in certain areas other than those of the North Atlantic (OJ L 87, 31.3.2009, p. 1).
(13) Directive 2003/4/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 January 2003 on public access to environmental information (OJ L 41, 14.2.2003, p. 26).
(14) Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents (OJ L 145, 31.5.2001, p. 43).
(15) Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 September 2006 on the application of the provisions of the Aarhus Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters to Community institutions and bodies (OJ L 264, 25.9.2006, p. 13).
(16) Council Decision 2005/370/EC of 17 February 2005 (OJ L 124, 17.5.2005, p. 1).
(17) Date of entry into force of this Regulation.
(18) Five years after the entry into force of this Regulation.
(19) One year after the entry into force of this Regulation.
(20) Two years after the entry into force of this Regulation.
(21) Four years after the entry into force of this Regulation.
(22)+ Five years after the entry into force of this Regulation.
(23) Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7).
(24) Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2009 on the conservation of wild birds (OJ L 20, 26.1.2010, p. 7).
(25) Directive 2008/56/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 establishing a framework for community action in the field of marine environmental policy (Marine Strategy Framework Directive) (OJ L 164, 25.6.2008, p. 19).
(26) Five years after the entry into force of this Regulation.
(27) Three months after the entry into force of this Regulation.
(28) 60 days after the entry into force of this Regulation.
(29) Council Regulation (EC) No 1005/2008 of 29 September 2008 establishing a Community system to prevent, deter and eliminate illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing (OJ L 286, 29.10.2008, p. 1).
(30)Council Regulation (EC) No 199/2008 of 25 February 2008 concerning the establishment of a Community framework for the collection, management and use of data in the fisheries sector and support for scientific advice regarding the Common Fisheries Policy (OJ L 60, 5.3.2008, p. 1).
(31) Date of entry into force of this Regulation.
(32) Four years from the entry into force of this Regulation.
(33) Five years after the date of entry into force of this Regulation.
(34) One year after the date of entry into force of this Regulation.


Civil protection mechanism ***I
PDF 203kWORD 70k
Resolution
Text
Annex
European Parliament legislative resolution of 10 December 2013 on the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council on a Union Civil Protection Mechanism (COM(2011)0934 – C7-0519/2011 – 2011/0461(COD))
P7_TA(2013)0540A7-0003/2013

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2011)0934),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 196 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C7‑0519/2011),

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

–  having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions of 19 July 2012(1),

–  having regard to the undertaking given by the Council representative by letter of 9 October 2013 to approve Parliament’s position, in accordance with Article 294(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety and the opinions of the Committee on Development, the Committee on Foreign Affairs, the Committee on Budgets and the Committee on Regional Development (A7-0003/2013),

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

2.  Approves the joint statement by Parliament, the Council and the Commission annexed to this resolution;

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

4.  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;

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

Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 10 December 2013 with a view to the adoption of Decision No .../2013/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council on a Union Civil Protection Mechanism

P7_TC1-COD(2011)0461


(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Decision No 1313/2013/EU.)

ANNEX TO THE LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION

Statement by the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission

The European Parliament, the Council and the Commission take note of the approach taken in Article 19(4) to (6) and Annex I, which responds to the specificities of this Decision and is with no precedent value to other financial instruments.

Statement by the Commission

Without prejudice to the annual budgetary procedure, it is the Commission’s intention to present to the European Parliament an annual report on the implementation of the Decision, including the budget breakdown set out in Annex I, starting from January 2015. This approach is based upon the specific nature of civil protection policy and is with no precedent value to other financial instruments.

(1) OJ C 277, 13.9.2012, p. 164.


Credit agreements relating to residential property ***I
PDF 198kWORD 70k
Resolution
Text
European Parliament legislative resolution of 10 December 2013 on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on credit agreements relating to residential property (COM(2011)0142 – C7-0085/2011 – 2011/0062(COD))
P7_TA(2013)0541A7-0202/2012

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2011)0142),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 114(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C7‑0085/2011),

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

–  having regard to the opinion of the European Central Bank of 18 August 2011(1),

–  having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 14 July 2011(2),

–  having regard to the undertaking given by the Council representative by letters of 8 May 2013 and 27 November 2013 to approve Parliament’s position, in accordance with Article 294(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs and the opinions of the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection and the Committee on Legal Affairs (A7-0202/2012),

1.  Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out(3);

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

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

Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 10 December 2013 with a view to the adoption of Directive 2014/…/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council on credit agreements for consumers relating to residential immovable property and amending Directives 2008/48/EC and 2013/36/EU and Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010

P7_TC1-COD(2011)0062


(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Directive 2014/17/EU.)

(1) OJ C 240, 18.8.2011, p. 3.
(2) OJ C 318, 29.10.2011, p. 133.
(3) This position replaces the amendments adopted on 10 September 2013 (Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0341).


Imports of rice from Bangladesh ***I
PDF 182kWORD 66k
Amendments adopted by the European Parliament on 10 December 2013 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on imports of rice originating in Bangladesh (COM(2012)0172 – C7-0102/2012 – 2012/0085(COD))(1)
P7_TA(2013)0542A7-0304/2013

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

Text proposed by the Commission   Amendment
Amendment 1
Proposal for a regulation
Title
Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on imports of rice originating in Bangladesh
Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on imports of rice originating in Bangladesh and repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 3491/90
Amendment 2
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
(3)  In order to ensure the reliability and the efficiency of the preferential import arrangement, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty should be delegated to the Commission to establish rules making the participation in the arrangement conditional upon the lodging of a security. It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level. The Commission, when preparing and drawing up delegated acts, should ensure a simultaneous, timely and appropriate transmission of relevant documents to the European Parliament and to the Council.
(3)  In order to ensure the reliability and the efficiency of the preferential import arrangement, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty should be delegated to the Commission to establish rules making the participation in the arrangement conditional upon the lodging of a security in line with Commission Regulation (EC) No 1964/2006 of 22 December 2006 laying down detailed rules for the opening and administration of an import quota for rice originating in Bangladesh, pursuant to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3491/901. It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level. The Commission, when preparing and drawing up delegated acts, should ensure a simultaneous, timely and appropriate transmission of relevant documents to the European Parliament and to the Council.
______________
1 OJ L 408, 30.12.2006, p. 18
Amendment 3
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
(4)  In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of this Regulation, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission. Those powers, save where explicitly provided otherwise, should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member states of the Commission's exercise of implementing powers . However, where the suspension of the preferential import arrangement becomes necessary, the Commission should be allowed to adopt implementing acts without applying the Regulation (EU) No 182/2011.
(4)  In order to ensure uniform conditions for the adoption of certain measures for the implementation of this Regulation, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission. Those powers, save where explicitly provided otherwise, should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member states of the Commission's exercise of implementing powers . However, where the suspension of the preferential import arrangement becomes necessary, the Commission should adopt an implementing act without applying Regulation (EU) No 182/2011.
Amendment 4
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
(7)  To ensure the advantages of the preferential import arrangements are limited only to rice originating in Bangladesh, a certificate of origin should be issued and an export tax of an amount corresponding to the reduction of the import duty should be collected by the exporting country.
(7)  To ensure the advantages of the preferential import arrangements are limited only to rice originating in Bangladesh, a certificate of origin should be issued.
Amendment 5
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7 a (new)
(7a)  This Regulation is part of the Union's common commercial policy, which must be consistent with the objectives of the Union policy in the field of development cooperation as set out in Article 208 of the Treaty, in particular the eradication of poverty and the promotion of sustainable development and good governance in the developing countries. As such, it should also comply with World Trade Organization (WTO) requirements, in particular with the Decision on Differential and More Favourable Treatment, Reciprocity and Fuller Participation of Developing Countries (the 'Enabling Clause'), adopted under the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) in 1979, under which WTO Members may accord differential and more favourable treatment to developing countries,
Amendment 6
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7 b (new)
(7b)  This Regulation is also based on the recognition of the right of small farmers and rural workers to a decent income and to a safe and healthy working environment as fundamental in relation to achieving the general objectives of granting trade preferences to developing countries and least developed countries in particular. The Union aims to define and pursue common policies and actions in order to foster the sustainable economic, social and environmental development of developing countries, with the primary aim of eradicating poverty. In this context, the ratification and effective implementation of core international conventions on human and labour rights, environmental protection and good governance are essential, as reflected by the special incentive arrangement providing for additional tariff preferences under Regulation (EU) No 978/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 applying a scheme of generalised tariff preferences1,
_______________
1 OJ L 303, 31.10.2012, p. 1.
Amendment 13
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 c (new)
(7c)  To ensure that this Regulation is in line with the general provisions set out in Article 208 TFEU, only rice that is produced, harvested and processed in accordance with the International Labour Organisation Conventions listed in Annex VIII to Regulation (EU) No 978/2012, and in particular with Conventions on Forced Labour (No. 29), Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise (No. 87), the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining (No. 98), Equal Remuneration (No. 1000), Abolition of Forced Labour (No 105), Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) (No. 111) and on the Worst Forms of Child Labour (No. 182), should be covered under this Regulation;
Amendment 7
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 - paragraph 1 a (new)
1a.  This Regulation recognises the right of small farmers and rural workers to a decent income and to a safe and healthy working environment and regards respect for that right as fundamental in relation to achieving the general objectives of granting trade preferences to developing countries and, in particular, to least developed countries.
Amendment 8
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 - paragraph 3
3.  By means of an implementing act adopted without the assistance of the Committee referred to in Article 323(1) of Regulation No XXXX/XXXX, the Commission shall suspend the application of the preferential import arrangement provided for in paragraph 1 of this Article once it ascertains that, during the year in progress, imports qualifying under the said arrangement have reached the quantity indicated in paragraph 2.
3.  The Commission shall adopt an implementing act suspending the application of the preferential import arrangement provided for in paragraph 1 of this Article once it ascertains that, during the year in progress, imports qualifying under the said arrangement have reached the quantity indicated in paragraph 2 of this Article. That implementing act shall be adopted without applying the procedure referred to in Article 5a(2).
Amendment 9
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 - paragraph 2 - point (a)
(a)  that proof is provided that an export tax of an amount corresponding to the reduction referred to in paragraph 1 has been collected by Bangladesh
deleted
Amendment 10
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 - paragraph 2
2.  The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 3 shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from the day of entry into force of this Regulation.
2.  The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 3 shall be conferred on the Commission for a period of five years from ...*. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of that five-year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
___________
* Date of entry into force of this Regulation.
Amendment 11
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 - paragraph 5
5.  A delegated act adopted pursuant to Article 3 shall enter into force only if no objection has been expressed either by the European Parliament or the Council within a period of two months of notification of that act to the European Parliament and the Council or if, before the expiry of that period, the European Parliament and the Council have both informed the Commission that they will not object. That period shall be extended by two months at the initiative of the European Parliament or of the Council.
5.  A delegated act adopted pursuant to Article 3 shall enter into force only if no objection has been expressed either by the European Parliament or the Council within a period of two months of notification of that act to the European Parliament and the Council or if, before the expiry of that period, the European Parliament and the Council have both informed the Commission that they will not object. That period shall be extended by four months at the initiative of the European Parliament or of the Council.
Amendment 12
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 a (new)
Article 5a
Committee procedure
1.  The Commission shall be assisted by the Committee for the Common Organisation of the Agricultural Markets established by Article [323(1)] of Regulation (EU) No [xxxx/yyyy ] of the European Parliament and of the Council of ..... establishing a common organisation of agricultural markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation)1. That Committee shall be a committee within the meaning of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011.
2.  Where reference is made to this paragraph, Article 5 of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 shall apply.
3.  Where the opinion of the committee is to be obtained by written procedure, that procedure shall be terminated without result when, within the time-limit for delivery of the opinion, the chair of the committee so decides or a majority of committee members so request.
_______________
1 COD 2010/0385.

(1) The matter was referred back to the committee responsible for reconsideration pursuant to Rule 57(2), second subparagraph (A7-0304/2013).


Timing of auctions of greenhouse gas allowances ***I
PDF 197kWORD 37k
Resolution
Text
European Parliament legislative resolution of 10 December 2013 on the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2003/87/EC clarifying provisions on the timing of auctions of greenhouse gas allowances (COM(2012)0416 – C7-0203/2012 – 2012/0202(COD))
P7_TA(2013)0543A7-0046/2013

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2012)0416),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 192(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C7‑0203/2012),

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

–  having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 14 November 2012(1),

–  after consulting the Committee of the Regions,

–  having regard to its resolution of 15 March 2012 on a Roadmap for moving to a competitive low carbon economy in 2050(2),

–  having regard to the undertaking given by the Council representative by letter of 20 November 2013 to approve Parliament’s position, in accordance with Article 294(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety and the opinion of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (A7-0046/2013),

1.  Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out(3);

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

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

Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 10 December 2013 with a view to the adoption of Decision No .../2013/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2003/87/EC clarifying provisions on the timing of auctions of greenhouse gas allowances

P7_TC1-COD(2012)0202


(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Decision No 1359/2013/EU.)

(1)OJ C 11, 15.1.2013, p. 87.
(2) OJ C 251 E, 31.8.2013, p. 75.
(3) This position corresponds to the amendment adopted on 3 July 2013 (Texts Adopted, P7_TA(2013)0310).


