European Parliament decision to raise no objections to the Commission delegated regulation of 30 October 2013 on the conditions for making a declaration of performance on construction products available on a website (C(2013)7086 – 2013/2928(DEA))

P7_TA(2013)0551 B7-0548/2013

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission delegated regulation (C(2013)7086),

–  having regard to the Commission’s letter of 14 November 2013 asking Parliament to declare that it will raise no objections to the delegated regulation,

–  having regard to Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to Regulation (EU) No 305/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2011 laying down harmonised conditions for the marketing of construction products and repealing Council Directive 89/106/EEC(1)(CPR), and in particular Articles 7(3) and 63(1) thereof,

–  having regard to Rule 87a(6) of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the fact that no objections have been raised within the period laid down in the third and fourth indents of Rule 87a(6) of its Rules of Procedure, which expired on 10 December 2013,

A.  whereas it is important to ensure that the delegated regulation on e-supply enters into force as soon as possible, given that the substantial provisions of the basic legislative act, including those on providing declarations of performance, apply from 1 July 2013;

B.  whereas the possibility to make these declarations available on the internet would, in accordance with the wish of the legislator, allow the manufacturers of construction products to reduce costs and also increase the flexibility of the construction sector as such;

C.  whereas the delegated regulation should have been prepared by the Commission in advance, in order to avoid the unfortunate delay in permitting a derogation from the obligation for manufacturers to provide paper or electronic copies of a declaration of performance for each product which is made available on the market;

D.  whereas it is of utmost importance that both Parliament and the Council can exercise their rights as co-legislators as defined in the Treaties, including the decision as to which elements are to be delegated to the Commission in future basic legislative acts, and that Parliament is able to take part in consultations – alongside Member States’ experts and other stakeholders – prior to the adoption of a delegated act and in a transparent manner;

1.  Declares that it has no objections to the delegated regulation;

2.  Instructs its President to forward this decision to the Council and the Commission.

(1) OJ L 88, 4.4.2011, p. 5.

European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 December 2013 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing an exchange, assistance and training programme for the protection of the euro against counterfeiting (the 'Pericles 2020' programme) (COM(2011)0913 – C7-0510/2011 – 2011/0449(COD))

P7_TA(2013)0552 A7-0423/2013

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2011)0913),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 133 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C7-0510/2011),

–  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 2 March 2012(1),

–  having regard to the undertaking given by the Council representative by letter of 21 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 (A7-0423/2013),

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 11 December 2013 with a view to the adoption of Regulation (EU) No .../2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing an exchange, assistance and training programme for the protection of the euro against counterfeiting (the 'Pericles 2020' programme) and repealing Council Decisions 2001/923/EC, 2001/924/EC, 2006/75/EC, 2006/76/EC, 2006/849/EC and 2006/850/EC

(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Regulation (EU) No 331/2014.)

(1) OJ C 137, 12.5.2012, p. 7.

European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 December 2013 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) No 99/2013 on the European statistical programme 2013-17 (COM(2013)0525 – C7-0224/2013 – 2013/0249(COD))

P7_TA(2013)0553 A7-0401/2013

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2013)0525),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 338(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C7-0224/2013),

–  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 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 (A7-0401/2013),

1.  Adopts its position at first reading, taking over the Commission proposal;

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 11 December 2013 with a view to the adoption of Regulation (EU) No .../2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) No 99/2013 on the European statistical programme 2013-17

(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Regulation (EU) No 1383/2013.)

European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 December 2013 on the draft Council decision authorising Member States to ratify, in the interests of the European Union, the Convention concerning decent work for domestic workers, 2011, of the International Labour Organisation (Convention No 189) (11462/2013 – C7-0234/2013 – 2013/0085(NLE))

P7_TA(2013)0554 A7-0394/2013

(Consent)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the draft Council decision (11462/2013),

–  having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Article 153 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 (C7‑0234/2013),

–  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 (A7-0394/2013),

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.

European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 December 2013 on the draft Council decision on the conclusion of a Protocol to the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Armenia, of the other part, on a Framework Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Armenia on the general principles for the participation of the Republic of Armenia in Union programmes (16469/2012 – C7-0009/2013 – 2012/0247(NLE))

P7_TA(2013)0555 A7-0406/2013

(Consent)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the draft Council decision (16469/2012),

–  having regard to the draft Protocol to the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Armenia, of the other part (16472/2012),

–  having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Articles 114, 168, 169, 172, 173(3), 188 and 192 and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C7-0009/2013),

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

–  having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on Foreign Affairs (A7-0406/2013),

1.  Consents to conclusion of the Protocol;

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 Republic of Armenia.

European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 December 2013 on the proposal for a Council decision on the conclusion of an agreement between the European Union and the French Republic concerning the application to the collectivity of Saint-Barthélemy of Union legislation on the taxation of savings and administrative cooperation in the field of taxation (COM(2013)0555 – C7-0360/2013 – 2013/0269(NLE))

P7_TA(2013)0556 A7-0404/2013

(Consultation)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the proposal for a Council decision (COM(2013)0555),

–  having regard to the draft agreement between the European Union and the French Republic concerning the application to the collectivity of Saint-Barthélemy of Union legislation on the taxation of savings and administrative cooperation in the field of taxation,

–  having regard to Articles 113 and 115, in conjunction with Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (b) and Article 218(8), second paragraph of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C7‑0360/2013),

–  having regard to Rules 55, 90(7) and 46(1) of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (A7-0404/2013),

1.  Approves the 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.

European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 December 2013 on the proposal for a Council decision amending Decision 2002/546/EC as regards its period of application (COM(2013)0781 – C7-0420/2013 – 2013/0387(CNS))

P7_TA(2013)0557 A7-0431/2013

(Special legislative procedure – consultation)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to the Council (COM(2013)0781),

–  having regard to Article 349 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union , pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C7‑0420/2013),

–  having regard to Rules 55 and 46(1) of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Regional Development (A7-0431/2013),

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.

European Parliament resolution of 11 December 2013 with recommendations to the Commission on EU donor coordination on development aid (2013/2057(INL))

P7_TA(2013)0558 A7-0393/2013

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to Article 225 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), and in particular Articles 9 and 151 and Article 153(1)(e) thereof,

–  having regard to Articles 209 and 210 TFEU,

–  having regard to the United Nations Millennium Declaration of 8 September 2000,

–  having regard to the Paris Declaration of 2005, the Accra Agenda for Action (AAA) of 2008 and the Global Partnership for Effective Development of 2011,

–  having regard to the joint statement by the Council and the representatives of the governments of the Member States meeting within the Council, the European Parliament and the Commission on European Union Development Policy: The European Consensus(1),

–  having regard to the Commission communication of 13 October 2011 entitled ‘Increasing the impact of EU Development Policy: an Agenda for Change’ (COM(2011)0637),

–  having regard to the Council’s conclusions of 14 May 2012 on ‘Increasing the Impact of EU Development Policy: an Agenda for Change’(2),

–  having regard to the Conclusions of the Council and of the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States meeting within the Council of 15 May 2007 on the ‘European Union Code of Conduct on Complementarity and the Division of Labour in Development Policy’(3),

–  having regard to its resolution of 28 September 2006 on ‘more and better cooperation: the 2006 EU aid effectiveness package’(4),

–  having regard to its resolution of 22 May 2008 on the follow-up to the Paris Declaration of 2005 on Aid Effectiveness(5),

–  having regard to its resolution of 25 October 2011 on the 4th High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness(6),

–  having regard to the Conclusions of the General Affairs and External Relations Council of 17 November 2009 on an Operational Framework on Aid Effectiveness(7),

–  having regard to the Conclusions of the Foreign Affairs Council (Development Ministers) of 14 June 2010 on Cross-country Division of Labour(8), which makes a number of additions and changes to the Operational Framework on Aid Effectiveness,

–  having regard to the Conclusions of the Foreign Affairs Council (Development Ministers) of 9 December 2010 on ‘Mutual Accountability and Transparency: A Fourth Chapter for the EU Operational Framework on Aid Effectiveness’(9),