Defining criteria determining when recovered paper ceases to be waste pursuant to Article 6(1) of Directive 2008/98/EC on waste
PDF 209kWORD 43k
European Parliament resolution of 10 December 2013 on the draft Council regulation on defining criteria determining when recovered paper ceases to be waste pursuant to Article 6(1) of Directive 2008/98/EC on waste (D021155/01 – 2012/2742(RPS))
P7_TA(2013)0544B7-0553/2013

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the proposal for a Council Regulation on defining criteria determining when recovered paper ceases to be waste pursuant to Article 6(1) of Directive 2008/98/EC on waste (COM(2013)0502),

–  having regard to the JRC scientific and technical report entitled ‘End-of-waste criteria for waste paper: technical proposals’, published in March 2011,

–  having regard to Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on waste and repealing certain Directives(1), and in particular Article 6(1) thereof,

–  having regard to Regulation (EC) No 1013/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council on shipments of waste(2), and in particular Article 49 thereof,

–  having regard to Commission Decision 2011/753/EU establishing rules and calculation methods for verifying compliance with the targets set in Article 11(2) of Directive 2008/98/EC(3), and in particular Article 2(2) thereof,

–  having regard to the Commission communication of 26 January 2011 entitled ‘A resource-efficient Europe – Flagship initiative under the Europe 2020 Strategy’ (COM(2011)0021),

–  having regard to the opinion delivered on 9 July 2012 by the committee referred to in Article 39 of Directive 2008/98/EC,

–  having regard to Article 5a(4)(e) of Council Decision 1999/468/EC of 28 June 1999 laying down the procedures for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission(4),

–  having regard to Rule 88(2), (3) and (4)(c) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.  whereas defining end-of-waste criteria in accordance with Directive 2008/98/EC can be an important instrument to promote recycling and a market for secondary raw materials, and can thereby improve resource efficiency;

B.  whereas the proposed Council regulation stipulates that waste paper with a non-paper component equal to or less than 1,5 % of air dry weight shall cease to be waste when it is destined for the use of paper fibres for paper manufacturing, subject to certain additional criteria;

C.  whereas multi-material paper with a non-paper content of more than 30 % of air dry weight shall count in its totality as non-paper component; whereas a typical multi-material paper container contains just 30 % or less of non-paper components (24 % of polyethylene, 6 % of aluminium) and would thus not count as a non-paper component; whereas, as a result, a waste paper stream could contain any amount of multi-material paper containers (with their high content of non-paper components as well as non-negligible residual content of liquids, food and other organic material attached thereto) and would be seen no longer as waste but as a product;

D.  whereas, under Article 3(17) of Directive 2008/98/EC, ‘recycling’ is defined as ‘any recovery operation by which waste materials are reprocessed into products, materials or substances whether for the original or other purposes’;

E.  whereas the draft regulation defines the end-of-waste point as the point when the recovered paper is destined for the use of paper fibres for paper manufacturing, thus placing it before the actual reprocessing in the paper mill; whereas this conflicts with the existing definition of ‘recycling’, which requires reprocessing of waste materials;

F.  whereas such waste material obtained after collection and sorting has only been pre-processed (not reprocessed) and cannot be used without further reprocessing;

G.  whereas defining end-of-waste before recycling has actually taken place would cause problems in relation to a vast body of existing Community legislation such as that relating to eco-labels, public procurement, eco-design and REACH in which, hitherto, ‘recycling’ has been referred to as resulting in a ready-to-be-used recycled product and, furthermore, contradicts Article 2(2) of Commission Decision 2011/753/EU, in which ‘pre-processing’ is clearly differentiated from ‘final recycling’;

H.  whereas, pursuant to Article 6(1) of Directive 2008/98/EC, certain specified waste shall cease to be waste when it has undergone a recovery operation (including recycling) and complies with specific criteria to be developed in accordance with the conditions laid down in that article; whereas those conditions include: a) that the substance or object complies with the existing legislation and standards applicable to products (Article 6(1c)); and b): that the use of the substance or object will not lead to overall adverse environmental or human health impacts (Article 6(1d));

I.  whereas the threshold for the non-paper component of 1,5 % is based on the European standard EN 643; whereas according to the JRC study this standard ‘is a central element in waste paper trade’ and ‘specifies a list of European standard grades of waste’; whereas reliance on this standard for setting end-of-waste criteria clearly violates Article 6(1)(c) of Directive 2008/98/EC, which explicitly refers to ‘standards applicable to products’, and not to standards applicable to waste;

J.  whereas relevant paper product standards such as ISO 1762 for inorganic impurities, ISO 5350/1 and 5350/2 for visible dirt and ISO 624 for extractives (low molecular weight carbohydrates) require a purity level of 1 ppm – 15 000 times lower than the level proposed;

K.  whereas the inclusion of multi-material paper goes against the explicit recommendation in the JRC study, which excluded layered waste paper from the scope of end-of-waste criteria on the grounds of the additional intrinsic environmental risk arising from it should the material be exported, especially outside the EU;

L.  whereas, as is stated in Article 49(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1013/2006, in the case of exports outside the EU the competent authority of dispatch in the Union shall require and endeavour to secure that any waste exported is managed in an environmentally sound manner in the third country of destination, inter alia by being able to demonstrate that the facility which receives the waste will be operated in accordance with human health and environmental protection standards that are broadly equivalent to those established in the EU legislation;

M.  whereas if used paper, including multi-material waste paper, is granted end-of-waste status before it has even been properly recycled, then such material can be traded freely on global markets and the safeguards of the Waste Shipment Regulation with regard to environmentally sound management will no longer apply; whereas exempting waste streams with a high degree of non-paper materials - which moreover could go well beyond the 1,5 % threshold owing to the discounting of current multi-material paper - from the requirements of the Waste Shipment Regulation clearly risks violating Article 6(1d) of Directive 2008/98/EC, which states that use of the substance shall not lead to overall adverse environmental impacts;

N.  whereas the proposed management system to demonstrate compliance with the criteria referred to in Article 3 of the draft Council Regulation, and in particular the provision that the non-paper materials in consignments of multi-material paper are destined for recovery, is likely to be nearly impossible to implement for a waste that has ceased to be waste and is thus freely traded, possibly changing hands many times, and in any case no longer requires environmentally sound treatment of the material concerned;

O.  whereas stimulating increased global trade in such alleged ‘end-of-waste’ paper by circumventing the environmental and health protection safeguards would not only have an additional negative environmental impact during transport, but could also lead to a decrease in the European paper recycling rate due to reduced availability of waste paper, so that paper manufacturers might have to substitute it at least partially with more virgin fibre-based production in Europe, with higher energy input and related CO2 emissions, which would again conflict with the criterion of avoiding overall adverse environmental impacts;

P.  whereas the Commission communication on a ‘resource-efficient Europe’ includes a strategy to make the EU a ‘circular economy’, based on a recycling society with the aim of reducing waste generation and using waste as a resource; whereas further improvement of recycling rates in the EU risks being seriously undermined by the proposed ‘end-of-waste’ criteria, and the current proposal would thus not comply with Article 6(1d) of Directive 2008/98/EC;

1.  Opposes adoption of the Council regulation on defining criteria determining when recovered paper ceases to be waste pursuant to Article 6(1) of Directive 2008/98/EC on waste;

2.  Considers that the draft Council regulation is not compatible with the aim and content of the basic act;

3.  Considers that the draft Council regulation exceeds the implementing powers conferred on the Commission under the basic act;

4.  Considers that the Commission has not properly assessed the impacts of the draft regulation on paper recycling, on the waste paper value chain, on shipments of waste paper and on the overall effects of the draft regulation on the environment; encourages the Commission to reconsider the draft Regulation and improve the proposed end-of-waste criteria in light of the objections raised in this resolution;

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

(1) OJ L 312, 22.11.2008, p. 3.
(2) OJ L 190, 12.7.2006, p. 1.
(3) OJ L 310, 25.11.2011, p. 11.
(4) OJ L 184, 17.7.1999, p. 23.


Gender aspects of the European framework of national Roma inclusion strategies
PDF 214kWORD 73k
European Parliament resolution of 10 December 2013 on gender aspects of the European Framework of National Roma Inclusion Strategies (2013/2066(INI))
P7_TA(2013)0545A7-0349/2013

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Charter of Fundamental Rights, in particular Articles 1, 14, 15, 21, 23, 24, 25, 34 and 35,

–  having regard to international human rights law, notably the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination; the 1992 UN Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities; the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women; and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child,

–  having regard to European conventions protecting human rights and fundamental freedoms, notably the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR); the European Social Charter and the related recommendations of the European Committee of Social Rights; the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities of the Council of Europe; and the Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence,

–  having regard to Articles 2, 3 and 6 of the Treaty on European Union and Articles 8, 9 and 10 of the Treaty of the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to the Commission Communication on an EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies up to 2020 (COM(2011)0173) and the European Council Conclusions of 24 June 2011,

–  having regard to the Commission Communication on National Roma Integration Strategies: a first step in the implementation of the EU Framework (COM(2012)0226),

–  having regard to the Proposal for a Council Recommendation on effective Roma integration measures in the Member States (COM(2013)0460),

–  having regard to the Commission Communication on steps forward in implementing national Roma integration strategies (COM(2013)0454),

–  having regard to Council Directive 2000/43/EC(1) of 29 June 2000 implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin,

–  having regard to Council Directive 2000/78/EC(2) of 27 November 2000 Establishing a General Framework for Equal Treatment in Employment and Occupation,

–  having regard to the Commission's proposal for a Council Directive on implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation (COM(2008)0426),

–  having regard to its resolution of 1 June 2006 on the situation of Roma women in the EU(3),

–  having regard to its resolution of 9 March 2011 on the EU strategy on Roma inclusion(4),

–  having regard to the EU Fundamental Rights Agency (FRA) Analysis of Roma survey results by gender, provided by the FRA following a request made under Rule 126,

–  having regard to Rule 48 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality and the opinion of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs (A7-0349/2013),

A.  whereas the Strategy for Equality between women and men 2010-2015 requires the Commission to ‘support the promotion of gender equality in the implementation of all aspects of the Europe 2020 Strategy’ and whereas the Council conclusions on an EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies (NRIS) demand ‘a gender perspective to be applied in all policies and actions for advancing Roma inclusion’;

B.  whereas Roma women often face multiple and intersectional discrimination on the grounds of gender and ethnic origin – which is more intense than that against Roma men or non-Roma women – and have limited access to employment, education, health, social services and decision‑making; whereas Roma women are often victims of racism, prejudice and stereotypes that have a negative impact on their real integration;

C.  whereas Roma women are subject to patriarchal and sexist traditions that prevent them from exercising their freedom of choice in fundamental issues of their lives such as education, work, sexual and reproductive health and even marriage; whereas discrimination against Roma women cannot be justified by tradition, but must be addressed while respecting tradition and diversity;

D.  whereas the risk of poverty for Roma women exceeds that of Roma men and whereas Roma families with four or more children are at greatest risk of poverty in the EU;

E.  whereas commonly used indicators tend to neglect problems such as in-work poverty, energy poverty, violence against women and girls, the poverty of large families and single parents, child poverty, and the social exclusion of women;

F.  whereas older Roma women are exposed to a higher risk of poverty due to the majority of them having worked in the informal economy without remuneration or social security affiliation;

G.  whereas the overwhelming majority of Roma adults classified as ‘inactive’ are women and – partly due to the traditional labour division between women and men and due to racism and sexism existing within European labour markets – the number of active-aged Roma women in paid employment is only about half that of Roma men, with the figures being similar in terms of self-employment;

H.  whereas data from all countries show that Roma women face severe exclusion in the field of employment as well as discrimination in the workplace when looking for employment and when in work; whereas Roma women also remain excluded from the formal economy and are hampered by limited education opportunities, inadequate housing, poor healthcare, traditional gender roles and general marginalisation as well as discrimination from majority communities; whereas the national reports for implementing the EU Framework for NRIS still do not focus adequately on the aspect of gender equality;

I.  whereas it is significantly harder for mothers of large families or single mothers to work further away from their homes and families in disadvantaged rural areas;

J.  whereas the literacy rate and educational performance of Roma women fall significantly short of both that of Roma men and non-Roma women, and whereas the majority of Roma girls are early school leavers and a significant proportion of them has never attended school;

K.  whereas the economic crisis has had a negative impact on the health and wellbeing of Roma women, aggravating their long unacceptable situation, with more than a quarter of all Roma women being limited in their daily activities by health problems;

L.  whereas the lack of respect for comprehensive sexual and reproductive rights, including access to contraception, is an obstacle to Roma women’s empowerment and gender equality and leads to unplanned pregnancies, including teenage pregnancies, which disrupts the education and job opportunities of girls; whereas early motherhood is largely a consequence of the lack of appropriate access to social services and inadequate health structures which have not addressed the needs of Roma women;

M.  whereas due to their low socio-economic status and the discrimination they perceive in health care, Roma women are unaware of most of their rights and resort to medical services much less than the majority of the population;

N.  whereas Roma women and girls are disproportionately affected by several diseases – including HIV/AIDS – but prevention programmes for them are commonly under‑prioritised and under-financed, and the accessibility of screenings remains low;

O.  whereas extreme poverty, gender inequality and internal discrimination expose Roma women to a higher risk of trafficking, prostitution, domestic violence and exploitation, while facing additional obstacles in accessing protection;

P.  whereas a large number of Roma women have been victims of domestic violence at the hands of their husbands, in-laws and other family members; whereas the great majority of violence and human rights abuses against Roma women goes unreported due to the fact that violence against women is still accepted in patriarchal societies as a legal exercise of power but also due to the fact that perpetrators of violence against women are rarely held accountable for their acts, which discourages women from seeking legal help;

Q.  whereas acts of violence against Roma women are frequently committed by authorities in all EU Member States in the form of deep discrimination and clear breaches of the European Convention on Human Rights which can take different forms, such as collecting and storing data in registries on Roma people and children solely on the basis of ethnic background, or the eviction of hundreds of people without offering any adequate alternative housing or support, which are shameful and callous acts that completely ignore Member States’ international human rights obligations;

R.  whereas all EU Institutions and Member States bear a responsibility to eradicate violence against women and girls and, likewise, to end impunity, bringing perpetrators of hate crime, hate speech, discrimination and violence against Roma women and girls to justice;

S.  whereas Council Directive 2000/43/EC prohibits discrimination on grounds of race and ethnic origin; whereas about 30 infringement proceedings have been opened by the Commission against Member States for not adequately transposing the Race Equality Directive into national legislation;

1.  Stresses that NRIS must focus on empowering Roma women to take control of their own lives by becoming visible agents of change within their communities and by raising their voices to influence policies and programmes affecting them, as well as on reinforcing Roma women’s socio-economic resilience, i.e. their ability to adapt to the rapidly changing economic environment, through effectuating savings and preventing the running-down of assets;

2.   Welcomes the Commission’s 2012 progress report(5) and the proposal for a Council recommendation of 26 June 2013 on effective Roma integration measures in the Member States(6), with a special focus on access to employment, housing, education, and healthcare, which calls on Member States to introduce positive actions and to mainstream Roma integration strategies in their fight against poverty and social exclusion;

3.  Calls on those Member States which have received, in addition, country-specific recommendations under the European Semester on Roma-related issues, to implement these recommendations swiftly and to fight discrimination, including at the workplace, to involve civil society – including Roma organisations – in decision-making, and to allocate not only EU but also national and other funds in order to deliver on the commitments of their national Roma integration strategies (NRIS);

4.  Regrets that despite the adoption of its resolution on the situation of Roma women in 2006 and the 10 Common Basic Principles on Roma Inclusion by the Council, in which one of the principles relates to gender awareness, the vulnerable situation of Roma and Traveller women has, in practice, remained unaddressed by European and national policy makers;

5.  Stresses that the efficiency of the EU Framework for NRIS could be significantly increased by enhanced involvement of the Commission, based on its potential to improve the quality of regulations and other instruments, encourage greater policy coherence and promote the overarching goals of the Framework;

6.  Calls on Member States to develop National Action Plans in the four key priority areas: health, housing, employment, and education, with specific goals and targets, funding, indicators and timeframes; evaluate progress by measuring implementation outcomes;

7.  Calls on Member State governments and local authorities to involve Roma women, through women’s organisations, Roma NGOs and relevant stakeholders, in the preparation, implementation, evaluation and monitoring of the NRIS and to create links between gender equality bodies, women’s rights organisations and social inclusion strategies; further calls on the Commission to address gender equality in a consistent manner when implementing the EU 2020 Strategy and national reform programmes;

8.  Calls on the Commission to present a 'flowchart' of the EU Roma inclusion process, covering achievements, objectives, the specific measures used to attain these objectives, the state of play as regards implementation measures and the next steps;

9.  Calls on the Member States to combat the spatial segregation, forced evictions and homelessness faced by Roma men and women, and to set up effective and transparent housing policies;

10.  Calls on the Commission and Member States to ensure that the fundamental rights of Roma women and children are respected, and that – also by means of awareness‑raising campaigns – Roma women and girls are aware of their rights under existing national legislation on gender equality and discrimination, and to further combat patriarchal and sexist traditions;

11.  Calls on the Commission to specify the institutional division of tasks and responsibilities among involved organisations, forums and bodies, and to clearly define the role of these stakeholders - such as the EC Roma Task Force, the Network of National Contact Points, the European Roma Platform, the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights and its ad-hoc working group on Roma inclusion - in the supervision, control and coordination of the EU Framework for NRIS;

12.  Calls on the Commission to support NRIS by seeking common, comparable and reliable indicators and by developing a Dashboard of EU Roma inclusion indicators in order to present clear and unambiguous data against which progress can be measured as well as to meet the requirement of effective monitoring;

13.  Calls on Member States to ensure that austerity measures do not impact disproportionately on Roma and Traveller women and that budget decisions are underpinned by human rights principles;

14.  Calls on the Commission to urge Member States to present outcome indicators, baselines and numerical headline targets in their national strategies for the main priority areas, against which progress can be measured;

15.  Calls on the Commission and Member States to ensure that disaggregated data for gender and ethnicity are collected by all administrations and used to inform policy development; points out that collection of data must be carried out in line with the relevant human rights principles;

16.  Calls on Member States to match their national policy commitments by allocating proper financial resources for the implementation of NRIS, and to reflect their inclusion strategies in the national budgetary policies;

17.  Calls on the Commission and Member States to establish a proper framework for consultation, peer learning and the sharing of experience among policy-makers and Roma organisations and to launch structured dialogue to include Roma organisations and NGOs in the planning, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of European, national and local Roma inclusion strategies;

18.  Calls on Member States to ensure equality in civil rights and equal access to healthcare services, education, employment and accommodation while respecting human rights, the principle of non-discrimination and being compatible with nomadism where relevant;

19.  Calls on the Commission and Member States to include the Integrated Territorial Investment and Community-led Local Development instruments in their partnership contracts, to mobilise them for underdeveloped micro-regions and deprived territories, and to include Community-led Local Development in the set of operational programmes to be developed;

20.  Calls on the Commission and Member States to ensure the adoption and implementation of specific and comprehensive anti-discrimination legislation in line with international and European standards in all Member States, ensuring that anti‑discrimination bodies are equipped to promote equal treatment and have complaint mechanisms which are accessible to Roma women and girls;

21.  Calls on Member States to place greater emphasis on the territorial aspects of social inclusion in their national strategies, and to target the most deprived micro‑regions by means of complex, integrated development programmes;

22.  Calls on Member States to also focus on the urban dimension of cohesion policy, giving special consideration to cities that are disproportionately affected by social imbalances such as unemployment, social exclusion and polarisation and assist them in developing their infrastructure in order to exploit their potential contribution to economic growth and strengthen the links between urban and rural areas with a view to promoting inclusive development;

23.  Calls on Member States to strengthen gender mainstreaming when implementing their NRIS, by applying a gender equality perspective to all policies and practices affecting Roma women and to link their implementation to existing gender equality strategies, in particular by eliminating the gender pay and pension gaps within Roma communities and by making the eradication of violence against women and girls explicit objectives and taking real action to this end;

24.  Calls on the Council, the Commission and Member States to ensure that specific measures relating to women's rights and gender mainstreaming are included in the NRIS, that they take account of the gender perspective and the situation of multiple and intersectional discrimination faced by Roma women, especially as regards employment, health, housing and education, and that the assessment and annual monitoring conducted by the Commission and, in particular, the Fundamental Rights Agency, take account of women's rights and the gender equality perspective in each section of the NRIS; requests that these findings be presented to the European Parliament;

25.  Calls on the Commission and on Member States to ensure that the NRIS reflect Roma women’s specific rights and needs and to develop concrete indicators for their implementation, follow-up and monitoring based on, for example, the United Nations Development Programme’s Gender‑related Development Index (GDI) which looks at aspects such as long and healthy life, knowledge and decent standard of living and the Gender Empowerment Measure (GEM) which includes political participation and decision-making, economic participation and decision-making and power over economic resources; calls on the Commission and on Member States to use gender budgeting as one of the tools to mainstream gender;

26.  Calls on Member States to develop a national monitoring and evaluation framework for the NRIS that covers aspects such as budget monitoring and other forms of civil society monitoring (carried out by national NGOs, NGO networks or umbrella organisations), expert assessment (carried out by independent experts with proven expertise in the field), and administrative monitoring;

27.  Calls on the Commission and Member States to conduct gender impact assessments when designing the specific measures of their NRIS;

28.  Calls on the Commission to introduce more effective instruments for measuring the actual socio-economic situation of Roma women, by incorporating the quantification of the ‘economics of life’ and recognition of the informal economy into its ‘beyond GDP’ project, for example; calls on the Commission, furthermore, to develop and monitor gender-specific indicators for the NRIS and social inclusion policies;

29.  Invites NGOs operating in the field in Member States to draw up personalised action plans which aim to help women and young people to find employment, to provide psychological counselling to encourage Roma people to participate in education and vocational training and to identify their personal skills and abilities to improve social inclusion in the labour market; to mediate between providers of training/retraining and employers on the one hand, and Roma women/Roma population on the other hand; to boost education uptake by Roma women and girls by granting subsidies and scholarships, while respecting the principle of equal opportunities, taking account of the fact that girls marry at a younger age than boys;

30.  Calls on Member States to use their measures to explicitly target Roma women in extreme socio‑economic deprivation and to focus simultaneously on at-risk groups by preventing and tackling impoverishment;

31.  Calls on Member States to increase the number and visibility of Roma and Traveller programmes and beneficiaries, including specific support to Traveller and Roma organisations working to promote women’s empowerment and NGO access to structural funds;

32.  Calls on the Commission and on the Member States to develop financial mechanisms for supporting civil society and community monitoring of social inclusion policy, initiatives and projects regarding Roma and Traveller women;

33.  Calls on the Commission and Member States to introduce a child poverty reduction target into the EU Roma inclusion process, to mainstream children’s rights in social inclusion measures, to monitor progress from the perspective of child poverty, and to identify and develop priority actions in the field;

34.  Underlines that preventing marginalisation must begin in infancy; considers it essential to adopt an approach which targets different generations of women in order to put an end to the intergenerational transmission of poverty;

35.  Calls on Member States to include in their NRIS tailored programmes the active inclusion of Roma women in the labour market by guaranteeing access to high quality education programmes for Roma women and girls and by making life-long learning available so that marketable skills can be acquired; calls on Member States to include capacity building and the empowerment of Roma women as a horizontal objective in all priority areas of the NRIS and to promote political participation policy by supporting the active participation of Roma women at local, national, and European level;

36.  Calls on Member States to establish positive action measures to facilitate access to jobs in public administration for Roma women and men;

37.  Calls on Member States to develop specific measures targeting large families (with four or more children) and single parent households that facilitate entry to the labour market by considering tailored welfare arrangements, extending childcare facilities and ensuring that Roma children are integrated into local schools and childcare facilities and have full and equal access to compulsory education, thereby counteracting social exclusion and ghettoisation;

38.  Calls on Member States to ensure equal access to quality and affordable childcare and early childhood education, childhood development services and parent partnership education for Roma children, to reintroduce the Barcelona targets for childcare and to develop accessible, affordable and high quality care services for the whole life cycle;

39.  Calls on Member States to take all necessary measures to prevent the dismissal of employees during pregnancy or motherhood, and to consider recognising the raising of children as a period counting towards pension entitlements;

40.  Calls on Member States to examine the obstacles to self-employment faced by Roma women, to enable accessible, fast and inexpensive registration by Roma women entrepreneurs and to develop micro-loan schemes targeting small business start-ups and entrepreneurs with simple, entrepreneur-friendly administrative procedures, including technical assistance and back-up measures and special licences for recognising a range of seasonal and temporary jobs as ‘paid work’ which contributes to social security payments; further calls on Member States and local authorities to mobilise the European microfinance facility for employment and social inclusion;

41.  Calls on Member States to develop targeted and integration-oriented measures in the field of unemployment support, (retraining, job creation and placement with wage support, social security support, tax allowances, etc.) instead of the current, almost exclusive focus on public work programmes;

42.  Calls for support and promotion of the integration of the Roma population into the labour market; observes that, in order to differentiate labour administration services and measures and to develop guidance processes, support staff and case managers with a Roma background are needed;

43.  Calls on the Commission and the Member States to create a specific education mentoring and support system through community-based education and social services from early childhood to university for Roma youth, paying particular attention to gender issues;

44.  Calls on the Member States to make full use of the opportunities offered by the Structural Funds, in particular the European Social Fund (ESF), to improve both the education and the employment prospects for the Roma to give them a real chance of social inclusion and escape persistently high rates of poverty; urges the Member States to monitor progress on a regular basis, in particular with respect to the education and training of young Roma, especially women;

45.  Invites Member States to combat stereotypes, in order to prevent the anathematisation of this ethnic group which discourages employers from employing Roma people and which leads to discrimination within public administration and schools and has a negative impact on relations with the authorities and job seeking;

46.  Reiterates the fact that Roma education gaps have an important gender dimension, since the literacy rate of Roma women averages 68 %, compared to 81 % for Roma men, and the primary school enrolment rate among Roma girls is just 64 %, a gap which is also seen in enrolment rates for vocational qualifications; observes, however, that there are major differences between Member States in these statistics;

47.  Calls on the Member States to develop specific programmes to ensure that Roma girls and young women stay in primary, secondary, and higher education, and also to put in place special measures for teenage mothers and early school leaver girls, to support uninterrupted education in particular, subsidising their entry onto the labour market, and providing work-based training; further calls on Member States and the Commission to take these measures into account when coordinating and evaluating the NRIS;

48.  Calls on the Member States to develop anti-discrimination strategies in order to prevent and condemn racist behaviour in public services and within the labour market in particular, ensuring that Roma women and men's rights in the labour market are firmly upheld;

49.  Calls on the Commission and on the Member States to invest resources into attracting ‘non-traditional learners’ to continue their education and to support NGOs and programmes whose goal is to boost the inclusion of non‑traditional learners in education and adult learning programmes;

50.  Calls on Member States to promote networks of Roma students, to encourage solidarity between them, to increase the visibility of successful cases and to overcome the isolation of Roma students;

51.  Calls on Member States to encourage the participation of Roma families in schools, to assess the schools in which Roma children and young people study, and to make all necessary changes to ensure the educational integration and achievement of all; points out that specific measures should target Roma girls, based on successful cases which have been validated by the academic community;

52.  Requests the Commission and Member States to allocate funds for building schools, kindergartens and nurseries with more places so that the Roma children can participate in classes with other, non‑Roma, children without being discriminated against and left outside the education system or rejected by teachers on account of their ethnic origin;

53.  Calls on the Commission and Member States to introduce systematic training programmes on gender sensitivity and cultural specificities for social services and healthcare providers;

54.  Emphasises that the education of Roma girls helps to improve the lives of Roma people in many ways as it is, among other things, a crucial condition for increasing the employability of Roma women, facilitating their access to the labour market and providing some income security, as well as being essential to overcome poverty and social exclusion; observes, furthermore, that increasing teachers’ knowledge of Roma culture helps to reduce exclusion; calls, therefore, on the Member States to combat segregation, to ensure more inclusive and accessible education and culturally sensitive teaching methods involving school assistants with a Roma background and parents, while viewing the improvement of professional skills to match the demands of the labour market as a priority;

55.  Calls on the Commission and Member States to identify Roma women as an explicit target group of their health initiatives, especially with respect to diseases that are strongly linked to the female hormonal system and/or poverty, such as osteoporosis, musculoskeletal problems and central nervous system illnesses; urges, furthermore, to make breast and cervical cancer screening and prevention – including vaccines against human papillomaviruses – fully accessible and to aim at initiating healthcare for pregnant women already in their first trimester of pregnancy;

56.  Calls on Member States to ensure access to health, notably through the participation of Roma women’s NGOs in the design, implementation, and evaluation of healthcare programmes and to ensure that Roma women and girls can make their own choices about their sexuality, health, and maternity by promoting family planning, access to the full range of sexual and reproductive health care services and sexual education, and protecting children and adolescents from sexual abuse and early marriages, preventing infant and maternal mortality and the phenomenon of forced sterilisation;

57.  Calls on Member States to facilitate and promote the gender balanced participation of Roma communities in the design, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of disease prevention, treatment, care and support programming, as well as in reducing stigmatisation and discrimination in the healthcare system;

58.  Calls on Member States and local and regional authorities to develop and implement policies to guarantee that all Roma women, even those from the most excluded communities, have access to primary, emergency and preventive healthcare services and to organise training activities for healthcare workers in an effort to eliminate prejudice against Roma;

59.  Calls on Member States to investigate, ban and prosecute direct and indirect discrimination against Roma women in exercising their fundamental rights and in accessing public services, and to prevent any further discrimination; stresses the importance of conducting awareness‑raising campaigns to combat discrimination and eliminate racist stereotypes of Roma, and Roma women in particular;

60.  Calls on the Commission and the Member States to include Roma and particularly Roma women as a specific target group in the operational programmes and the rural areas development programmes for the next programming period;

61.  Calls on the Commission to publish an evaluation report on the implementation of Council Directive 2000/43/EC in each Member State; likewise calls on the Commission to draw up specific recommendations for each Member State in order to include also the gender dimension within the directive;

62.  Calls upon the Council to reach an agreement on the Equal Treatment Directive on implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons, irrespective of religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation, so as to ensure that all the grounds of discrimination and multiple discrimination are made illegal in all spheres of life; likewise calls on all EU institutions to ensure that intersectional discrimination is included in this directive;

63.  Calls on Member States to address all forms of violence against women, such as domestic violence, sexual exploitation and human trafficking, with special regard to Roma women, and to support victims by including specific objectives to tackle the trafficking of Roma women in the NRIS, ensuring proper resources for related public services and providing assistance also through mainstream services, such as health, employment and education; furthermore urges the Commission to support governmental and civil society initiatives to address these problems, while guaranteeing the fundamental rights of victims;

64.  Calls on Member States to work with Roma women to set up empowerment strategies that recognise their intersectional identity and promote activities that counteract gender stereotypes, targeting women, men, girls and boys;

65.  Points out that arranged marriage, child marriage and forced marriage are still prevalent as ‘traditional practices’, underlines that these practices are human rights violations which not only have a significant impact on the health of Roma girls, increasing the risk of complications during pregnancy and delivery, but which also expose girls to sexual abuse and exploitation, as well as precluding educational and employment opportunities;

66.  Calls on Member States to ratify and implement the Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings and to fully transpose the provisions of Directive 2011/36/EU on preventing and combating trafficking in human beings and protecting its victims(7), in particular by strengthening identification, protection and assistance to victims, with special emphasis on children;

67.  Requests European solutions from the Member States and the Commission for Roma people’s problems, taking into consideration their right of free movement as European citizens, and the need for collaboration between Member States to resolve the issues faced by this ethnic group;

68.  Calls on the Commission and Member States to encourage the exchange of information and best practices on the integration of Roma women in all areas of society;

69.  Recommends that the Member States take the necessary steps to stop the practice of young Roma women being given away in arranged marriages, which constitute a moral affront to their dignity;

70.  Calls on Member States to urgently address the needs of older Roma women as they are one of the most vulnerable groups and lack adequate income and require access to healthcare and long-term care as they age;

71.  Urges the Commission to launch a comprehensive strategy to combat violence against women as requested by Parliament in several resolutions; calls upon the Commission to deliver legal instruments, including a European directive to combat gender-based violence;

72.  Calls for the Roma language and culture to be developed and promoted, for administrative structures concerned with Roma affairs to be developed, for Roma policy and its implementation to be reinforced, and for participation in international cooperation on Roma issues to be increased;

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

(1) OJ L 180, 19.7.2000, p. 22
(2) OJ L 303, 2.12.2000, p.16.
(3) OJ C 298 E, 8.12.2006, p. 283.
(4) OJ C 199 E, 7.7.2012, p. 112.
(5) COM(2012)0226.
(6) COM(2013)0460.
(7) OJ L 101, 15.4.2011, p.1.