–  having regard to the consolidated text of the Operational Framework on Aid Effectiveness adopted by the General Secretariat of the Council of the European Union on 11 January 2011(10),

–  having regard to the report of October 2009 entitled ‘Aid Effectiveness Agenda: Benefits of a European Approach’, commissioned by the Directorate-General for Development of the Commission(11),

–  having regard to the final report of March 2011 entitled ‘Joint Multiannual Programming’, commissioned by the Directorate-General for Development of the Commission(12),

–  having regard to the ‘Final Report on the Evaluation of the Paris Declaration: Phase 2’, published in May 2011,

–  having regard to the 'Cost of Non-Europe Report' on 'Increasing coordination between EU donors', presented to the Committee on Development on 10 July 2013,

–  having regard to Council Decision of 26 July 2010 establishing the organisation and functioning of the European External Action Service (2010/427/EU)(13), in particular Article 9 (External action instruments and programming),

–  having regard to Rules 42 and 48 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Development and the opinion of the Committee on Foreign Affairs (A7-0393/2013),

A.  whereas recent estimations set out in the above-mentioned 'Cost of Non-Europe Report' show that as much as EUR 800 million could be saved annually from cutting transaction costs if the EU and its Member States concentrated their aid efforts on fewer countries and activities; and whereas a further EUR 8,4 billion of annual savings could be achieved if country allocation was completely coordinated and had poverty reduction as its only target;

B.  whereas, in a context where, overall, there has been limited progress towards reaching the UN goal of providing 0,7 % of gross national income as Official Development Assistance by 2015, more efficient coordination at EU level is a matter of the utmost importance;

C.  whereas, given the change in international demographics and the greater future interdependence between what is now the developing world and the EU as a whole, more efficiency in the spending of development aid will bring about more effective assistance on the ground and have the added benefit of breeding greater mutual respect into the future;

D.  whereas coordinated action by the EU as a whole, particularly by setting up a committee comprising representatives of the Commission, the Council and the European Parliament, has an added value which, in terms of policy and financial leverage, is greater than the sum of the individual actions of its 28 Member States and the Commission;

E.  whereas the EU and its Member States should continue to lead by example in reducing aid fragmentation by fully implementing the international aid and development effectiveness commitments made in Paris, Accra and Busan and by building on the progress made in the current process of Joint Programming;

F.  whereas EU donor coordination should contribute to the objective of ending all formal and informal tied aid and to turning the "Aid Effectiveness Agenda" into a "Development Effectiveness Agenda";

G.  whereas EU initiatives to enhance donor coordination are mainly of a voluntary, non-binding nature; and whereas the EU Code of Conduct on Complementarity and Division of Labour in Development Policy has led to limited results;

H.  whereas the Treaties give the EU the legal basis to strengthen the coherence and the effectiveness of the EU's external action;

I.  whereas the Commission should be the driving force behind the full implementation of the aid and development effectiveness agenda at EU level;

1.  Calls on the EU and its Member States to honour their commitments under the Paris Declaration, the Accra Agenda for Action and the Busan Global Partnership for Effective Development Cooperation, the main obstacles to which are lack of political will, bureaucracy and high transaction costs; recalls in this context that one basic condition for fulfilment of the "aid effectiveness agenda" is to embrace fully the principle of "democratic ownership", implying that development strategies are country-driven and reflect the commitment of all national stakeholders;

2.  Calls on the EU and its Member States to fully exploit the legal provisions of the TFEU on development that call for complementarity between the EU and its Member States in development cooperation (Articles 208 and 210 TFEU) so as to reinforce effective coordination between EU donors;

3.  Calls for more effective coordination by the EU and its Member States through, inter alia, joint programming including in-country division of labour in order to avoid overlapping of actions and high transaction costs; insists equally on the need to undertake a careful analysis of each recipient country's specific situation needs, while ensuring that financed projects are embedded in the local economy and benefit those most in need;

4.  Calls for more effective coordination by the EU and its Member States of cross-country division of labour in order to address the problem of 'aid darlings' and 'aid orphans'; stresses that the EU's policy on division of labour should ensure that horizontal issues such as human rights, gender equality and climate change are fully addressed; stresses also that the aim to increase the impact of aid and to get more results and value for money should not lead to a risk-averse development policy which only focuses on 'easy countries';

5.  Calls for a re-evaluation of the comparative advantages of the EU and its Member States in the division of tasks in the development field by assessing strengths and weaknesses, which should involve the Member State concerned (or the Commission), as well as other donors and partner countries;

6.  Notes, however, that better coordination is also needed with the international community and, more importantly, with local actors, specifically with local governments, national parliaments, civil society and NGOs; recalls that Millennium Development Goal 8, "forming a global partnership for development", encourages wide participation and close collaboration between all development actors;

7.  Stresses that, by pooling the resources provided by donor countries, multilateral development organisations have the potential to increase aid effectiveness and maximise efficiency; notes that the use of resources put in place by international organisations also helps donors exchange information on the development activities, resulting in greater transparency and accountability;

8.  Stresses that it is important to support the development of those countries’ capacity so that they can build up the skills, know-how and institutions required to manage their own development effectively; stresses the importance of free trade, a market economy and entrepreneurship in order for developing countries themselves to be able to fight poverty and thus create sustainable economic development and reduce their dependency on aid; stresses likewise the importance of promoting and defending good governance and that it is important that authorities in recipient countries should combat corruption and build up their fiscal infrastructure in order to be able to safeguard their tax revenue and combat tax evasion and unlawful capital flight;

9.  Emphasises the growing role of non-traditional donors, as well as private-sector investments, and philanthropic financial flows to developing countries that pose additional coordination challenges; takes the view that the new framework for EU donor coordination on development aid should also explore the opportunities for integrating these aspects, building on the commitments undertaken through the Busan Partnership for Effective Development;

10.  Underlines the importance of a differentiated approach to aid effectiveness, taking into account the level of development of the partner countries (least developed, fragile or middle-income) and their specific needs; that differentiated approach should be based on multidimensional development indicators going beyond GDP that take into account in-country poverty, inequality and vulnerability;

11.  Calls on the Member States to take full advantage of new electronic tools for the coordination of projects, like the Official Development Assistance to Mozambique Database (ODAMoz), the creation of which the EU funded.

12.  Calls on the EU to ensure that the commitments on aid and development effectiveness are fully reflected in all the financial mechanisms relevant to development cooperation;

13.  Stresses that, given the constraints on national and EU budgets resulting from economic difficulties and due to growing political concern over demonstrating more effective development spending, improved donor coordination is imperative and the EU should play a key role in its promotion, and that the coordination should cover all major aspects of all development projects, including their planning, monitoring and evaluation;

14.  Considers that, as a result of their voluntary, non-binding nature, current EU initiatives to enhance donor coordination have not completely exploited the full potential of the EU and its Member States to render its development aid more effective and efficient; therefore calls on the EU and its Member States to establish a new instrument for coordination in the form of a Regulation;

15.  Requests the Commission to submit, preferably by 31 December 2015 and in any event no later than the first semester of 2016, on the basis of Articles 209 and 210 TFEU, a proposal for an act concerning regulatory aspects on EU donor coordination on development aid, following the adoption and implementation of a road map of preparatory actions to facilitate the entry into force of these regulatory aspects, following the detailed recommendations set out in the Annex hereto;

16.  Asks the Commission and the EEAS to evaluate that road map on the basis of a set of indicators previously agreed. In this process the participants, on the one hand, would be EU delegations together with Member States' diplomatic representations in partner countries and, on the other hand, DG DEVCO and the EEAS together with representatives of Member States; that process would involve the Commission and the EEAS reporting back to the European Parliament in order to agree on the implementation of the roadmap;

17.  Confirms that the recommendations respect fundamental rights and the principle of subsidiarity;

18.  Considers that the requested proposal does not have financial implications;

19.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution and the accompanying detailed recommendations to the Commission and the Council.