Development of 'state building' in South Sudan
PDF 344kWORD 97k
European Parliament resolution of 10 December 2013 on the efforts of the international community in the area of development and of ‘state building’ in South Sudan (2013/2090(INI))
P7_TA(2013)0546A7-0380/2013

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to its resolution of 13 June 2012 on the situation in Sudan and South Sudan(1),

–  having regard to its resolution of 5 July 2011 on the future of EU budget support to developing countries(2),

–  having regard to its resolution of 25 October 2011 on the 4th High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness(3),

–  having regard to its resolution of 18 December 2008 on development perspectives for peace-building and nation building in post-conflict situations(4),

–  having regard to the fact-finding mission of its Committee on Development to South Sudan in July 2011,

–  having regard to the final report of the European Union Election Observation Mission on the Southern Sudan Referendum 9-15 January 2011(5),

–  having regard to the Partnership Agreement between the Members of the African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States (ACP), and the European Union and its Member States, signed in Cotonou on 23 June 2000(6), first amended in Luxembourg on 25 June 2005(7) and again amended in Ouagadougou on 22 June 2010(8),

–  having regard to the declaration by the Co-Presidents of the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly on the situation in Sudan and South Sudan, issued in Horsens (Denmark) in May 2012(9),

–  having regard to the declaration by the EU and its Member States on the Republic of South Sudan’s independence of 9 July 2011(10),

–  having regard to the Council conclusions of 22 July 2013 on Sudan and South Sudan(11),

–  having regard to the statement of 5 July 2012 by Commissioner Georgieva on Sudan and South Sudan(12),

–  having regard to the Directorate-General for Humanitarian Aid’s humanitarian implementation plan (HIP) for Sudan and South Sudan for 2013 and the modification thereof(13),

–  having regard to the statements by the Spokesperson for High Representative Catherine Ashton of 18 June 2013 on the deadly attack on a United Nations Interim Security Force for Abyei (UNISFA) peacekeeper in Southern Kordofan(14); of 1 May 2013 on the conflict in Sudan’s Southern Kordofan and Blue Nile states(15); and of 8 January 2013 on the recent closure of civil society organisations in Sudan(16),

–  having regard to the statement issued locally by the EU Delegation on 25 July 2013, following the dismissal by the President of the entire Government of the Republic of South Sudan(17),

–  having regard to the Dili Declaration: A new vision for peace-building and state‑building of 10 April 2010(18),

–  having regard to the Deal for Engagement in Fragile States presented at the Fourth High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness in Busan in December 2011(19),

–  having regard to the OECD’s 2011 Report on International Engagement in Fragile States - Republic of South Sudan(20),

–  having regard to the World Development Report 2011: Conflict, Security, and Development(21),

–  having regard to the Report of the African Union High-Level Implementation Panel on Sudan and South Sudan (AUHP) published on 31 July 2013(22),

–  having regard to the statement of 8 March 2013 by the Spokesperson for the UN Secretary-General on the establishment of the Safe Demilitarized Border Zone between Sudan and South Sudan and the activation of the Joint Border Verification and Monitoring Mechanism(23),

–  having regard to the resolution adopted by the UN Human Rights Council on technical assistance and capacity-building for South Sudan in the field of human rights’ on 27 June 2013 (A/HRC/21/L.7/Rev.1),

–  having regard to the Framework Agreement on the Political and Security Arrangements in the Blue Nile and Kordofan States signed on 28 June 2011(24),

–  having regard to the conclusions of reports of the High Commissioner for Human Rights presented to the Human Rights Council at its 21st and 23rd sessions(25),

–  having regard to the agreements concluded in Addis Ababa between the Republic of the Sudan and the Republic of South Sudan on 27 September 2012(26),

–  having regard to Amnesty International’s 2013 report on the human rights situation in South Sudan(27),

–  having regard to the Human Rights Watch report ‘This old man can feed us, you will marry him’(28),

–  having regard to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948,

–  having regard to Rule 48 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Development and the opinions of the Committee on Foreign Affairs and the Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality (A7-0380/2013),

A.  whereas UN Security Council Resolution 1996 (2011) welcomed the establishment of the Republic of South Sudan on 9 July 2011 and whereas the United Nations General Assembly voted on 14 July 2011 to admit South Sudan as a member state (A/RES/65/308);

B.   whereas the belt of insecurity, under-development and poor governance across the Sahel to the Horn of Africa can only be addressed through a comprehensive approach;

C.  whereas the newly created South Sudan is also one of the poorest countries in the world, with 50 % of the population living below the poverty line; whereas, having emerged from a war and being situated in an unstable region, it is in danger of failing if the international community and local actors fail to cooperate in developing a joint strategy to turn it into a democratic and inclusive state;

D.  whereas certain measures have been taken in the context of the Security Sector Reform (SSR), such as the establishment of the South Sudanese National Police Service (SSNPS), the National Security and Disarmament Council (NSDC) and the Demobilisation and Reintegration Council (DRC);

E.  whereas the prosperity and the viability of the new state of South Sudan depends to a large extent on constructive and peaceful relations with all neighbouring countries, in particular the Republic of the Sudan, and on the capability of these two countries to resolve their differences and to agree on and implement viable solutions, in particular regarding border conflicts, oil revenue, the final status of Abyei, national debt and citizenship;

F.  whereas state-building and overcoming fragility require a long-term perspective and solid, predictable and stable engagement by the international community;

G.  whereas, while the new country faces a great number of serious challenges, South Sudan has made considerable progress in relation to the key development indicators since the Comprehensive Peace Agreement of 2005 was enacted, including a six-fold increase in primary school enrolment, a 25 % decrease in infant mortality and the establishment of key state institutions at federal and state level;

H.  whereas children are the primary victims of the insecurity and conflict affecting South Sudan; whereas sexual violence is being perpetrated against children and women, and children are being recruited by armed groups;

I.  whereas the scope of democratic reconstruction is broadened when more women are involved in conflict resolution processes and political decision‑making;

J.  whereas South Sudan is highly reliant on oil production, which accounts for approximately 88% of national revenue, and is currently entirely dependent on the Republic of Sudan for its export; whereas this overreliance puts the country's economy at risk, but is also used to exert pressure on the new country, and is causing further tensions and even conflict, particularly with Sudan and between ethnic groups, as has been the case over the past two years; whereas South Sudan has concluded agreements with neighbouring Kenya, Ethiopia and Djibouti to explore the possibility of two new pipelines linking its oil fields to the Gulf of Aden and the Indian Ocean;

K.  whereas the suspension of oil production by the South Sudanese Government for over a year and the closure of the oil pipes in Sudan have deprived the country of one of its principal sources of income and plunged it into a major financial crisis leading to continued harsher austerity;

L.  whereas the 2013 Resource Governance Index, while acknowledging an ‘ambitious legal framework designed to promote transparent governance of the oil sector’, ranks South Sudan 50th out of 58 countries owing to its authorities having failed to release information about the sector and to establish proper monitoring and auditing mechanisms;

M.  whereas the international community has given important political and material support to South Sudan’s independence and viability, as well as its economic and social development and whereas the EU has played a very positive role in this connection; whereas the EU and its Member States pledged, on the occasion of South Sudan’s independence, to develop a close and long-term partnership with the Republic of South Sudan and its people;

N.  whereas on 23 May 2011, the Council approved a financial package of EUR 200 million for South Sudan to provide the funding for the EU’s contribution to the Joint Country Strategy Paper (Response Strategy) for South Sudan 2011-2013;

O.  whereas the international community and international humanitarian organisations have been very responsive to the need to relieve the suffering of people in the region, even though they are barred from certain areas by rebel groups and by the Sudanese Government, and whereas the EU has provided and continues to provide substantial levels of humanitarian aid, including EUR 110 million in 2012 alone;

P.  whereas the prospects for longer-term development and state-building in South Sudan are inextricably linked with regional interdependence in the Horn of Africa, not least in terms of addressing security concerns with neighbouring Sudan (including in the Darfur, Kurdofan and Blue Nile regions) and investing in economic integration with other regional partners;

Q.  whereas South Sudan is one of the very first countries in which joint programming between the European External Action Service (EEAS) and the Commission and EU Member States, aligned with the South Sudan Development Plan, has been put into practice in the form of a Single EU Country Strategy Paper, agreed on in December 2011, comprising a total of EUR 830 million in development aid;

R.  whereas South Sudan has not yet acceded to the Cotonou Agreement, with the Government of South Sudan voicing concerns about potential implications for its relations with the Republic of the Sudan; whereas accession to the Cotonou Agreement would not oblige South Sudan to accede immediately to the Rome Statute; whereas this reluctance to accede to the Cotonou Agreement is leading to problems in programming EU aid from 2014 onwards under the 11th European Development Fund, which could potentially result in South Sudan losing out, not only in terms of national allocations, but also with a view to regional funds and substantial European Investment Bank (EIB) resources which would enhance its infrastructure and regional economic integration; whereas by ratifying the Cotonou Agreement, South Sudan could also increase its capacity to attract European private sector investments; whereas the additional financial facilities to which South Sudan could have access following accession to the Cotonou Agreement could equally help with the implementation of the Addis Ababa Agreement;

S.  whereas the Council appointed Ms Rosalind Marsden as the European Union Special Representative (EUSR) for Sudan in August 2010 and subsequently enlarged and extended her mandate, but in June 2013 only agreed to a four-month extension until 31 October 2013 in order to integrate it into the mandate of the EUSR for the Horn of Africa, despite her outstanding work and her important role in leveraging the EU’s various tools and influence on the developments in the region; whereas without a designated EU Special Representative for Sudan/South Sudan, the EU will be side-lined in international negotiations and efforts;

T.  whereas the European Union has provided support for the African Union High-Level Panel, which includes the former South African President Thabo Mbeki as chair, and for the UN missions, namely the United Nations Mission in Sudan (UNMIS), the United Nations Mission in the Republic of South Sudan (UNMISS), the United Nations-African Union Mission in Darfur (UNAMID) and the United Nations Interim Security Force for Abyei (UNISFA);

U.  whereas a ‘New Deal for Engagement in Fragile States’ was formulated by the G7+ group of states (including South Sudan) and the International Dialogue on Peace Building and State Building (IDPS) and then endorsed by the EU, along with 36 countries, at the Fourth High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness in Busan in December 2011;

V.  whereas an Economic Partners Forum was held in Washington in April 2013 at which a ‘new deal compact’ was announced, setting out framework provisions regarding further international development aid commitments for South Sudan;

W.  whereas external efforts made with regard to state-building and development can only be successful if the leadership of South Sudan is committed to and will be capable of developing accountable, responsive, and inclusive governance, and overcomes short-term or clientelistic interests; whereas South Sudan is not yet included in most governance indicators and there is still very little quantitative data available on the extent of corruption in the country; whereas the international community, both private and public, does not tolerate corruption and therefore needs to ensure that the provision of aid or investment does not lead to or encourage harmful practices;

X.  whereas a social security net is lacking and access to services such as health care, electricity and water remains extremely limited; whereas, according to some estimates, only one third of the population has access to clean water and whereas water access issues have exacerbated communal conflicts;

Y.  whereas South Sudanese women and girls face the highest maternal mortality rate in the world and one in seven women in South Sudan will die during or just after childbirth(29); whereas the main causes of maternal mortality are infection and/or haemorrhaging, and South Sudan faces a serious lack of basic medical equipment and qualified nurses and midwives;

Z.  whereas it is estimated that 48 % of girls aged between 15-19 years are forced into marriage in South Sudan and whereas 12-year-old girls have reportedly been forced into marriage, thereby directly affecting the enrolment of girls at school, with girls representing only 39 % of pupils at primary school and 30 % at secondary school;

AA.  whereas the belief that females are the property of their father or husband is entrenched in the dowry system that exists in South Sudan;

AB.  whereas domestic violence is considered an entrenched social norm throughout South Sudan and whereas 82 % of women and 81 % of men believe that a woman should tolerate domestic violence and keep the problem within the family(30);

AC.  whereas the illiteracy rate is estimated at over 80 % (the highest rate of female illiteracy in the world), with girls accounting for only 25 % of school pupils, representing the lowest rate of female access to education in the world; whereas there is a shortage of teachers;

AD.  whereas there is a shortage of teachers and a serious need for people with vocational qualifications, as well as a need for education and training colleges to produce a skilled workforce;

AE.  whereas the vast expanse of arable land in South Sudan means that agriculture not only has great potential in terms of lucrative commercial and local job creation prospects in the country, but it could also help alleviate food shortages in South Sudan itself and, in the longer term, meet the needs of neighbouring countries;

AF.  whereas women are key to reducing food and nutrition insecurity, and can help boost agricultural productivity;

AG.  whereas South Sudan has practically no permanent road, rail or inland waterway transport infrastructures; whereas it is necessary to develop these infrastructures to boost the country’s economic growth, as well as trade, market access and job creation;

AH.  whereas the number of landmines and undetonated ordnance still buried in South Sudan since the civil war is estimated to be in the millions;

AI.  whereas internal security remains one of the critical challenges for South Sudan, with several low intensity conflicts giving rise to a serious humanitarian situation; whereas abuses by South-Sudanese security forces, including extra-judicial killings, rape and torture during civilian disarmament campaigns, have been reported repeatedly; whereas the post-2005 efforts in the field of demobilisation, disarmament, and reintegration have stalled and whereas an acceptable retirement scheme for veterans is lacking;

AJ.  whereas the population faces major risks in terms of food insecurity, affecting 4.1 million South Sudanese in 2013; whereas access to health services is very limited, there is a shortage of medical personnel and supplies, and there is evident humanitarian need among the people displaced by conflict; whereas the rate of mortality of under-fives is very high and the maternal mortality rate is the highest in the world;

AK.  whereas in 2013 South Sudan dropped 12 places in the Reporters Without Borders World Press Freedom Index to 124th out of 180 countries ranked;

AL.  whereas viable long-term stability in the Horn of Africa can only be built on strong institutions, a proper role and place for civil society, the rule of law and respect for human rights, in particular freedom of expression, as well as strong economic prospects for society in general; whereas the separation of Sudan and South Sudan has reportedly led to religious conflict; whereas a number of refugees have fled from Sudan to the largely Christian South Sudan; whereas the estimated number of refugees moving from Sudan to South Sudan in June 2013 was 263 000(31);

AM.  whereas journalists have frequently been threatened, arrested and detained without charge; whereas security forces have been reported to harass and illegally detain journalists; whereas the South Sudanese authorities have failed to carry out prompt, effective and impartial investigations into attacks on journalists, or cases such as the killing of the government critic and journalist Isaiah Abraham;

AN.  whereas weaknesses in the justice system give rise to serious human rights violations; whereas there is a clear need for specialised training in the field of human rights for the legal profession; whereas in order to address impunity, it is necessary to increase knowledge of core human rights instruments, which will contribute to their application; whereas there is an almost total lack of legal aid in the criminal justice system;

AO.  whereas South Sudan’s official language is English but it is not generally spoken, and most of the South Sudanese population is illiterate; whereas English is the predominant language in the public services and the legal system, in private-sector companies and in the country’s major media outlets; whereas South Sudan’s various ethnic groups speak, in total, more than 60 languages and dialects; whereas language is a key factor in national cohesion and therefore an appropriate language policy is important;

AP.  whereas South Sudan will continue to uphold capital punishment unless amendments in this connection are introduced into the country’s constitution;

AQ.  whereas the high prevalence of child marriage, with nearly half of all girls in South Sudan between the ages of 15 and 19 being married, creates an environment in which there is increased vulnerability to physical, sexual, psychological, and economic abuse;

AR.  whereas equitable participation of women in the public sphere is a constitutional right supported by a mandated quota of 25 %; whereas despite the commitment of the Government of South Sudan to increase the participation of women in the public sector, progress has been limited on this point; whereas the effective engagement of the women of South Sudan in peace making, governance and economic development can help consolidate peace and security for the country;

1.  Welcomes the most recent signs of eased tensions between the governments of South Sudan and the Republic of the Sudan, demonstrated during the visit of the South Sudanese President to the Republic of the Sudan in early September 2013, and the statements of good will on both sides on this occasion; underlines that the economic and social development of both countries depends to a large extent on peaceful and collaborative relations between the two countries;

2.  Calls on the governments of both countries and the international community to continue and intensify efforts to resolve the outstanding issues left unresolved following the expiration of the 2005 Comprehensive Peace Agreement and South Sudan’s independence in July 2011, which are still obstacles to good neighbourly relations, and to abstain entirely from the use of threats and military force and the support of irregular armed forces in the region;

3.  Urges the South Sudanese authorities to comply with UN Security Council Resolution 2109, to uphold the rule of law, to honour their responsibility to protect civilians and to respect the fundamental rights of their citizens; calls likewise on the South Sudanese authorities to step up their efforts to tackle the widespread and violent theft of cattle which traditionally takes place in rural parts of the country;

4.  Regrets that the recommendation made by the African Union to the governments in Khartoum and Juba that a referendum on the disputed region of Abyei be held in October 2013 has not been followed up by any effective action; calls on the South Sudanese authorities to ensure that Misseriya nomads are able to participate in the referendum, as Khartoum is otherwise opposed to its holding; welcomes the statement by the authorities in South Sudan pointing out that the Misseriya have always had free access to water and pastureland in Abyei and that they will continue to enjoy this right in the future;

5.  Proposes that the governments of Sudan and South Sudan consider, as a last resort, referring the outstanding problems with regard to the border between the two countries to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) so that they may be resolved legally and peacefully;

6.  Urges the Republic of the Sudan and the Republic of South Sudan to respect fully the Addis Ababa Agreements of September 2012;

7.  Reiterates its support for the European Union’s regional engagement under the EU Strategic Framework for the Horn of Africa, as well as under the comprehensive approach to Sudan and South Sudan; notes further the overlapping geography of the Sahel region and its interlinked political, economic and social challenges; calls for the European Union, therefore, to coordinate its strategy across the wider region more effectively, specifically by linking the aims and scope of the EU Strategic Framework for the Horn of Africa with those of the EU Strategy for Security and Development in the Sahel; encourages a closely linked consideration of human rights within both; calls further for the European Union to engage with the European Union Special Representatives for the Sahel and Human Rights, in addition to the EUSR for the Horn of Africa, when addressing the outstanding challenges faced by this region, and to commit itself to a full dialogue with regional partners for the purpose of improving cooperation and development;

8.  Recognises and fully supports the good offices of the EU Special Representative for Sudan and South Sudan and other EU partners; calls on all EU institutions and Member States to develop and/or maintain a constructive dialogue with both countries and also to contribute to a genuine process of comprehensive national dialogue for the future of the people of Sudan and South Sudan;

9.  Urges the authorities of Sudan and South Sudan to implement fully the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA), which calls on the two states to tackle issues concerning power sharing, citizenship, oil revenues and debt sharing; stresses that despite important differences between the governments of Khartoum and Juba, especially on the controversial Abyei referendum that should have taken place in October 2013, there are positive signs of cooperation between the two governments, such as the initiative to allow cross-border movements as a preparatory step to establishing trade agreements between the two countries; praises the progress made by the African Union in bringing together the Presidents of Sudan and South Sudan to encourage the implementation of the cooperation agreements; calls on Sudan and South Sudan to resume negotiations on the supply of oil to the North;

10.  Calls on South Sudan and Sudan to make best use of the wealth and potential which the oil resources in the region represent for both countries and to reach an agreement on the unsolved transitional economic arrangements between the two countries;

11.  Underlines the importance of the Cooperation Agreement, including the sectoral agreements, between Sudan and South Sudan signed in Addis Ababa on 27 September 2012; stresses, however, its concern over the unilateral announcement by the Sudanese Government with regard to the shutting down of oil exports from South Sudan and the freezing of all sectoral agreements as a measure that will damage both countries’ economies and escalate regional tensions; calls for both governments to work with the African Union High-Level Implementation Panel to return to the Cooperation Agreement, to end support for armed rebel groups, to adhere fully to the agreement on the Safe Demilitarised Border Zone monitored by the expanded UN Interim Security Force for Abyei, and to prepare for a referendum on the future status of Abyei;

12.  Calls on all groups and parties within South Sudan to develop a joint vision for their country and its peaceful, prosperous and equitable development; proposes that the Government of South Sudan consider launching an inclusive national debate with a view to ending interethnic conflict and envisaging peaceful relations;

13.  Stresses the importance of demonstrating to the people of South Sudan the value and effectiveness of their new democratic state, including the establishment of a stable government which does not operate by arbitrary presidential decrees and ensures the separation of executive, legislative and judicial powers, as well as respecting human rights and the freedom of the media, preventing and tackling corruption and delivering public services and infrastructure, including in rural areas outside Juba; deplores the impact of corruption on this new state and calls for the international donor community, including the European Union, to assess carefully South Sudan’s capacity to tackle this matter; calls in addition for South Sudan to enhance efforts to tackle corruption, including initiatives by President Kiir against senior officials, whilst encouraging the government to pursue the implementation of its development plan, including by diversifying its economy away from dependence on oil exports;

14.  Urges South Sudan to ratify the Cotonou Agreement between the EU and ACP states, in order to permit the long-term commitment of the EU to South Sudan’s development and underlines that South Sudan’s accession to the Agreement should in no way affect reconciliation and constructive relations with the Republic of the Sudan which, in fact, has a long-term interest in the prosperous development of all of its neighbours;

15.  Calls on South Sudan to ratify without delay the international agreements protecting human rights;

16.  Calls on key international partners, especially EU Members States, the Commission and the EEAS, to maintain their commitment to development and state-building and to human security for all South-Sudanese people; underlines the need to link peace-building, including the issue of dealing with the past, to state-building efforts in order to ensure sustainable state-building; supports the engagement of the EU as a key partner in the context of the New Deal through a State-Building Compact;

17.  Calls on key international partners, especially EU Members States, the Commission and the EEAS, to maintain their commitment to development and state-building and to human security for all South-Sudanese people; supports the engagement of the EU as a key partner in the context of the New Deal through a State-Building Compact;

18.  Underlines the importance of the European Union, working with multilateral partners and donors, in supporting South Sudan on its democratic journey; welcomes, in this connection, the European Union’s contribution (USD 4,9 million) to the International Organisation for Migration, which will facilitate dialogue and communication among the different tribes and clans on how to share scarce resources (water, pastureland) in a context of growing inter‑community violence; welcomes the work of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (Unesco) in preserving the historical archives as an important tool for South Sudan in its nation‑building process; urges the South Sudanese Government, given the growing sensitivity of the international community regarding chemical weapons, to sign and ratify as soon as possible the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on their Destruction, as well as other arms control and disarmament treaties, including those designed to tackle the illicit and uncontrolled flow of small arms and light weapons;

19.  Recalls that all forms of budgetary support to developing countries require proper risk management tools, should be complimentary to other aid modalities, and need to be backed-up by proper parliamentary scrutiny of the national budget in the recipient country, as well as by other forms of accountability and by the participation of citizens, and that these measures need to be ensured and supported both by the national government and the respective aid donors;

20.  Encourages the EEAS, the EU Special Representative for Sudan and South Sudan and the Commission to enhance awareness and visibility of the EU’s very positive contributions to a peaceful, democratic transition and to the economic and social development of South Sudan; is concerned that putting an end to the mandate of the EU Special Representative for Sudan and South Sudan, at a time when a number of commitments contained in the 2005 Comprehensive Peace Agreement and the September 2012 Addis Ababa Agreement still have not been fully met, could further decrease this visibility and reduce the leverage of the EU and its Member States; asks for the extension of the Special Representative’s mandate instead of the plan to add Sudan to the already overburdened mandate of the Special Representative for the Horn of Africa;

21.  Calls for the regular review of the EU’s Strategic Framework for the Horn of Africa and its comprehensive approach to Sudan and South Sudan in order to ensure that policy instruments and resources are tailored to supporting the peace process and democracy‑building, including preparations for the elections in 2015; notes that future mandates, including decisions to merge positions, of the EU Special Representatives in this region should be considered in the context of such a policy review and in response to political realities on the ground;

22.  Welcomes the fact that the EU has committed EUR 285 million in development aid to South Sudan since 2011, when South Sudan gained independence (excluding Member State aid), in addition to humanitarian aid;

23.  Calls on the state not to prevent NGOs or humanitarian organisations from reaching people in conflict zones; points out that impeding NGOs and humanitarian organisations in this way constitutes a breach of international humanitarian law;

24.  Supports the focus of EU aid for South Sudan on agriculture, democratic governance and the rule of law, education and health; notes that even though laws and regulations are in place, implementation is lagging behind; welcomes the Commission’s efforts to provide support for capacity-building of the South Sudanese legal system, in particular to provide technical assistance to the judiciary and the Supreme Court; welcomes EU support to the National Legislative Assembly of South Sudan;

25.  Urges the Commission, the Member States and the South Sudanese authorities to work with communities and women’s organisations to provide and promote access to education and sexual and reproductive rights and healthcare services for girls and women, including access to contraception and HIV/AIDS testing and treatment;

26.  Calls for projects funded by the EU to be monitored and assessed regularly, including as regards progress towards gender equality, and calls for Parliament to be informed of the results;

27.  Calls for the views of local communities, in particular women, to be taken into account so that clearer objectives can be set for projects and so that those objectives can be tailored to the situation on the ground as well as to developments;

28.  Calls on the international community, in particular the EU and its Member States in the context of their external action, and in cooperation with local partners and NGOs, to emphasise the importance of access for girls to primary education and of efforts to tackle adult illiteracy, which is depriving South Sudan of the precious human capital that it needs for its development and in order to strengthen it as a democratic State;

29.  Recommends the establishment, without delay, of an education system that will provide qualified people to build and maintain South Sudan’s infrastructure, including its roads, housing, water purification system, sewage treatment plants, electricity, IT and telephone networks, etc.;

30.  Welcomes EU support to the African Union High-Level Implementation Panel for Sudan and South Sudan (AUHIP) while, at the same time, calling for a review of the panel with a view to assessing its effectiveness; regrets that EU support has not always been fully visible;

31.  Underlines the need to support mechanisms which will allow for the proper and transparent distribution and management of oil revenues; calls on the South-Sudanese authorities and the National Legislative Assembly, as well as international partners and companies present in South Sudan to contribute to greater transparency in the generation and use of those revenues; welcomes the recent passing of the Petroleum Revenue Management Bill by the National Legislative Assembly; calls for the quick adoption into law by the President and quick implementation of all modalities of the Act;

32.  Stresses the need to make major sustainable investments in infrastructure, in the provision of basic services and in agricultural development in South Sudan; insists that agricultural development should have the primary aim of ensuring food security for the population and the diversification of the country’s economy, which may be endangered by concessions of fertile land given to private foreign companies for extracting and exporting large amounts of commodities; highlights, in this connection, the importance of land tenure, largely neglected in South Sudan, which has led to disputes over land representing one of the root causes of conflict in the country; calls on the EU to support efforts of land governance and the strengthening of tenure security in the country, while at the same time taking into account local informal arrangements of dispute resolution and recognition of customary tenure;

33.  Encourages the Government of South Sudan to foster economic diversification and reduce hydrocarbon dependence; encourages South Sudan to increase local food production, to promote export industries and to develop transport infrastructure with the aim of facilitating access to markets;

34.  Draws attention to the contribution which women could make to the development of agriculture and the rural economy; encourages South Sudan to take measures to promote the involvement of women in these economic activities;

35.  Underscores the importance of developing and improving infrastructure to give people throughout the country access to drinking water and improved water supplies; recommends that plans for investment in hydropower be improved;

36.  Stresses that ensuring human security for all South-Sudanese people requires a renewed effort by the Government of South Sudan and its international partners to follow through with the disarmament, demobilisation and reintegration (DDR) of armed groups and to undertake broader security sector reform (SSR) leading to a reduction in the size of the standing army, as well as its professionalisation, full respect for civilian control and the chain of command, as well as greater respect for human rights among the armed forces; Stresses the need to engage constructively and frequently with South Sudanese civil society and women’s associations to deal with the problem of insecurity and promote respect for human rights including women’s rights;

37.  Is deeply concerned that women and children of the armed conflicts in South Sudan represent the overwhelming majority of the internally displaced persons and refugees; calls for effective human rights monitoring, including of any sexual and gender-based violence or violations and abuses committed against children; calls on all warring parties to end the impunity of the perpetrators;

38.  Urges the South Sudanese Government to ensure gender equality and guarantee that women enjoy their rights and freedoms without being discriminated against on any grounds, such as sex, race, religious or cultural beliefs, or national or social origin;

39.  Calls on the South Sudanese authorities to introduce a family law setting out a minimum marriageable age and conditions for the custody of children, as well as a law tackling gender-based violence, particularly by criminalising harmful traditional practices such as female genital mutilation;

40.  Urges the South Sudanese Government to ratify the Convention to Eliminate all forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) and the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child;

41.  Calls upon the Government of South Sudan to continue to cooperate fully with the United Nations Mission in the Republic of South Sudan (UNMISS) and to assist the UN in fulfilling its mandate, in particular as regards the protection of civilians; urges UN member states to uphold their commitment to the UNMISS while realistically adapting, if necessary, its mandate, to take account of the evolving capacity of the South Sudanese authorities to provide human security over the coming years;

42.  Is surprised that the United Nations, in view of the contributions made by the EU to its budget, does not grant the Union special status during election missions, ensuring that its observers are protected and can do their job properly (i.e. affording them secure accommodation and access to health care);

43.  Underlines the importance of replacing the Transitional Constitution by a permanent constitution based on popular consultation and support; is concerned at the South Sudan Government's lack of political will; strongly reminds the government of its obligations under the presidential decree to conduct a constitutional review process, and calls on the government to do so before the 2015 elections; calls on the EU and its Member States to accompany and support a locally owned and driven constitution-making process, which must involve all groups of society, including women and those living in peripheral regions; calls on the EU delegation in Juba, with a view to the 2015 presidential elections, to ensure implementation of the recommendations in the report of the EU election observation mission in 2011;

44.  Welcomes the commitment made by the President of South Sudan to achieve the goal of having a female representation of at least 25 % in the cabinet and invites him to strengthen the participation of women in the ongoing constitutional process; recalls that women play a key role in conflict resolution, peace-building processes and in building a stable state; invites the South Sudanese authorities, in this connection, to ensure that women are fully included in the implementation of the peace process with Sudan; calls on the international community to continue supporting the participation of women at all levels of public life;