ANNEX TO THE RESOLUTION:

DETAILED RECOMMENDATIONS AS TO THE CONTENT OF THE PROPOSAL REQUESTED

Recommendation 1 (on the objective and scope of the Regulation to be adopted)

The objective of the Regulation should be to codify and strengthen the mechanisms and practices for ensuring better complementarity and effective coordination of development aid. Its scope should provide for an appropriate solution to the question of increasing the effectiveness and efficiency of EU development aid.

The Regulation should apply to Member States and the EU's Institutions.

Recommendation 2 (on the general principles which should govern coordination among EU donors)

The Regulation should codify the following principles:

—  Ownership: The EU and its Member States should respect partner country leadership and align behind central government-led strategies. They should include, where appropriate, actions to help strengthen partner country capacity to lead operational frameworks for donor coordination.

—  Harmonisation: The EU and its Member States should implement common arrangements at country level for programming (joint programming) and work together to reduce the number of separate, often duplicated, missions to the field and diagnostic reviews. They should also delegate authority to lead donors for the execution of the activities for which one of those donors has a comparative advantage at sector or country level.

—  Alignment: The EU and its Members States should base their overall support (country strategies, policy dialogues and development cooperation programmes) on partners' national development strategies and periodic reviews of progress in implementing those strategies. To make aid administration less burdensome, they should use country-systems as the first option. The EU and its Members States should avoid creating dedicated structures for day-to-day management and implementation of aid-financed projects and programmes.

—  Predictability of funds: In order to effectively coordinate their development efforts, the EU and its Member States should provide developing countries with timely information on their forward expenditure and/or implementation plans, with indicative resource allocations to allow partner countries to integrate them in their medium-term planning.

—  Transparency and mutual accountability: The EU and its Member States should work together with partner countries to establish mutually-agreed frameworks that provide reliable assessments of performance, transparency and accountability of country systems and to improve availability and quality of data in partner countries. Key initiatives helping to achieve these goals such as the EU Transparency Guarantee and the International Aid Transparency Initiative should be further promoted.

—  Differentiated approach: In the implementation of this Regulation, a differentiated approach based on development contexts and needs should be pursued so that partner countries and regions are provided with specific, tailor-made cooperation, based on their own needs, strategies, priorities and assets.

—  Review, evaluation and discussion of results: The EU should monitor and report on the implementation of the Regulation. Actions taken should be reported on an annual basis to national parliaments and to the European Parliament.

Recommendation 3 (on Joint Programming)

The Regulation should codify the EU and its Member States' commitment to increasing their participation in joint multi-annual programming aligned with partner countries' development strategies including, to the best possible extent, the synchronisation with programming cycles at partner country level. The joint programming framework is a pragmatic tool to advance division of labour and should complement and strengthen existing arrangements for donor coordination in order to avoid unnecessary parallel processes.

The Regulation should ensure that the EU actively monitors progress at country level and at headquarters to ensure that steady progress is made on existing commitments, and that road maps for the implementation of the EU joint programming framework are duly followed up.

Recommendation 4 (on division of labour)

The EU and its Member States have developed a wide array of guiding principles on the way division of labour should be effectively conducted. The EU Code of Conduct on Complementarity and Division of Labour in Development Policy provides guidance to the EU and its Member States and should be speedily implemented in all partner countries.

Recommendation 4.1: on in-country division of labour

The EU and its Member States should reduce transaction costs by limiting the number of EU donors active in sector policy dialogue and cooperation activities. In order to do so, they should develop and implement sector exit plans for better sector concentration, based on a dialogue with partner governments and other donors as well as on an impact analysis of potential financing gaps.

Recommendation 4.2: on cross-country division of labour

With a view to reducing cross-country aid fragmentation and donor proliferation, the EU and its Member States should ensure that their country allocations are carried out on an informed basis including by taking into account other Member States' intentions and opportunities for EU impact. Member States should strive for better geographic concentration while the Commission should play a coordinating role, particularly in orphan countries. In this respect, EU joint analyses and strategies for both EU “darling” and "orphan" countries could serve as a basis for better cross-country division of labour.

Recommendation 5 (on monitoring progress at headquarters and country level)

The Regulation should codify the mechanisms to report evidence of progress of increased donor coordination at the country level by including, inter alia: a) disaggregated information on all relevant aid flows; b) progress on Joint Programming processes, with particular attention to division of labour; c) evidence of reduced transaction costs through division of labour; and d) the mainstreaming of Joint Programming and division of labour in strategic planning processes.

That information should be made available to partner countries so that they may report it in their national budget documents and thus facilitate transparency towards parliaments, civil society and other relevant stakeholders.

Recommendation 6 (on the involvement of national parliaments in the monitoring of donor coordination)

The Regulation should include provisions to increase the participation of national parliaments in the monitoring of donor coordination. To this end, annual meetings between the European Parliament and national parliaments should be held to assess progress and discuss results.

Recommendation 7 (on the annual report to the European Parliament and the Council)

The Regulation should include provisions on evaluation by means of an annual report. The Commission should examine the progress made in implementing the measures taken under the Regulation and should submit to the European Parliament and the Council, as well as to the Committee referred to in Recommendation 9, an annual report on its implementation and the results in terms of coordination of EU assistance.

That report should also be submitted to the European Economic and Social Committee and to the Committee of the Regions.

The annual report should be based on information relating to the previous year provided by headquarters and the field. It should assess the results of the efforts in enhancing coordination of the development policies of the EU and its Member States, using as far as possible specific and measurable indicators of progress towards meeting the objectives of the Regulation.

Recommendation 8 (on the review)

The Commission should submit to the European Parliament and the Council a report evaluating the implementation of the Regulation in the first three years accompanied, if appropriate, by a legislative proposal introducing the necessary amendments.

Recommendation 9 (on the establishment of the Committee on Coordination)

The Regulation should include provisions for the establishment of a Committee. The Committee should adopt its rules of procedure and should be composed of representatives from the Commission, the Council and the European Parliament.

(1) OJ C 46, 24.2.2006, p. 1. (2) Doc.9369/12. (3) Doc.9558/07. (4) OJ C 306 E, 15.12.2006, p. 373. (5) OJ C 279 E, 19.11.2009, p. 100. (6) OJ C 131 E, 8.5.2013, p. 80. (7) Doc.15912/09. (8) Doc.11081/10. (9) Doc.17769/10. (10) Doc.18239/10. (11) Project No 2008/170204 – Version 1. (12) Project No 2010/250763 – Version 1. (13) OJ L 201, 20.5.2010, p. 3.

European Parliament decision of 11 December 2013 on the nomination of Phil Wynn Owen as a Member of the Court of Auditors (C7-0313/2013 – 2013/0811(NLE))

P7_TA(2013)0559 A7-0438/2013

(Consultation)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to Article 286(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C7‑0313/2013),

–  having regard to Rule 108 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A7-0438/2013),

A.  whereas Parliament’s Committee on Budgetary Control proceeded to evaluate the credentials of the nominee, in particular in view of the requirements laid down in Article 286(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;

B.  whereas at its meeting of 7 November 2013 the Committee on Budgetary Control heard the Council’s nominee for membership of the Court of Auditors;

1.  Delivers a favourable opinion on the Council’s nomination of Phil Wynn Owen as a Member of the Court of Auditors;

2.  Instructs its President to forward this decision to the Council and, for information, the Court of Auditors, the other institutions of the European Union and the audit institutions of the Member States.

European Parliament decision of 11 December 2013 on the nomination of Alex Brenninkmeijer as a Member of the Court of Auditors (C7-0312/2013 – 2013/0810(NLE))

P7_TA(2013)0560 A7-0433/2013

(Consultation)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to Article 286(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C7‑0312/2013),

–  having regard to Rule 108 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A7-0433/2013),

A.  whereas Parliament’s Committee on Budgetary Control proceeded to evaluate the credentials of the nominee, in particular in view of the requirements laid down in Article 286(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;

B.  whereas at its meeting of 7 November 2013 the Committee on Budgetary Control heard the Council’s nominee for membership of the Court of Auditors;

1.  Delivers a favourable opinion on the Council’s nomination of Alex Brenninkmeijer as a Member of the Court of Auditors;

2.  Instructs its President to forward this decision to the Council and, for information, the Court of Auditors, the other institutions of the European Union and the audit institutions of the Member States.

European Parliament decision of 11 December 2013 on the nomination of Henri Grethen as a Member of the Court of Auditors (C7-0309/2013 – 2013/0807(NLE))

P7_TA(2013)0561 A7-0439/2013

(Consultation)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to Article 286(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C7-0309/2013),

–  having regard to Rule 108 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A7-0439/2013),

A.  whereas at its meeting of 7 November 2013 the Committee on Budgetary Control heard the Council’s nominee for membership of the Court of Auditors;

B.  whereas Henri Grethen fulfils the conditions laid down in Article 286(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;

1.  Delivers a favourable opinion on the Council’s nomination of Henri Grethen as a Member of the Court of Auditors;

2.  Instructs its President to forward this decision to the Council and, for information, the Court of Auditors, the other institutions of the European Union and the audit institutions of the Member States.

European Parliament decision of 11 December 2013 on the nomination of Nikolaos Milionis as a Member of the Court of Auditors (C7-0310/2013 –2013/0808 (NLE))

P7_TA(2013)0562 A7-0436/2013

(Consultation)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to Article 286(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C7-0310/2013),

–  having regard to Rule 108 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A7-0436/2013),

A.  whereas Parliament’s Committee on Budgetary Control proceeded to evaluate the credentials of the nominee, in particular in view of the requirements laid down in Article 286(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;

B.  whereas at its meeting of 7 November 2013 the Committee on Budgetary Control heard the Council’s nominee for membership of the Court of Auditors;

1.  Delivers a favourable opinion on the Council’s nomination of Nikolaos Milionis as a Member of the Court of Auditors;

2.  Instructs its President to forward this decision to the Council and, for information, the Court of Auditors, the other institutions of the European Union and the audit institutions of the Member States.

European Parliament decision of 11 December 2013 on the nomination of Danièle Lamarque as a Member of the Court of Auditors (C7-0311/2013 – 2013/0809(NLE))

P7_TA(2013)0563 A7-0437/2013

(Consultation)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to Article 286(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C7‑0311/2013),

–  having regard to Rule 108 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A7-0437/2013),

A.  whereas Parliament’s Committee on Budgetary Control proceeded to evaluate the credentials of the nominee, in particular in view of the requirements laid down in Article 286(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;

B.  whereas at its meeting of 7 November 2013 the Committee on Budgetary Control heard the Council’s nominee for membership of the Court of Auditors;

1.  Delivers a favourable opinion on the Council’s nomination of Danièle Lamarque as a Member of the Court of Auditors;

2.  Instructs its President to forward this decision to the Council and, for information, the Court of Auditors, the other institutions of the European Union and the audit institutions of the Member States.

European Parliament decision of 11 December 2013 on the proposal of the European Central Bank for the appointment of the Chair of the Supervisory Board of the European Central Bank (N7-0103/2013 – C7-0424/2013 – 2013/0901(NLE))

P7_TA(2013)0564 A7-0452/2013

(Approval)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the proposal of the European Central Bank of 22 November 2013 for the appointment of the Chair of the Supervisory Board of the European Central Bank (N7-0103/2013),

–  having regard to Article 26(3) of Council Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013 of 15 October 2013 conferring specific tasks on the European Central Bank concerning policies relating to the prudential supervision of credit institutions(1),

–  having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement between the European Parliament and the European Central Bank on the practical modalities of the exercise of democratic accountability and oversight over the exercise of the tasks conferred on the ECB within the framework of the Single Supervisory Mechanism(2),

–  having regard to its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (A7-0452/2013),

A.  whereas Article 26(3) of Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013 provides that the European Central Bank (ECB) is to submit to Parliament its proposal for the appointment of the Chair of its Supervisory Board and that the Chair is to be chosen on the basis of an open selection procedure from among individuals of recognised standing and experience in banking and financial matters who are not members of the Governing Council;

B.  whereas Article 26(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013 provides that the appointments for the Supervisory Board in accordance with that Regulation are to respect the principles of gender balance, experience and qualification;

C.  whereas, by letter of 22 November 2013, the ECB submitted to Parliament a proposal for the appointment of Danièle Nouy as the Chair of the Supervisory Board of the ECB for a term of office of five years;

D.  whereas Parliament’s Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs then proceeded to evaluate the credentials of the proposed candidate, in particular in view of the requirements laid down in Article 26(2) and (3) of Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013; whereas in carrying out that evaluation, the Committee received a curriculum vitae from the proposed candidate as well as her replies to a written questionnaire;

E.  whereas the Committee held a hearing with the proposed candidate on 27 November 2013, at which she made an opening statement and then responded to questions from the members of the Committee;

1.  Approves the ECB’s proposal for the appointment of Danièle Nouy as Chair of the Supervisory Board of the ECB;

2.  Instructs its President to forward this decision to the European Central Bank, the Council and the governments of the Member States.

(1) OJ L 287, 29.10.2013, p. 63. (2) OJ L 320, 30.11.2013, p. 1.

European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 December 2013 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing common rules and procedures for the implementation of the Union's instruments for external action (COM(2011)0842 – C7-0494/2011 – 2011/0415(COD))

P7_TA(2013)0565 A7-0447/2013

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2011)0842),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Articles 209(1) and 212(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C7‑0494/2011),

—  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 9 October 2012(1),

–  having regard to the undertaking given by the Council representative by letter of 4 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 Foreign Affairs and the opinions of the Committee on Development, the Committee on International Trade and the Committee on Budgets (A7-0447/2013),

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

2.  Approves the statement by Parliament annexed to this Resolution;

3.  Takes note of the Commission statements 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 11 December 2013 with a view to the adoption of Regulation (EU) No .../2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down common rules and procedures for the implementation of the Union's instruments for financing external action

(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Regulation (EU) No 236/2014.)

ANNEX TO THE LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION

Declaration of the European Commission on the use of implementing acts for laying down provisions for the implementation of certain rules in Regulation No 232/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 establishing a European Neighbourhood Instrument and in Regulation (EU) No 231/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 establishing an Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA II)

The European Commission considers that the rules for implementing cross-border cooperation programmes as set out in Regulation (EU) No 236/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 laying down common rules and procedures for the implementation of the Union's instruments for financing external action and other specific, more detailed implementing rules in Regulation (EU) No 232/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 establishing a European Neighbourhood Instrument and in Regulation (EU) No 231/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 establishing an Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA II), aim at supplementing the basic act and should therefore be delegated acts to be adopted on the basis of Article 290 TFEU. The European Commission will not oppose the adoption of the text as agreed by the co-legislators. Nevertheless, the European Commission recalls that the question of delimitation between Articles 290 and 291 TFEU is currently under examination by the Court of Justice of the European Union in the ‘biocides’ case.

European Commission declaration concerning ‘reflows’

In line with the obligations set out in Article 21(5) of the Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union and repealing Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002, the European Commission will include in the draft budget a line accommodating internal assigned revenues and wherever possible, it will indicate the amount of such revenue.

The budgetary authority will be informed about the amount of the accumulated resources every year during the planning process of the budget. Internal assigned revenues will be included in the draft budget only to the extenet that their amount is certain.

Statement by the European Parliament on the suspension of assistance granted under the financial instruments

The European Parliament notes that Regulation (EU) No 233/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 establishing a financing instrument for development cooperation for the period 2014-2020, Regulation (EU) No 232/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 establishing a European Neighbourhood Instrument, Regulation (EU) No 234/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 establishing a Partnership Instrument for cooperation with third countries and Regulation (EU) No 231/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 establishing an Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance (IPA II) do not contain any explicit reference to the possibility of suspending assistance in cases where a beneficiary country fails to observe the basic principles enunciated in the respective instrument and notably the principles of democracy, rule of law and the respect for human rights.