45.  Urges the South Sudanese Government to increase efforts to establish a roadmap, in order to sustain the process of transition until constitutional order and the rule of law have been fully re-established throughout the country, through the organisation of democratic, free, fair and transparent elections in 2015; calls on the EU and its international partners to increase their support for the upcoming electoral process;

46.  Notes that since the CPA in 2005, there have been efforts to intensify the fight against corruption, but South Sudan’s anti-corruption framework is still in the early stages of development; notes also that even where legal instruments do exist, a lack of capacity, resources and political will can hamper their implementation; encourages South Sudan to ratify the international conventions against corruption and calls on the South Sudanese authorities to develop and implement an integrated anti-corruption strategy; stresses that the international community and the EU should assist South Sudan’s efforts in this area, in particular by increasing support to capacity building;

47.  Urges the Government of South Sudan to enact any media laws to protect media freedom and safeguard the media in carrying out their work of reporting;

48.  Calls on South Sudan’s National Security Service (NSS) to end the harassment of human rights activists and journalists and the unlawful detention and censorship of journalists – which constitute breaches of South Sudan’s Constitution – thereby requiring the government to guarantee freedom of the press;

49.  Urges the authorities of South Sudan to carry out prompt, effective, and impartial investigations into all allegations of threats and attacks against human rights activists and journalists and to hold those responsible to account, in accordance with international standards; welcome recent steps taken by authorities to investigate the killing of civilians and alleged human rights abuses by the armed forces;

50.  Urges the Government of South Sudan to do everything in its power to put an end to extrajudicial executions and to identify and bring to justice the security officers accused of the killing of the journalist Isaiah Abraham;

51.  Urges the South Sudanese authorities to strengthen the fight against impunity by equipping the justice and law enforcement community with tools designed to prevent and curb violence against women, ensuring that the perpetrators are successfully convicted;

52.  Recommends that the Human Rights Council establish a meaningful follow‑up mechanism on the situation of human rights in South Sudan, such as an independent expert;

53.  Strongly opposes the death penalty in all circumstances and calls on South Sudan to take specific steps to move towards the abolition thereof;

54.  Underlines that women in South Sudan face multiple forms of discrimination as well as violations of their fundamental rights, including widespread early and forced marriage, the absence of family law, limited political participation by women’s at all levels of government, and sexual and domestic violence; calls on the South Sudanese Government to eliminate all kinds of discrimination against women, to fight illiteracy by improving access to education for women, thereby improving their role in society and in the building of the new state; calls on the South Sudanese Government to set out a national action plan to end child marriage by promoting, inter alia, access to education for children; urges the South Sudanese Government, in this connection, and considering that traditional practices play an important role in the society of South-Sudan, to end any discriminatory traditional practices carried out against women by engaging with NGOs, for example, in order to educate members of the judiciary with respect to the field of human rights;

55.  Welcomes the creation of the first College of Nursing and Midwifery at the Juba teaching hospital, but notes that more qualified nurses and midwives are needed to ensure a significant improvement in maternal and child health, and to open up roads and establish more health centres based on this model throughout the whole country;

56.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the governments and parliaments of the Member States, the governments of South Sudan and Sudan, the Human Rights Commissioner of South Sudan, the National Legislative Assembly of South Sudan, the National Assembly of Sudan, the African Union, and the Secretary General of the United Nations.

(1) OJ C 332 E, 15.11.2013, p. 49.
(2) OJ C 33 E, 5.2.2013, p. 38.
(3) OJ C 131 E, 8.5.2013, p. 80.
(4) OJ C 45 E, 23.2.2010, p. 74.
(5) http://eeas.europa.eu/eueom/pdf/missions/final-report-eueom-referendum-south-sudan-2011_en.pdf.
(6) OJ L 317, 15.12.2000, p. 3.
(7) OJ L 209, 11.8.2005, p. 27.
(8) OJ L 287, 4.11.2010, p. 3.
(9) http://www.europarl.europa.eu/intcoop/acp/2012_horsens/pdf/soudan_en.pdf
(10) http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_Data/docs/pressdata/EN/foraff/123591.pdf.
(11) http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/EN/foraff/138254.pdf.
(12) http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-12-524_en.htm.
(13) http://ec.europa.eu/echo/files/funding/decisions/2013/HIPs/Sudan-SouthSudan_en.pdf.
(14) http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_Data/docs/pressdata/EN/foraff/137507.pdf.
(15) http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/EN/foraff/136969.pdf.
(16) http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/EN/foraff/134590.pdf.
(17) http://eeas.europa.eu/statements/local/local_statement_south_sudan_24072013_en.pdf.
(18) http://timor-leste.gov.tl/wpcontent/uploads/2010/04/Dili_Declaration_FINAL_12.04.20101.pdf.
(19) http://www.oecd.org/dac/effectiveness/Final%20file.pdf, page 39.
(20) http://www.oecd.org/countries/southsudan/48697972.pdf.
(21) http://wdronline.worldbank.org/worldbank/a/c.html/world_development_report_2011/abstract/WB.978-0-8213-8439-8.abstract.
(22) http://appablog.wordpress.com/2013/07/31/report-of-the-african-union-high-level-implementation-panel-for-sudan-and-south-sudan/.
(23) http://www.un.org/sg/statements/index.asp?nid=6644.
(24) http://www.sudantribune.com/IMG/pdf/Two_Areas_Agreement.pdf.
(25) http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/HRBodies/HRCouncil/RegularSession/Session21/A-HRC-21-34_en.pdf.http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/HRBodies/HRCouncil/RegularSession/Session21/A.HRC.21.62_en.pdf.http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/HRBodies/HRCouncil/RegularSession/Session23/A-HRC-23-31_en.pdf.
(26) http://www.rssnegotiationteam.org/historic-september-27-peace-agreements.html.
(27) http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/south-sudan/report-2013.
(28) http://www.hrw.org/reports/2013/03/07/old-man-can-feed-us-you-will-marry-him-0.
(29) Humanitarian news and analysis, Report on ‘Women’s Security in South Sudan’ 2012.
(30) Conflict and Health, March 2013.
(31) UN Refugee Agency, ‘CAP for South Sudan, Mid-Year Review 2013’.


CARS 2020: towards a strong, competitive and sustainable European car industry
PDF 226kWORD 69k
European Parliament resolution of 10 December 2013 on CARS 2020: towards a strong, competitive and sustainable European car industry (2013/2062(INI))
P7_TA(2013)0547A7-0391/2013

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to Article 173 of Title XVII of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (ex Article 157 of the Treaty establishing the European Community), covering EU industrial policy and referring to, among other things, the competitiveness of the Union's industry,

–  having regard to the Commission communication entitled ‘CARS 2020: Action Plan for a competitive and sustainable automotive industry in Europe’ (COM(2012)0636),

–  having regard to the reports of the CARS 21 High Level Group on the competitiveness and sustainable growth of the automotive industry in the European Union (2012)(1) and on a competitive automotive regulatory system for the 21st century (2006)(2),

–  having regard to the Commission communication entitled ‘A Stronger European Industry for Growth and Economic Recovery’ (COM(2012)0582),

–  having regard to the conclusions on the situation of European industry and the specific situation of the automotive industry adopted by the Competitiveness Council at its meeting of 10 and 11 December 2012,

–  having regard to Rule 48 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy and the opinions of the Committee on International Trade, the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection and the Committee on Transport and Tourism (A7-0391/2013),

A.  whereas the automotive industry is a vital part of Europe’s manufacturing base and a key source of competitiveness, growth and jobs in the EU;

B.  whereas, despite the current economic and financial crisis of unprecedented proportions, Europe’s automotive industry has an important role to play in ensuring that certain skills and sectors of manufacturing are retained in Europe, and this requires coordinated action within the EU;

C.  whereas the current economic situation is not the sole cause of this crisis and whereas what is needed is a complete rethink of our approach to mobility in the 21st century, since mobility is a major factor in fostering economic growth;

D.  whereas the automotive industry is feeling the effects of a revolution in progress around the world, with demand in Europe falling or stagnating, whereas both demand and production are shifting to the emerging economies, whereas the energy sources used are changing gradually but noticeably, and whereas component parts and functions are being digitised, resulting in increasing levels of productivity, which in turn are bringing about major changes in the value chain;

E.  whereas Europe’s automotive industry is still at the forefront of research and innovation worldwide and therefore needs to restore competitiveness and sustainable production throughout the entire production and value chain;

F.  whereas one solution to the problem of excess production capacity is to convert capacity to other sectors of industry, such as public transport and renewable energy, and to invest in sustainable infrastructure;

Political governance

1.  Endorses the Commission’s new strategy of launching a new European industrial policy, in particular for the sustainable automotive industry, placed at the heart of Europe's economy;

2.  Expects the Commission to coordinate its own efforts more efficiently, in order to ensure that the CARS 2020 recommendations actually become operational and are monitored by the High Level Group in order not to repeat the failure of the first phase of the CARS 21 process (December 2005), when the conclusions reached were not followed by the necessary action; calls, accordingly, on the Commission to draw up a clear schedule of fast-track measures and, within its remit, to use its right of initiative, notably by drawing up guidelines, in order to coordinate and build on action by Member States and firms to ensure decent standards of living for EU citizens and to consolidate EU industries, focusing on economic and employment growth and market recovery;

3.  Calls on the Commission to develop cross-cutting roadmaps that cover development in the energy sector, the transport sector and the ICT sector;

4.  Believes that action by the Commission in this area is being hampered by various constraints and a lack of policy coordination mechanisms; calls on the Commission to submit a study showing the mismatch between what it wishes to achieve and the tools available to it, as the basis for a debate within the Council and Parliament;

5.  Believes that the Commission should take into consideration the entire automotive sector, in particular subcontractors, retailers and aftermarket firms, in all future policy-making processes involving the sector;

6.  Welcomes the industrial policy conclusions adopted by the Competitiveness Council at its meeting in December 2012; urges the Member States to pursue their stated aim of overhauling industrial policy in the automotive sector and firming up new arrangements for Europe-wide cooperation in that sector; points out that this closer cooperation on industrial policy for the automotive sector can take place either at Union level or on a voluntary basis among a number of countries;

7.  Calls on the Member States to carry out properly coordinated and structural reforms geared to enhancing competitiveness, such as support for research and innovation, competence building, staff retraining, lowering indirect costs, enhancing labour flexibility based on social dialogue, cutting red tape and shortening payment periods;

8.  Believes it essential, with a view to restoring faith in the EU, for the Union to improve the implementation of its action plan and the way the action plan is communicated to the general public, investors and firms;

Automotive industry and production in the EU

9.  Considers it essential for cohesive and dynamic research, manufacturing, production and value, and innovation chains to be maintained and further developed in the EU with a focus on the production of sustainable vehicles; takes the view that keeping Europe competitive in the future will depend on creating a virtuous circle that benefits innovation, employment, competitiveness, health, the environment and mobility;

10.  Points out that labour costs in the automotive industry account for between just 13 and 20 % of added value; points out, furthermore, that global competitiveness can only be guaranteed by means of innovation throughout the production chain and flexibility in production processes, and that this must accordingly be negotiated with the workers;

11.  Stresses the importance of maintaining and strengthening the production base in Europe so as to ensure decent living standards for its citizens and consolidate its industries with a view to achieving economic growth and recovery;

12.  Acknowledges the fact that the European market is in a state of decline and crisis, including in the automotive sector; considers it regrettable, however, that the Commission fails to analyse the fundamental causes of this decline such as the widely varying circumstances in the industry (firms, market segments and types, products, sectors) and the large number of structural changes (of a demographic, sociological, behavioural, economic and technical nature) that are taking place on the demand side; believes, therefore, that, alongside Europe-wide cross-cutting action, measures specifically tailored to individual circumstances need to be taken at both national and European level in order to stimulate demand;

13.  Considers that new behavioural patterns of mobility are powerful levers for boosting the competitiveness of the European automotive sector, such as public and multimodal transport networks, traffic management, smart cities, car-sharing and joint ownership schemes;

14.  Deplores the fact that the Commission fails to address the issue of over-capacity, despite the fact that it is a problem shared by the whole of the industry and one that has unavoidable short- and medium-term repercussions (chain, jobs, regional economy); calls therefore on the Commission to submit at the earliest opportunity:

   (a) a study on the scale of over-capacity in Europe and the best practice in addressing this problem, including outside the EU (United States);
   (b) an action plan setting out all the policy tools available in this area, including in particular those involving research and innovation;
   (c) proposals for more active and coordinated support for workers and companies in the automotive sector to promote the reorientation of skills and jobs towards other sectors that are growing;

15.  As regards restructuring:

   (a) welcomes the Commission’s intention to re-establish the task force to monitor major restructuring operations, as well as the publication of the Green Paper on effective restructuring practices (COM(2012)0007);
   (b) calls on firms and Member States to step up cooperation and efforts to anticipate industrial adjustments, in order to prevent negative externalities from undermining the cohesiveness of the industrial production process (jobs, production);
   (c) calls on the Commission and Member States to develop conversion plans in a coordinated fashion so as to support regions facing swingeing job losses in the automotive sector, and calls for integrated use to be made, in the process, of all European-level instruments (EIB, ESF and ERDF) and national instruments so as to assist the workers affected and redirect them towards alternative employment in related sectors, e.g. alternative energy, and for the available automotive technology to be optimised;
   (d) underscores also the central role and responsibility of firms and regional governments in conversion policy, in particular by improving worker training, but also by making available vacated sites for the socio-economic development and conversion of the regions concerned;

16.  Draws the attention of both Member States and firms to the fact that clustering (joint purchasing, cooperation arrangements, consortiums, mergers) provides a means of remaining competitive in the face of increasingly fierce competition from outside the EU;

17.  Calls on the Commission and the Member States to strengthen the specific measures to step up access to capital markets for SMEs and mid-cap companies, notably by setting up regional one-stop-shops; considers that SMEs and mid-cap companies, in particular subcontractors, distributors and retailers and aftermarket firms, are those which are being hit hardest by the crisis; points out, at the same time, that such companies are an asset because their size and responsiveness allow them to adjust to change, and that they have been the initiators of many technological advances; considers, therefore, that one avenue of development to be pursued is the diversification of SMEs’ and mid-cap companies’ commercial opportunities (through internationalisation and involvement in new projects);

18.  Reiterates the importance of complying with the principle of technological neutrality in the choice of standards in order to protect the investments of first movers, thereby encouraging innovation in the sector;

Human resources

19.  Believes the know-how built up by the workers in the automotive industry to be an asset for Europe; welcomes the setting-up of the European Automotive Skills Council in 2013, and trusts that it will swiftly identify effective policies in this area;

20.  Welcomes the Commission’s statement on shaping skills and developing competences as the basis for a durable competitive advantage;

21.  Believes the labour market to be out of step with the industry's requirements (strong demand for skilled workers) at present; considers it essential in this connection to adapt not just public training strategies (promoting science, technology, engineering and mathematics courses and vocational training), but also firms' training strategies (in particular by extending dual-training systems) in order to enable firms to attract and hold on to highly qualified workers;

22.  Calls on the Member States to make the legislative adjustments required for more open and constructive social dialogue and labour relations affecting the organisation of work (e.g. sectoral agreements, worker involvement); calls on the Member States to develop and follow best practices;