The European Parliament considers that any suspension of assistance under these instruments would modify the overall financial scheme agreed under the ordinary legislative procedure. As a co-legislator and co-branch of the budgetary authority, the European Parliament is therefore entitled to fully exercise its prerogatives in that regard, if such a decision is to be taken.

(1) OJ C 391, 18.12.2012, p. 110.

European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 December 2013 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing an Instrument for Stability (COM(2011)0845 – C7-0497/2011 – 2011/0413(COD))

P7_TA(2013)0566 A7-0451/2013

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2011)0845),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Articles 209(1) and 212(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C7‑0497/2011),

–  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 4 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 Foreign Affairs and the opinions of the Committee on Development, the Committee on International Trade and the Committee on Budgets (A7-0451/2013),

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

2.  Takes note of the Commission statement annexed to this resolution;

3.  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;

4.  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 11 December 2013 with a view to the adoption of Regulation (EU) No .../2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing an instrument contributing to Stability and Peace

(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Regulation (EU) No 230/2014.)

ANNEX TO THE LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION

Declaration by the European Commission on the strategic dialogue with the European Parliament(1)

On the basis of Article 14 TEU, the European Commission will conduct a strategic dialogue with the European Parliament prior to the programming of the Regulation (EU) No 230/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 establishing an instrument contributing to stability and peace and after initial consultation of its relevant beneficiaries, where appropriate. The European Commission will present to the European Parliament the relevant available documents on programming with indicative allocations foreseen per country/region, and, within a country/region, priorities, possible results and indicative allocations foreseen per priority for geographic programmes, as well as the choice of assistance modalities(2). The European Commission will present to the European Parliament the relevant available documents on programming with thematic priorities, possible results, choice of assistance modalities2, and financial allocations for such priorities foreseen in thematic programmes. The European Commission will take into account the position expressed by the European Parliament on the matter.

The European Commission will conduct a strategic dialogue with the European Parliament in preparing the mid-term review and before any substantial revision of the programming documents during the period of validity of this Regulation.

The European Commission, if invited by the European Parliament, will explain where the European Parliament's observations have been taken into consideration in the programming documents and any other follow-up given to the strategic dialogue.

(1) The European Commission will be represented at the responsible Commissioner level. (2) Where applicable.

European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 December 2013 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a European Neighbourhood Instrument (COM(2011)0839 – C7-0492/2011 – 2011/0405(COD))

P7_TA(2013)0567 A7-0449/2013

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2011)0839),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Articles 209(1) and 212(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C7‑0492/2011),

–  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 14 November 2012(1),

–  having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions of 9 October 2012(2),

–  having regard to the undertaking given by the Council representative by letter of 4 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 Foreign Affairs and the opinions of the Committee on Development, the Committee on International Trade, the Committee on Budgets, the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy, the Committee on Regional Development, the Committee on Culture and Education and the Committee on Women's Rights and Gender Equality (A7-0449/2013),

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

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

3.  Takes note of the Commission declarations 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 11 December 2013 with a view to the adoption of Regulation (EU) No .../2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a European Neighbourhood Instrument

(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Regulation (EU) No 232/2014.)

ANNEX TO THE LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION

Declaration by the European Commission on the strategic dialogue with the European Parliament(3)

On the basis of Article 14 TEU, the European Commission will conduct a strategic dialogue with the European Parliament prior to the programming of the Regulation (EU) No 232/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 establishing a European Neighbourhood Instrument and after initial consultation of its relevant beneficiaries, where appropriate. The European Commission will present to the European Parliament the relevant available documents on programming with indicative allocations foreseen per country/region, and, within a country/region, priorities, possible results and indicative allocations foreseen per priority for geographic programmes, as well as the choice of assistance modalities(4). The European Commission will present to the European Parliament

the relevant available documents on programming with thematic priorities, possible results, choice of assistance modalities2, and financial allocations for such priorities foreseen in thematic programmes. The European Commission will take into account the position expressed by the European Parliament on the matter.

The European Commission will conduct a strategic dialogue with the European Parliament in preparing the mid-term review and before any substantial revision of the programming documents during the period of validity of this Regulation.

The European Commission, if invited by the European Parliament, will explain where the European Parliament's observations have been taken into consideration in the programming documents and any other follow-up given to the strategic dialogue.

Declaration of the European Commission on the use of implementing acts for laying down provisions for the implementation of certain rules in Regulation (EU) No 232/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 establishing a European Neighbourhood Instrument and in Regulation (EU) No 231/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 establishing an Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA II)

The European Commission considers that the rules for implementing cross-border cooperation programmes as set out in Regulation (EU) No 236/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 laying down common rules and procedures for the implementation of the Union's instruments for financing external action and other specific, more detailed implementing rules in Regulation (EU) No 232/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 establishing a European Neighbourhood Instrument and in Regulation (EU) No 231/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 establishing an Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA II), aim at supplementing the basic act and should therefore be delegated acts to be adopted on the basis of Article 290 TFEU. The European Commission will not oppose the adoption of the text as agreed by the co-legislators. Nevertheless, the European Commission recalls that the question of delimitation between Articles 290 and 291 TFEU is currently under examination by the Court of Justice of the European Union in the ‘biocides’ case.

Statement by the European Parliament on the suspension of assistance granted under the financial instruments

The European Parliament notes that Regulation (EU) No 233/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 establishing a financing instrument for development cooperation for the period 2014-2020, Regulation (EU) No 232/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 establishing a European Neighbourhood Instrument, Regulation (EU) No 234/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 establishing a Partnership Instrument for cooperation with third countries and Regulation (EU) No 231/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 establishing an Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance (IPA II) do not contain any explicit reference to the possibility of suspending assistance in cases where a beneficiary country fails to observe the basic principles enunciated in the respective instrument and notably the principles of democracy, rule of law and the respect for human rights.

The European Parliament considers that any suspension of assistance under these instruments would modify the overall financial scheme agreed under the ordinary legislative procedure. As a co-legislator and co-branch of the budgetary authority, the European Parliament is therefore entitled to fully exercise its prerogatives in that regard, if such a decision is to be taken.

(1) OJ C 11, 15.1.2013, p. 77. (2) OJ C 391, 18.12.2012, p. 110. (3) The European Commission will be represented at the responsible Commissioner level. (4) Where applicable.

European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 December 2013 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance (IPA II) (COM(2011)0838 – C7-0491/2011 – 2011/0404(COD))

P7_TA(2013)0568 A7-0445/2013

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2011)0838),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 212(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C7-0491/2011),

–  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 14 November 2012(1),

–  having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions of 9 October 2012(2),

–  having regard to the undertaking given by the Council representative by letter of 4 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 Foreign Affairs and the opinions of the Committee on International Trade, the Committee on Budgets, the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs and the Committee on Regional Development (A7-0445/2013),

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

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

3.  Takes note of the Commission declarations 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 11 December 2013 with a view to the adoption of Regulation (EU) No .../2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing an Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance (IPA II)

(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Regulation (EU) No 231/2014.)

ANNEX TO THE LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION

Declaration by the European Commission on the strategic dialogue with the European Parliament(3)

On the basis of Article 14 TEU, the European Commission will conduct a strategic dialogue with the European Parliament prior to the programming of the Regulation (EU) No 231/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 establishing an Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance (IPA II) and after initial consultation of its relevant beneficiaries, where appropriate. The European Commission will present to the European Parliament the relevant available documents on programming with indicative allocations foreseen per country/region, and, within a country/region, priorities, possible results and indicative allocations foreseen per priority for geographic programmes, as well as the choice of assistance modalities(4). The European Commission will present to the European Parliament the relevant available documents on programming with thematic priorities, possible results, choice of assistance modalities2, and financial allocations for such priorities foreseen in thematic programmes. The European Commission will take into account the position expressed by the European Parliament on the matter.

The European Commission will conduct a strategic dialogue with the European Parliament in preparing the mid-term review and before any substantial revision of the programming documents during the period of validity of this Regulation.

The European Commission, if invited by the European Parliament, will explain where the European Parliament's observations have been taken into consideration in the programming documents and any other follow-up given to the strategic dialogue.

Joint Declaration by the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission concerning the funding of horizontal programmes for minorities

The European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission agree that point (ii) of point (a) of Article 2(1) of Regulation (EU) No 231/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 establishing an Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA II) is to be interpreted as allowing the funding of programmes aimed at enhancing respect for and protection of minorities in line with the Copenhagen criteria, as it was the case under Regulation (EC) No 1085/2006 of the Council of 17 July 2006 establishing an Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA).

Declaration of the European Commission on the use of implementing acts for laying down provisions for the implementation of certain rules in Regulation (EU) No. 232/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 establishing a European Neighbourhood Instrument and in Regulation (EU) No 231/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 establishing an Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA II)

The European Commission considers that the rules for implementing cross-border cooperation programmes as set out in Regulation (EU) No 236/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 laying down common rules and procedures for the implementation of the Union's instruments for financing external action and other specific, more detailed implementing rules in Regulation (EU) No 232/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 establishing a European Neighbourhood Instrument and in Regulation (EU) No 231/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 establishing an Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA II), aim at supplementing the basic act and should therefore be delegated acts to be adopted on the basis of Article 290 TFEU. The European Commission will not oppose the adoption of the text as agreed by the co-legislators. Nevertheless, the European Commission recalls that the question of delimitation between Articles 290 and 291 TFEU is currently under examination by the Court of Justice of the European Union in the ‘biocides’ case.

Statement by the European Parliament on the suspension of assistance granted under the financial instruments

The European Parliament notes that Regulation (EU) No 233/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 establishing a financing instrument for development cooperation for the period 2014-2020, Regulation (EU) No 232/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 establishing a European Neighbourhood Instrument, Regulation (EU) No 234/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 establishing a Partnership Instrument for cooperation with third countries and Regulation (EU) No 231/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 establishing an Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance (IPA II) do not contain any explicit reference to the possibility of suspending assistance in cases where a beneficiary country fails to observe the basic principles enunciated in the respective instrument and notably the principles of democracy, rule of law and the respect for human rights.

The European Parliament considers that any suspension of assistance under these instruments would modify the overall financial scheme agreed under the ordinary legislative procedure. As a co-legislator and co-branch of the budgetary authority, the European Parliament is therefore entitled to fully exercise its prerogatives in that regard, if such a decision is to be taken.

Statement by the European Parliament on the Beneficiaries listed in Annex I of the Regulation (EU) No 231/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 establishing an Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance (IPA II)

The European Parliament notes that the Regulation (EU) No 231/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 establishing an Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance (IPA II) uses the term ‘the beneficiaries listed in Annex I’ throughout the text. The European Parliament considers that this term applies to countries.

(1) OJ C 11, 15.1.2013, p. 77. (2) OJ C 391, 18.12.2012, p. 110. (3) The European Commission will be represented at the responsible Commissioner level. (4) Where applicable.

European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 December 2013 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a Partnership Instrument for cooperation with third countries (COM(2011)0843 – C7-0495/2011 – 2011/0411(COD))

P7_TA(2013)0569 A7-0446/2013

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2011)0843),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Articles 207(2), 209(1) and 212(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C7‑0495/2011),

–  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 9 October 2012(1),

–  having regard to the undertaking given by the Council representative by letter of 4 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 Foreign Affairs and the opinions of the Committee on International Trade, the Committee on Development, the Committee on Budgets and the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (A7-0446/2013),

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

2.  Approves the statement by Parliament 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 11 December 2013 with a view to the adoption of Regulation (EU) No .../2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a Partnership Instrument for cooperation with third countries

(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Regulation (EU) No 234/2014.)

ANNEX TO THE LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION

Declaration by the European Commission on the strategic dialogue with the European Parliament(2)

On the basis of Article 14 TEU, the European Commission will conduct a strategic dialogue with the European Parliament prior to the programming of the Regulation (EU) No 234/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 establishing a Partnership Instrument for cooperation with third countries and after initial consultation of its relevant beneficiaries, where appropriate. The European Commission will present to the European Parliament the relevant available documents on programming with indicative allocations foreseen per country/region, and, within a country/region, priorities, possible results and indicative allocations foreseen per priority for geographic programmes, as well as the choice of assistance modalities(3). The European Commission will present to the European Parliament the relevant available documents on programming with thematic priorities, possible results, choice of assistance modalities2, and financial allocations for such priorities foreseen in thematic programmes. The European Commission will take into account the position expressed by the European Parliament on the matter.

The European Commission will conduct a strategic dialogue with the European Parliament in preparing the mid-term review and before any substantial revision of the programming documents during the period of validity of this Regulation.

The European Commission, if invited by the European Parliament, will explain where the European Parliament's observations have been taken into consideration in the programming documents and any other follow-up given to the strategic dialogue.

Statement by the European Parliament on the suspension of assistance granted under the financial instruments

The European Parliament notes that Regulation (EU) No 233/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 establishing a financing instrument for development cooperation for the period 2014-2020, Regulation (EU) No 232/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 establishing a European Neighbourhood Instrument, Regulation (EU) No 234/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 establishing a Partnership Instrument for cooperation with third countries and Regulation (EU) No 231/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 establishing an Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance (IPA II) do not contain any explicit reference to the possibility of suspending assistance in cases where a beneficiary country fails to observe the basic principles enunciated in the respective instrument and notably the principles of democracy, rule of law and the respect for human rights.

The European Parliament considers that any suspension of assistance under these instruments would modify the overall financial scheme agreed under the ordinary legislative procedure. As a co-legislator and co-branch of the budgetary authority, the European Parliament is therefore entitled to fully exercise its prerogatives in that regard, if such a decision is to be taken.

(1) OJ C 391, 18.12.2012, p. 110. (2) The European Commission will be represented at the responsible Commissioner level. (3) Where applicable.

European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 December 2013 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a financing instrument for the promotion of democracy and human rights worldwide (COM(2011)0844 – C7-0496/2011 – 2011/0412(COD))

P7_TA(2013)0570 A7-0448/2013

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2011)0844),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Articles 209 and 212 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C7‑0496/2011),

–  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 15 November 2012(1),

—  having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions of 9 October 2012(2),

–  having regard to the undertaking given by the Council representative by letter of 4 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 Foreign Affairs and the opinions of the Committee on Development, the Committee on Budgets and the Committee on Women's Rights and Gender Equality (A7-0448/2013),

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

2.  Approves the joint statement by the 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 11 December 2013 with a view to the adoption of Regulation (EU) No .../2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a financing instrument for democracy and human rights worldwide

(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Regulation (EU) No 235/2014.)

ANNEX TO THE LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION

Declaration by the European Commission on the strategic dialogue with the European

Parliament(3)

On the basis of Article 14 TEU, the European Commission will conduct a strategic dialogue with the European Parliament prior to the programming of the Regulation (EU) No 235/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 establishing a financing instrument for democracy and human rights worldwide and after initial consultation of its relevant beneficiaries, where appropriate. The European Commission will present to the European Parliament the relevant available documents on programming with indicative allocations foreseen per country/region, and, within a country/region, priorities, possible results and indicative allocations foreseen per priority for geographic programmes, as well as the choice of assistance modalities(4). The European Commission will present to the European Parliament the relevant available documents on programming with thematic priorities, possible results, choice of assistance modalities2, and financial allocations for such priorities foreseen in thematic programmes. The European Commission will take into account the position expressed by the European Parliament on the matter.

The European Commission will conduct a strategic dialogue with the European Parliament in preparing the mid-term review and before any substantial revision of the programming documents during the period of validity of this Regulation.

The European Commission, if invited by the European Parliament, will explain where the European Parliament's observations have been taken into consideration in the programming documents and any other follow-up given to the strategic dialogue.

Joint Declaration of the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission on Election Observation Missions

The European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission underline the important contribution of European Union Election Observation Missions (EU EOMs) to Union external relations policy supporting democracy in partner countries. EU EOMs contribute to increase transparency and confidence in electoral processes, and provide an informed assessment of elections as well as recommendations for their further improvement, in the context of Union cooperation and political dialogue with partner countries. In this regard, the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission agree that up to 25 % of the budget over the period 2014-2020 of the Regulation (EU) No 235/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 establishing a financial instrument for democracy and human rights worldwide should be devoted to the funding of EU EOMs, depending on annual election priorities.