23.  Recommends that Member States and firms should improve the provision of further training for workers, in order to anticipate tomorrow’s needs and make it possible, in the event of job losses in a given sector, for the laid-off workers’ skills to be put to good use in growth sectors;

Innovation and technology

24.  Believes technological innovation to be the essential factor in automotive-sector competitiveness; calls for a technological-neutrality approach; reaffirms its determination to ensure that the Europe 2020 targets are met and that economical and sustainable means of transport and new production methods are developed;

25.  Stresses that integrated innovation projects covering the whole value chain are crucial for improved competitiveness;

26.  Takes the view that knowledge and innovation may form the basis for a durable competitive advantage for the European automotive industry when the pace at which innovative solutions are introduced precludes the possibility of their being imitated, and when the means used to protect innovation and to combat industrial espionage will ensure that it is possible to realise a return on investment without harming consumers; believes that the areas in which an innovative advantage will be realised on the European market centre upon environmental and safety considerations;

27.  Asserts that there are two effective strategies for competitiveness in the European automotive industry: a cost leadership strategy and a differentiation strategy; feels that applying a combination of the two strategies would create difficulties and be less effective, as it would require a broader front on innovative research;

28.  Notes that the European automotive industry has achieved numerous successes through the strategy of cost leadership, thanks to popular, low‑cost models that circulate on the European market (e.g. producers such as Škoda, Dacia and Nissan);

29.  Welcomes the Commission’s proposals regarding technological improvements, but points out that its projections for the creation of added value, commercial opportunities and jobs are subject to various conditions;

30.  Considers it essential to foster research and development focusing on low-carbon and sustainable technologies, in which Europe has a lead, in order to reduce Europe’s dependence on imported energy; points out that these include electric and hybrid vehicles, alternative fuels, mobile energy storage, and the roll-out of the necessary distribution networks and infrastructures, but regrets the fact that such technologies have not yet been brought onto the market; expects action to be taken with a view to:

   gearing the technologies as closely as possible to the expectations of EU and international markets and ensuring they will be accepted by car buyers, and
   taking into account all the environmental and social externalities linked to a vehicle’s life-cycle, to how it is manufactured and to the clean-up effort it necessitates;

31.  Takes the view that for the European automotive industry to be competitive, it has to become profitable by helping to develop industries that cooperate to supply cheap inputs from within Europe, such as: steel, castings, forgings, upholstery, tyres and electronic components;

32.  Believes that EU efforts should be based on a differentiation strategy relying on a number of priorities geared towards consolidating Europe’s technological advantage, including:

   (a) technological convergence, in particular as regards standards for the stages upstream of production and distribution;
   (b) the development of eco-innovations (vehicles that are lighter, more efficient, less polluting and more easily recyclable, key-enabling technologies, batteries and energy storage, driver aids, comfort, connected cars), safety (eCall) and accessibility (uses for drivers with a disability), setting European products apart from the others;
   (c) cooperation at EU and international level in areas that have been under-exploited to date, such as power-train technology;
   (d) strengthening Europe’s leadership in international standard setting, thus ensuring that we can maintain a technological lead on world markets, taking into account the importance of international harmonisation for accessing new markets;
   (e) mechanisms, such as the procedure for measuring fuel consumption, becoming an important aspect of competitiveness for the global automotive industry on the European market, ensuring that European manufacturers are protected from unfair competition;
   (f) infrastructure roll-out for electric cars and alternative fuels;

33.  Calls on the Member States and the Commission to foster the emergence of transnational clusters, competitive hubs and public-private collaborative networks focusing on the mobility of the future and generating a steady stream of innovations (prototypes);

34.  Points out that R&D requires substantial funding (scientific risk, long investment cycles) and deplores, in this connection, the fact that the target of channelling 3 % of GDP into R&D in the Union has yet to be met; considers that the cuts planned by the Member States to the budgets of the COSME and Horizon 2020 programmes will be damaging, in particular in the budget headings relating to transport;

35.  Notes that the automobile sector is a source of substantial private investment in research and innovation; points out, however, that as long as the recession continues to affect the European market, EU funding such as Horizon 2020 and COSME may stimulate private investment in the sector; stresses the need to continue to pursue an ambitious approach to the funding of the green car initiative and SME development, which are clear priorities; points out that regional and local authorities, depending on their powers, have various tools for supporting the automotive industry in an active way;

36.  Highlights the need for adequate financial resources to be provided under the Multiannual Financial Framework 2014–2020 for the restructuring of the sector and to upgrade and modernise its micro, small and medium-sized enterprises, to increase productivity and promote nationally-produced goods from the sector;

Regulation

37.  Stresses the need for the principle of ‘smart regulation’, as a coherent approach with respect to legislation having an impact on the car industry, to be implemented at the earliest opportunity; points out that, although this was one of the recommendations of the first ‘CARS 21’ group (2005), no action has been taken in this area to date; stresses the vital importance of smart regulation to encourage investment in the automobile sector;

38.  Takes the view that the Commission’s proposal to place a moratorium on all new legislation that could have an adverse impact on the economic situation in the industry is contributing to the achievement of long-term competitiveness and helping to provide adequate responses to environmental challenges;

39.  Stresses the importance of reasonable lead-times to enable the industry to adapt production facilities and invest in the industrial system;

40.  Calls for any policies and decisions already in place that could hamper the sustainable transformation of the automotive industry to be reviewed; calls on the Commission to launch an ex-post assessment on adopted legislation and on the lack or bad implementation of adopted legislation;

41.  Calls on European manufacturers to uphold and reinforce current EU legislation on statutory guarantees;

42.  Takes the view that commercial guarantees for European automotive products are too short‑term and are incommensurate with their high levels of reliability, and that this puts them at a profound competitive disadvantage in relation to the commercial guarantees offered by third‑country manufacturers (e.g. Japan and South Korea);

43.  Considers it essential for technical regulations to be harmonised across the EU in order to guard against any artificial distortions of competition; stresses the need for harmonisation and improvement of test procedures that are currently resulting in significant discrepancies regarding consumption figures for certain manufacturers; asks the Commission to respond to the problem of consumers being misled by unrepresentative information on vehicles’ fuel consumption and environmental performances; supports the planned development of a new, accurate driving test cycle and procedures to reflect real driving conditions, and calls for these to be introduced without delay;

44.  Encourages European enterprises involved in producing automotive products to step up their cooperation within the single market through European standardisation, certification, unification and disposal, and also through voluntary market segmentation;

45.  Believes that there is a need to improve EU road safety significantly by taking action on vehicles, infrastructure and driver behaviour; welcomes the Commission’s eCall proposal relating to a system enabling vehicles to call emergency services automatically in the event of a serious accident;

46.  Calls on the Commission and the Member States to enhance the protection of intellectual property rights at international level and introduce a business confidentiality strategy at EU level, with a view to combating counterfeiting and industrial espionage; draws attention to the fact that technological development is a sensitive and vulnerable area;

Financial resources

47.  Calls for the EU and the Member States to harmonise, optimise and bolster the use of the financial resources available to stimulate investment in sustainable mobility over and above public subsidies, by means of tax incentives for SMEs (tax credits for research, CO2 emissions tax-and-rebate schemes, vehicle scrappage schemes) and both private funding instruments (risk capital funds, ‘business angels’) and public funding instruments (European Investment Bank);

48.  Asks the Commission to make an in-depth country-comparative study of taxation applied to the automobile sector in the EU, in order to simplify and rationalise the current tax burden on production and on trade in motor vehicle-related services and reduce red tape;

49.  Considers it essential for complementarity to be maintained between the funding available for restructuring and that available for R&D; calls, accordingly, for the funding allocated to the European Social Fund and the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund to be maintained at the current level;

50.  Considers it vital for competition policy (State aid rules) to be geared to securing greater competitiveness, growth and employment, in line with the approach pursued by our competitors outside the EU;

51.  Calls for a conditionality clause to be introduced, under which automotive firms in receipt of investment support for a given site would be required to keep their operations at that site until the end of the depreciation period and to refund the EU subsidies should they decide to relocate;

Internal market

52.  Points out that a robust internal market is a precondition for a return to competitiveness and sustainability in the automotive industry;

53.  Considers closer European approximation essential in areas in which the prevailing conditions militate against a level playing field:

   (a) vis-à-vis non-EU competitors: high prices for energy and raw materials, strong euro exchange rate;
   (b) on the internal market: social and fiscal competition, tax breaks for firms and incentives for buyers (low-carbon incentives, vehicle scrappage schemes);
   (c) in the EU internal market: conditions relating to the recyclability of vehicles and the ecological recycling of used cars;

54.  Stresses that suppliers in particular need to be strengthened, and that it is here that innovation potential (Car2car, car2infrastructure) and employment opportunities can be found;

55.  Deplores the fact that, on the aftermarket, legal fragmentation is currently having an adverse effect on motorists and on fair and healthy competition between Member States; with a view to enhancing employment and the purchasing power of motorists and maintaining and developing European production lines and the aftermarket industry, calls for an approximation of legislation, particularly in the spare parts sector, and for information to be provided to motorists regarding their vehicle repair entitlements; calls on the Commission to accompany this with an in-depth and comparative study of the implications of legal fragmentation for the internal market, the European manufacturing sector and the purchasing power of motorists;

56.  Calls for coordination at EU level to step up efforts to combat the import of counterfeit spare parts;

57.  Notes the need for the Member States to ensure greater transparency and compliance with the principles of good faith in commercial relations between manufacturers and dealers; takes the view that the introduction of a code of conduct for manufacturers and dealers would be a reliable way of achieving this; considers that this code should at least include clauses relating to dealer relocation, multi-branding and compensation entitlement for unjustified termination of the contract by the manufacturer in line with the supplementary guidelines contained in Commission Notice 2010/C 138/05;

58.  Calls on the Commission to take measures, in cooperation with the Member States, to ensure a high level of consumer protection, transparency and safety in the second-hand car market, and to work towards a gradual phasing-out of polluting and less safe vehicles; commends the Commission’s recommendation in the roadworthiness testing regulation to require mileage recording at each test; considers that initiatives such as the ‘Car Pass’ scheme in Belgium could be encouraged by a European Standard; notes that re-registration procedures for vehicle transfers must also discourage cross-border mileage fraud;

59.  Draws attention once again to the economic benefits for Europe to be gained from the formation of major new industrial projects, along the lines of those in the aeronautics and space industry, in order to attain the critical mass required to face up to international competition; stresses that these projects may be organised at Union level or on a voluntary basis between Member States;

60.  Underscores the importance of smart specialisation strategies to establish a framework for intra-EU competition in the same areas of activity to give way to complementary regional specialisations making the EU more competitive vis-à-vis third countries;

61.  Draws the attention of:

   (a) Member States to the alternative means of encouraging demand that are available, such as labelling schemes, targeted release of funds from employee savings schemes, tax incentives for company purchases, recycling of materials, public procurement;
   (b) firms to the various marketing tools available, such as insurance, including loan reimbursement in case of unemployment, warranty extensions, vehicle sharing, internet sales;

62.  Expresses its regret that the CARS 2020 action plan focuses primarily on European car manufacturers while ignoring the significance of the entire aftermarket sector, its actors and needs; feels that European automotive policy must be more expansive and be based on a holistic approach; asserts that the main objective should be to ensure a level playing field for all participants along the chain; takes the view, therefore, that European automotive industry policy ought also to incorporate provisions adapted for all of the actors – from major manufacturers to SMEs – in the distribution and repair chain;

External markets and trade relations

63.  Points out that the automobile industry delivers a sizeable positive contribution to the EU’s trade balance, that exports to emerging markets are clearly a necessity in order to maximise our long-term success, and that alliances with non-EU funds and firms are of key importance to the future of our firms, as are locating plants in non-EU countries (including to produce cars for the local markets) as a means of generating growth, and importing vehicles to meet demand;

64.  Welcomes the Commission’s announcement that a breakthrough has been reached in work on a free‑trade zone with the USA and Japan and on equal access to global markets, which means that all participants in the global automotive market will have to adhere strictly to the same rules; takes the view that this increases the likelihood that sustainable development and improvements in road safety will become the basis for achieving competitive advantage throughout the world;

65.  Acknowledges that a uniform international certification system which enables the inspection of vehicles and automotive parts across the single European market and which is based on EU environmental and safety standards could play a key role in eliminating unfair competition;

66.  Recognises that demand in the emerging markets will grow not only in the luxury category but also in the lower segments, and that the European industry will be more competitive in these segments;

67.  Points out that many of our automotive firms are becoming less competitive as a result of growing competition – some of it unfair – from non-EU firms; stresses that many of them have the potential to become successful if they are allowed to meet the growing demand on new export markets; urges the Commission to reorganise its trade policy, so as to be able to:

   (a) coordinate Member State measures for promoting EU firms and protecting EU products, investment and intellectual property rights outside the EU;
   (b) centralise all EU export instruments, in particular those geared to SMEs (Small Business, Big World), e.g. through the creation of a comprehensive, accessible and sectoral digital platform;
   (c) gradually make the principle of reciprocity – to which the Commission pays too little attention in CARS 2020 – a central tenet of our trade relations;
   (d) push for the dismantling of non-tariff barriers in the automotive sector;
   (e) shorten the time taken to instigate investigations and apply trade defence instruments;

68.  Asks the Commission to extend its ex ante impact assessments on future trade agreements to the notion of competitiveness in the automobile sector, carry out fresh studies following their entry into force, and regularly assess the cumulative impact of agreements, both those currently in force and those subject to ongoing negotiations, based on specific and defined criteria, including the way in which stakeholders are involved;

69.  Resolves to provide itself with the necessary means to gauge for itself the impact of each FTA;

o
o   o

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

(1) http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/automotive/files/cars-21-final-report-2012_en.pdf
(2) http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/automotive/files/pagesbackground/competitiveness/cars21finalreport_en.pdf.


Sexual and reproductive health and rights
PDF 106kWORD 34k
European Parliament resolution of 10 December 2013 on Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights (2013/2040(INI))
P7_TA(2013)0548A7-0426/2013

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to Article 168 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union concerning public health and in particular paragraph 7 thereof, which states that ‘Union action shall respect the responsibilities of the Member States for the definition of their health policy and for the organisation and delivery of health services and medical care’,

–  having regard to the Programme of Action of the 1994 Cairo International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) and to the Programme of Action of the 1995 Beijing World Conference on Women,

–  having regard to Rule 48 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality and the opinion of the Committee on Development (A7-0426/2013),

A.  whereas the Cairo ICPD Programme of Action gives a definition of sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR);

1.  Notes that the formulation and implementation of policies on SRHR and on sexual education in schools is a competence of the Member States;

2.  Notes that, even though it is a competence of the Member States to formulate and implement policies on health and on education, the EU can contribute to the promotion of best practices among Member States;

3.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the governments and national parliaments of the Member States, the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights and the UN Secretary-General.