(1) OJ C 11, 15.1.2013, p. 81. (2) OJ C 391, 18.12.2012, p. 110. (3) The European Commission will be represented at the responsible Commissioner level. (4) Where applicable.

European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 December 2013 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a financing instrument for development cooperation (COM(2011)0840 – C7-0493/2011 – 2011/0406(COD))

P7_TA(2013)0571 A7-0450/2013

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2011)0840),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 209(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C7‑0493/2011),

–  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 9 October 2012(1),

–  having regard to the undertaking given by the Council representative by letter of 4 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 Development and the opinions of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, the Committee on International Trade, the Committee on Budgets and the Committee on Women's Rights and Gender Equality (A7-0450/2013),

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

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

3.  Takes note of the Commission statements 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 11 December 2013 with a view to the adoption of Regulation (EU) No .../2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a financing instrument for development cooperation for the period 2014-2020

(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Regulation (EU) No 233/2014.)

ANNEX TO THE LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION

Declaration by the European Commission on the strategic dialogue with the European Parliament(2)

On the basis of Article 14 TEU, the European Commission will conduct a strategic dialogue with the European Parliament prior to the programming of the Regulation (EU) No 233/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 establishing a financing instrument for development cooperation for the period 2014-2020 and after initial consultation of its relevant beneficiaries, where appropriate. The European Commission will present to the European Parliament the relevant available documents on programming with indicative allocations foreseen per country/region, and, within a country/region, priorities, possible results and indicative allocations foreseen per priority for geographic programmes, as well as the choice of assistance modalities(3). The European Commission will present to the European Parliament the relevant available documents on programming with thematic priorities, possible results, choice of assistance modalities2, and financial allocations for such priorities foreseen in thematic programmes. The European Commission will take into account the position expressed by the European Parliament on the matter.

The European Commission will conduct a strategic dialogue with the European Parliament in preparing the mid-term review and before any substantial revision of the programming documents during the period of validity of this Regulation.

The European Commission, if invited by the European Parliament, will explain where the European Parliament's observations have been taken into consideration in the programming documents and any other follow-up given to the strategic dialogue.

Declaration by the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission on point (ii) of point (b) of Article 5(2) of Regulation (EU) No 233/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 establishing an instrument for development cooperation for the period 2014-2020

With regard to the application of point (ii) of point (b) of Article 5(2) of Regulation (EU) No 233/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 establishing an instrument for development cooperation for the period 2014-2020 at the time of entry into force of that Regulation, the following partner countries are considered eligible for bilateral cooperation, as exceptional cases, including in view of the phasing out of development grant aid: Cuba, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru and South Africa.

Declaration by the European Commission on Article 5 of Regulation (EU) No 233/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 establishing an instrument for development cooperation for the period 2014-2020

The European Commission will seek the views of the European Parliament before changing the application of point (ii) of point (b) of Article 5(2) of Regulation (EU) No 233/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 establishing an instrument for development cooperation for the period 2014-2020.

Declaration by the European Commission on allocation for basic services

Regulation (EU) No 233/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 establishing an instrument for development cooperation for the period 2014-2020 should enable the Union to contribute to fulfilling the joint Union commitment of providing continued support for human development to improve people's lives in line with the Millennium Development Goals. At least 20 % of allocated assistance under that Regulation will be allocated to basic social services, with a focus on health and education, and to secondary education, recognising that a degree of flexibility must be the norm, such as cases where exceptional assistance is involved. Data concerning the respect of this declaration will be included in the annual report referred to in Article 13 of the Regulation (EU) No 236/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 laying down common rules and procedures for the implementation of the Union's instrument for financing external action.

Statement by the European Parliament on the suspension of assistance granted under the financial instruments

The European Parliament notes that Regulation (EU) No 233/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 establishing a financing instrument for development cooperation for the period 2014-2020, Regulation (EU) No 232/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 establishing a European Neighbourhood Instrument, Regulation (EU) No 234/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 establishing a Partnership Instrument for cooperation with third countries and Regulation (EU) No 231/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 establishing an Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance (IPA II) do not contain any explicit reference to the possibility of suspending assistance in cases where a beneficiary country fails to observe the basic principles enunciated in the respective instrument and notably the principles of democracy, rule of law and the respect for human rights.

The European Parliament considers that any suspension of assistance under these instruments would modify the overall financial scheme agreed under the ordinary legislative procedure. As a co-legislator and co-branch of the budgetary authority, the European Parliament is therefore entitled to fully exercise its prerogatives in that regard, if such a decision is to be taken.

(1) OJ C 391, 18.12.2012, p. 110. (2) The European Commission will be represented at the responsible Commissioner level. (3) Where applicable.

European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 December 2013 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (2014 - 2020) (COM(2011)0608 – C7-0319/2011 – 2011/0269(COD))

P7_TA(2013)0572 A7-0005/2013

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2011)0608),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Articles 175, 42 and 43 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C7‑0319/2011),

–  having regard to the opinion of the Committee on Legal Affairs on the proposed legal basis,

–  having regard to Article 294(3) and Article 175 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to the reasoned opinions submitted, within the framework of the Protocol No 2 on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality, by the Danish Parliament, by the Netherlands Senate and the Netherlands House of Representatives, and by the Swedish Parliament, asserting that the draft legislative act does not comply with the principle of subsidiarity,

–  having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 23 February 2012(1),

–  having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions of 3 May 2012(2),

–  having regard to the undertaking given by the Council representative by letter of 18 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 Rules 55 and 37 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs and the opinions of the Committee on International Trade, the Committee on Budgets, the Committee on Budgetary Control, the Committee on Regional Development and the Committee on Women's Rights and Gender Equality (A7-0005/2013),

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 11 December 2013 with a view to the adoption of Regulation (EU) No .../2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (2014-2020) and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1927/2006

(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Regulation (EU) No 1309/2013.)

(1) OJ C 143, 22.5.2012, p. 42. (2) OJ C 225, 27.7.2012, p. 159.

European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 December 2013 on the proposal for a Council directive amending Directive 2011/16/EU as regards mandatory automatic exchange of information in the field of taxation (COM(2013)0348 – C7-0200/2013 – 2013/0188(CNS))

P7_TA(2013)0573 A7-0376/2013

(Special legislative procedure – consultation)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to the Council (COM(2013)0348),

–  having regard to Article 115 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C7‑0200/2013),

–  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 opinion of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A7-0376/2013),

1.  Approves the Commission proposal as amended;

2.  Calls on the Commission to alter its proposal accordingly, in accordance with Article 293(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;