Volunteering and voluntary activity in Europe
PDF 140kWORD 55k
European Parliament resolution of 10 December 2013 on volunteering and voluntary activity in Europe (2013/2064(INI))
P7_TA-PROV(2013)0549A7-0348/2013

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,

–  having regard to Articles 165, 166 and 214 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to the definition of volunteer work proposed by the International Labour Organisation (ILO) in its Manual on the Measurement of Volunteer Work (2011),

–  having regard to Decision No 2241/2004/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 December 2004 on a single Community framework for the transparency of qualifications and competences (Europass),

–  having regard to Decision No 1719/2006/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 November 2006 establishing the Youth in Action programme for the period 2007 to 2013(1),

–  having regard to Decision No 1720/2006/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 November 2006 establishing an action programme in the field of lifelong learning(2),

–  having regard to Decision No 1904/2006/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 establishing for the period 2007 to 2013 the programme ‘Europe for Citizens’ to promote active European citizenship(3),

–  having regard to Council Decision 2010/37/EC of 27 November 2009 on the European Year of Voluntary Activities Promoting Active Citizenship (2011)(4),

–  having regard to the resolution of the Council and of the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States, meeting within the Council, on the recognition of the value of non-formal and informal learning within the European youth field(5),

–  having regard to the Council resolution of 27 November 2007 on voluntary activities of young people (14427/1/2007),

–  having regard to the resolution of the Council and the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States, meeting within the Council of 16 May 2007, on implementing the common objectives for voluntary activities of young people(6),

–  having regard to the Council recommendation of 20 November 2008 on the mobility of young volunteers across the European Union(7),

–  having regard to Recommendation 2006/961/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 on transnational mobility within the Community for education and training purposes: European Quality Charter for Mobility(8),

–  having regard to its declaration of 10 March 2011 on establishing European statutes for mutual societies, associations and foundations(9),

–  having regard to the Council conclusions of 3 October 2011 on the role of voluntary activities in social policy (14552/2011),

–  having regard to the Council conclusions of 29 November 2011 on the role of voluntary activities in sport in promoting active citizenship(10),

–  having regard to the Commission’s EU citizenship report 2010 of 27 October 2010 entitled ‘Dismantling the obstacles to EU citizens’ rights’ (COM(2010)0603),

–  having regard to the communication of 5 September 2007 from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions entitled ‘Promoting young people’s full participation in education, employment and society’ (COM(2007)0498),

–  having regard to the communication of 27 April 2009 from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions entitled ‘An EU Strategy for Youth: Investing and Empowering – A renewed open method of coordination to address youth challenges and opportunities’ (COM(2009)0200),

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

–  having regard to the communication of 15 September 2010 from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions entitled ‘Youth on the Move – An initiative to unleash the potential of young people to achieve smart, sustainable and inclusive growth in the European Union’ (COM(2010)0477),

–  having regard to the communication of 20 September 2011 from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions entitled ‘EU Policies and Volunteering: Recognising and promoting cross-border voluntary activities in the EU’ (COM(2011)0568),

–  having regard to the Commission proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing ‘Erasmus for All’ – The Union Programme for Education, Training, Youth and Sport (COM(2011)0788),

–  having regard to the report of 19 December 2012 from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on the implementation, results and overall assessment of the 2011 European Year of Volunteering (COM(2012)0781),

–  having regard to the opinion of 28 March 2012 of the European Economic and Social Committee on the communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions entitled ‘EU Policies and Volunteering: Recognising and Promoting Cross-border Voluntary Activities in the EU’(11),

–  having regard to its resolution of 12 June 2012 on recognising and promoting cross-border voluntary activities in the EU(12),

–  having regard to the Council Recommendation of 20 December 2012 on the validation of non-formal and informal learning,

–  having regard to the Commission report on the implementation, results and overall assessment of the 2011 European Year of Volunteering (EYV 2011);

–  having regard to Rule 48 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Culture and Education (A7-0348/2013),

A.  whereas EYV 2011 was a success, had relevant objectives and helped to raise awareness of the issue;

B.  whereas creating an environment in which volunteering can thrive and is accessible to everyone is a lengthy process in which all stakeholders need to be involved;

C.  whereas volunteering is a key facet of active citizenship and democracy, as well as of personal development, embodying European values such as solidarity and non-discrimination, and whereas it also helps to boost participatory democracy and promote human rights inside and outside the EU;

D.  having regard to the importance which is attached to volunteering in the debate on public policies;

E.  whereas engagement in voluntary activity can be an important way of gaining skills needed in the labour market as well as a means of attaining prominent social positions in the community;

F.  whereas volunteers are, to a large degree, the lifeblood of sport;

G.  whereas volunteering is a key factor for individual and collective emancipation, solidarity and social cohesion;

H.  whereas volunteering plays a key role in creating social capital and boosting development, as well as in promoting economic and social cohesion, thus helping to further the aims of the Europe 2020 strategy;

I.  whereas the Council conclusions of October 2011 on the role of voluntary activities in social policy underline the importance of voluntary activities for addressing gender inequalities;

J.  whereas bureaucratic barriers at national level continue to restrict opportunities to engage in volunteering, which is still not legally recognised to a sufficient degree in some Member States;

K.  whereas, owing to different traditions and cultural practices, major disparities exist between Member States as regards the laws applying to volunteering, the rights that volunteers have and the way in which volunteering is organised;

L.  whereas the severe economic crisis, austerity measures and tax pressures are jeopardising the financial stability of many NGOs, sports bodies and voluntary organisations, which are nonetheless continuing to do what they can to enhance inclusion and social wellbeing in these difficult times;

M.  whereas in order to safeguard the achievements of EYV 2011, European volunteering policy - to which a piecemeal approach is currently being taken at EU level, with responsibility being scattered across a range of services - needs to be properly structured and coordinated;

1.  Notes the figures given for the EYV 2011 communication campaign in the annexes to the Commission report, and deplores the fact that poor results were achieved because of a lack of financial resources;

2.  Recognises and supports the various forms of volunteering practised in the Member States through national organisations and networks of associations operating at local level; calls, in this respect, for a multicultural approach from the Member States, and calls on the Commission to undertake a detailed analysis of national volunteering practices and traditions with a view to fostering a common European approach;

3.  Notes that the further consolidation of a common European approach to volunteering will create more opportunities for young people’s mobility and employability by allowing them to acquire valuable skills;

4.  Welcomes the fact that some Member States have adopted or revised laws in this area with a view to creating a favourable environment for volunteering. and recommends other Member States to do likewise, with a focus on strengthening volunteers’ rights using the European Charter for the Rights and Responsibilities of Volunteers;

5.  Encourages Member States to continue creating an enabling environment for volunteering, especially by means of a legal framework where one is still lacking;

6.  Notes that some Member States have implemented the guidelines set out in the ILO Manual on the Measurement of Volunteer Work, and encourages the others to follow suit so that a body of comparable data providing a clear picture of the valuable contribution such work makes to society may be compiled;

7.  Calls for a European statute for voluntary organisations to be adopted in order to help ensure that they are given proper legal and institutional recognition;

8.  Stresses the need to promote volunteering, especially among schoolchildren, students and other young people, in order to broaden the horizons of solidarity and support for it;

9.  Points out that the large number of European Skills Passports created online over recent months illustrates the success of this ‘electronic portfolio’, which provides a comprehensive picture of individuals' skills, including those acquired during volunteering work, so that they may be officially recognised for both employment and learning purposes;

10.  Draws attention to the fact that skills and abilities acquired during volunteer work, which may be counted as non-formal and informal learning and work experience, are a plus point on CVs and in working life;

11.  Believes that the proposed ‘Europass Experience’ document would allow volunteers to describe and record skills developed during volunteer work that may not lead to certification, and encourages the Commission, in the light of the Council’s recommendation on the validation of non-formal and informal learning, to launch that document as soon as possible;

12.  Notes the importance of the skills and abilities mentioned above for motivating young people to volunteer and for generating social capital and boosting societal development;

13.  Suggests that attention be paid to the issue of gender parity within the voluntary sector, and especially to the pronounced discrepancy that exists among voluntary leaders, with men being over-represented in managerial positions;

14.  Believes that the skills acquired by young people during volunteer work should be included in the European Skills Passport and Europass, so that formal and non-formal learning are treated in the same way;

15.  Emphasises that volunteering offers young people who have broken off their schooling an inclusive environment and inclusive activities;

16.  Reiterates its support for the Commission’s European Voluntary Humanitarian Aid Corps initiative, which is intended to help the EU respond swiftly and in a coordinated manner to humanitarian crises and serious natural disasters by providing support for the training, mobilisation and coordination of volunteers for EU humanitarian aid operations;

17.  Points out that volunteering, which is becoming increasingly common among both young and elderly people, promotes intercultural learning as well as a sense of European identity and intergenerational solidarity, and fosters active ageing and lifelong civic participation;

18.  Points out that volunteering enables both young people and older people to make a contribution to society and earn recognition and esteem in return, and that this improves their quality of life, wellbeing and general state of health;

19.  Points out that the existence of a broad range of volunteering activities, as well as ease of access to such activities, as regards cost, availability of information and infrastructure, and provision of liability and accident insurance cover, are essential if volunteering is to be promoted among all age groups;

20.  Considers that volunteering, as an active method of building civil society, can contribute to the development of intercultural dialogue and play a major role in combating prejudice and racism;

21.  Points out that volunteering plays a key role in creating human and social capital and promoting social inclusion; calls on the Commission and the Member States to give due recognition to the vital contribution made by volunteering in the world of sport and, specifically, amateur sport, in which field many sports organisations would not be able to function without the help of volunteers;

22.  Calls on the Commission and the Member States to give due recognition to the key contribution that volunteering is making at this time of serious economic crisis;

23.  Stresses that continuous effort is required to ensure that women have equal access to voluntary activity;

24.  Highlights the need to ensure continuity between EYV 2011 and subsequent EYVs, as part of efforts to ensure that volunteering is seen as a valuable means of taking an active part in society, and in this regard encourages the Commission to include volunteering as an important contribution to active citizenship during the European Year of Citizens;

25.  Calls on the Member States to ensure the sustainability of the results achieved at national level during EYV 2011;

26.  Calls on the Commission to introduce and develop a volunteering policy and to use the open method of coordination in order to foster dialogue and cooperation between stakeholders in the various Member States;

27.  Urges the Member States to take the requisite steps to institutionalise volunteering in a manner consistent with their national labour laws;

28.  Calls on the Member States and the Commission to set up a single point of contact in the form of a service with responsibility for volunteering policy and for coordination in this area between Commission departments and the various institutions;

29.  Stresses the need, in cooperation in particular with European volunteer organisations, associations and networks, to set up a centralised EU portal providing a pan-European platform for coordination in this area, which should include a volunteering best practice database and a section on cross-border volunteering, with information on programmes available, costs and arrangements for taking part, in order to foster the pooling of information;

30.  Encourages the Member States to set up national coordination websites and search engines that will allow easy and well-structured access to volunteering opportunities for single individuals and cooperation possibilities for organisations;

31.  Encourages Member States to continue to provide a stable and sustainable support framework for both national and cross-border volunteering that supports both volunteers and volunteering organisations; recommends that Member States should keep in place the national coordinating bodies set up in connection with EYV 2011;

32.  Calls on the Member States to implement the provisions of Directive 2004/114/EC(13) on the conditions of admission of third-country nationals for purposes of study, pupil exchange, unremunerated training or voluntary service, and to simplify the procedures for the granting of visas, or to abolish them, for those wishing to undertake voluntary activities as part of the European Neighbourhood Policy;

33.  Urges national, regional and local authorities to make adequate funding available, streamline administrative procedures and provide tax incentives for volunteers’ organisations and networks, in particular small organisations with limited resources; calls, in this connection, for the concept of grants to associations to be clarified so that funding for associations is no longer confused with state aid which could hamper competition in the for-profit sector;

34.  Calls on the Commission to look into the possibility of counting the economic contribution made by voluntary work as matching funding for European projects;

35.  Draws attention to the need for volunteering to be encouraged as part of corporate social responsibility strategies, in keeping with voluntary international standard ISO 26000:2010 on guidance on corporate social responsibility;

36.  Calls on the Commission to see to it that Member States make it compulsory for volunteers to have proper insurance cover, in order to protect their health and safety during volunteer work;

37.  Calls on the Member States that have not yet done so to adopt legislation on volunteering and to facilitate volunteering through the provision of formal, informal and non-formal training to enhance volunteers’ skills and empower them in their work;

38.  Calls on the Member States to facilitate volunteering through the provision of formal, informal and non-formal training to enhance volunteers’ skills and empower them in their work, their dedication being primarily altruistic and disinterested; encourages them to introduce training courses in volunteering as electives in educational institutions;

39.  Calls on the Commission and the Member States to further promote the European Voluntary Service in universities and other higher education institutions;

40.  Believes that voluntary work, as a method of informal learning, helps to develop skills and professional qualifications which make it easier for volunteers to enter or return to the labour market;

41.  Recommends that the Commission should continue to maintain contacts with the EYV 2011 Alliance successor, the European Alliance for Volunteering, and other volunteer-based organisations and that it should take proper account of the recommendations laid down in the Policy Agenda for Volunteering in Europe (PAVE), as the basis for an action plan for the future;

42.  Calls on the Commission to marshal the necessary resources to set up a European Volunteering Development Fund, in order to ensure that appropriate support infrastructure is put in place;

43.  Emphasises the need to make it easier for NGOs to gain access to European funding, in particular under the ESF, at national and European level;

44.  Calls on the Member States to implement the Council recommendation on the validation of non-formal and informal learning and to ensure, in advance of the target date of 2018, the implementation of formal structures for the validation of the knowledge, skills and competences gained through volunteering leading to a recognised qualification which educational institutions, employers and others should recognise;

45.  Calls on the Commission to recognise volunteer time as eligible in-kind cofinancing for all European grants, and to work with volunteer organisations in order to develop systems for recording and documenting volunteer time on the basis of the many tools and models available;

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

(1) OJ L 327, 24.11.2006, p. 30.
(2) OJ L 327, 24.11.2006, p. 45.
(3) OJ L 378, 27.12.2006, p. 32.
(4) OJ L 17, 22.1.2010, p. 43.
(5) OJ C 168, 20.7.2006, p. 1.
(6) OJ C 241, 20.9.2008, p. 1.
(7) OJ C 319, 13.12.2008, p. 8.
(8) OJ L 394, 30.12.2006, p.5.
(9) OJ C 199 E, 7.7.2012, p. 187
(10) OJ C 372, 20.12.2011, p. 24.
(11) CESE 824/2012.
(12) OJ C 332 E, 15.11.2013, p. 14.
(13)OJ L 375, 23.12.2004, p. 12.


Reports on fact-finding visits for the investigation of petitions (interpretation of Rule 202(5) of the Rules of Procedure)
PDF 101kWORD 31k
European Parliament decision of 10 December 2013 concerning reports on fact-finding visits for the investigation of petitions (interpretation of Rule 202(5) of the Rules of Procedure) (2013/2258(REG))
P7_TA(2013)0550

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the letter of 26 November 2013 from the Chair of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs,

–  having regard to Rule 211 of its Rules of Procedure,

1.  Decides to append the following interpretation to Rule 202(5):

"Fact-finding visits and the reports on those visits are aimed solely at providing the Committee with the requisite information to enable it to consider the petition further. Such reports are drafted under the exclusive responsibility of the participants in the visit, who shall seek to reach a consensus. Failing such a consensus, the report must set out the divergent findings of fact or assessments. The report is submitted to the Committee for its approval by a single vote, unless the Chair declares, where appropriate, that amendments may be tabled to parts of the report. Rule 52 does not apply to these reports, either directly or mutatis mutandis. In the absence of approval by the Committee, reports shall not be forwarded to the President.";

2.  Instructs its President to forward this decision to the Council and the Commission, for information.

Legal notice - Privacy policy