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

4.  Asks the Council to consult Parliament again if it intends to substantially amend the Commission proposal;

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

Text proposed by the Commission   Amendment Amendment 1 Proposal for a directive Recital 1 (1)  In recent years, the challenge posed by tax fraud and tax evasion has increased considerably and has become a major focus of concern within the Union and at global level. Unreported and untaxed income is considerably reducing national tax revenues. An increase in the efficiency and effectiveness of tax collection is therefore urgently needed. The automatic exchange of information constitutes an important tool in this regard and the Commission in its Communication of 6 December 2012 containing an Action plan to strengthen the fight against tax fraud and tax evasion8 highlighted the need to promote vigorously the automatic exchange of information as the future European and international standard for transparency and exchange of information in tax matters. The European Council on 22 May 2013 requested the extension of automatic information exchange at Union and global levels with a view to combatting tax fraud, tax evasion and aggressive tax planning. (1)  In recent years, the challenge posed by tax fraud, tax evasion and aggressive tax planning has increased considerably and has become a major focus of concern within the Union and at global level, especially in times of crisis. Unreported and untaxed income is considerably reducing national tax revenues, creating conditions for unfair competition and leading to losses. An increase in the efficiency and effectiveness of tax collection is therefore urgently needed. There should be effective systems in place to improve the efficiency of tax collection and to determine which Member State’s tax law is applicable. The automatic exchange of information constitutes an important tool in this regard and the Commission in its Communication of 6 December 2012 containing an Action plan to strengthen the fight against tax fraud and tax evasion8 highlighted the need to promote vigorously the automatic exchange of information as the future European and international standard for transparency and exchange of information in tax matters. The European Parliament, in its resolution of 21 May 2013 on Fight against Tax Fraud, Tax Evasion and Tax Havens9, and the European Council on 22 May 2013, requested the extension of automatic information exchange at Union and global levels with a view to combatting tax fraud, tax evasion and aggressive tax planning. _____________ ____________ 8 COM(2012)722 final. 8 COM(2012)0722 final. 9 Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0205. Amendment 2 Proposal for a directive Recital 1 a (new) (1a)  In the past, tax policy was seen as an exclusively national matter, in which the Union does not matter. Today, tax must be as a result of globalisation, also discussed at the Union level. It would be more efficient and effective for the Commission to coordinate the exchange of information on tax on behalf of Member States than have a series of bilateral agreements between Member States. Different standards for automatic exchange of information vary from country to country. This is unnecessarily complex and imposes unnecessarily high costs for both Member States and financial institutions within the Union. Amendment 3 Proposal for a directive Recital 1 b (new) (1b)  The definitions relating to Directive 2011/16/EU should be developed in coordination with the OECD's work in this area, with the purpose of providing clearer explanations, simplifying the regulatory framework and enhancing the coherence of the amendments to that Directive. Amendment 4 Proposal for a directive Recital 3 (3)  As highlighted by the request of the European Council, it is appropriate to bring forward the extension of automatic information exchange already envisaged in Article 8(5) of Directive 2011/16/EU. A Union initiative ensures a coherent, consistent and comprehensive Union-wide approach to the automatic exchange of information in the internal market which would lead to cost savings both for tax administrations and economic operators. (3)  As highlighted by the request of the European Council, it is appropriate to bring forward the extension of automatic information exchange already envisaged in Article 8(5) of Directive 2011/16/EU. A Union initiative ensures a coherent, consistent and comprehensive Union-wide approach to the automatic exchange of information in the internal market and is important in order to improve the efficiency of the tax systems and to strengthen the internal market in which the co-existence of 28 national tax systems raises issues of double taxation and distortion of competition. Not only would Member States benefit from the exchange of information on an equal footing, but the Union would be able to take the lead to promote similar standards internationally. Amendment 5 Proposal for a directive Recital 3 a (new) (3a)  Member States should implement administrative cooperation and exchange of information that does not violate taxpayers' procedural rights or their right to privacy. Amendment 6 Proposal for a directive Recital 3 b (new) (3b)  In accordance with the OECD report of 19 June 2013 and the St Petersburg G20 Leaders’ Declaration of 6 September 2013, the automatic exchange of information should be based on a common global model which ensures adequate confidentiality and the proper use of information exchanged. Expanding the scope of the automatic exchange of tax information will be the Union’s contribution to the work of the OECD and should increase the probability of a coherent global system, based on the new OECD standard to be presented in February 2014. Amendment 7 Proposal for a directive Recital 3 c (new) (3c)  When data is submitted to the tax authorities for the purpose of information exchange with other countries, it is important to clarify how those authorities may use that data. Amendment 9 Proposal for a directive Recital 4 a (new) (4a)  In order to reduce ambiguities and inconsistencies, and to achieve cost savings, it is essential that the implementation of this Directive is coordinated with the implementation of FATCA. Amendment 10 Proposal for a directive Recital 5 (5)  The conclusion of parallel and uncoordinated agreements by Member States under Article 19 of Directive 2011/16/EU would lead to distortions that would be detrimental to the smooth functioning of the internal Market. Expanded automatic information exchange on the basis of a Union-wide legislative instrument would remove the need for Member States to invoke that provision, with a view to concluding bilateral or multilateral agreements that may be considered appropriate on the same subject in the absence of relevant Union legislation. (5)  The conclusion of parallel and uncoordinated agreements by Member States under Article 19 of Directive 2011/16/EU would lead to distortions that would be detrimental to the smooth functioning of the internal Market and to the Union approach as a whole. Expanded automatic information exchange on the basis of a Union-wide legislative instrument would remove the need for Member States to invoke that provision, with a view to concluding bilateral or multilateral agreements that may be considered appropriate on the same subject in the absence of relevant Union legislation. Therefore, the Union would also be in a better negotiating position to push for higher standards of tax information exchange at a global level. Amendment 11 Proposal for a directive Recital 5 a (new) (5a)  Work is in progress under the auspices of the OECD to develop bilateral and multilateral model agreements on exchanging information. Negotiations are also being held between the USA and many other countries on the implementation of FATCA by means of bilateral agreements. Many of the proposed amendments to Directive 2011/16/EU on administrative cooperation in the field of taxation regulate the same information exchange with which FATCA and the work at the OECD are concerned. The Commission should clarify the relationship between those regulatory provisions in order to ensure that the national tax authorities and the financial institutions responsible for applying those amendments are able to implement them. Amendment 12 Proposal for a directive Recital 6 a (new) (6a)  The new categories of income and capital in respect of which this Directive introduces an obligation to exchange information should be established in accordance with their interpretation in the law of the Member State communicating the information. Amendment 13 Proposal for a directive Recital 7 a (new) (7a)  The purpose of the existing provision of information to national tax authorities on income from capital and services is, inter alia, to provide a basis for taxation and for exchanges of information with other countries. If the requirement to provide information is now altered and information is obtained purely for the purpose of exchanging it, it is important to make it clear how the national tax authorities are permitted to use that information. Amendment 15 Proposal for a directive Recital 9 a (new) (9a)  Each Member State should lay down penalties for breaches of this Directive and should take appropriate measures to ensure compliance therewith. Amendment 16 Proposal for a directive Recital 10 (10)  This Directive respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles which are recognised in particular by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. (10)  This Directive respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles which are recognised in particular in Article 16 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and in Article 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. In light of the sensitivity of the data to be collected, specific attention should be paid to the respect for the right to privacy and to legitimate claims of confidentiality, in particular during any inquiry process. Amendment 17 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – point b Directive 2011/16/EU Article 8 – paragraph 3a – subparagraph 1 – introductory part 3a.  The competent authority of each Member State shall, by automatic exchange, communicate to the competent authority of any other Member State, information regarding taxable periods as from 1 January 2014 concerning the following items which are paid, secured or held by a financial institution for the direct or indirect benefit of a beneficial owner who is a natural person resident in that other Member State: 3a.  The competent authority of each Member State shall, by automatic exchange, communicate to the competent authority of any other Member State, information regarding taxable periods as from 1 January 2014 concerning the following items, in accordance with its national law, which are paid, secured or held by a financial institution for the direct or indirect benefit of a beneficial owner who is a natural person resident in that other Member State: Amendment 18 Proposal for a Directive Article 1 – point b a (new) Directive 2011/16/EU Article 8 – paragraph 4 (ba)  Paragraph 4 is replaced by the following: 4.  Before 1 July 2016, Member States shall provide the Commission on an annual basis with statistics on the volume of automatic exchanges and, to the extent possible, with information on the administrative and other relevant costs and benefits relating to exchanges that have taken place and any potential changes, for both tax administrations and third parties. "4. Before 1 July 2016, Member States shall provide the Commission on an annual basis with statistics on the volume of automatic exchanges and, to the extent possible, with information on the administrative and other relevant costs and benefits relating to exchanges that have taken place and any potential changes, for both tax administrations and third parties. The Commission shall inform the European Parliament of the information received." Amendment 19 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – point c Directive 2011/16/EU Article 8 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 5.  Before 1 July 2017, the Commission shall submit a report that provides an overview and an assessment of the statistics and information received, on issues such as the administrative and other relevant costs and benefits of the automatic exchange of information, as well as practical aspects linked thereto. If appropriate, the Commission shall present a proposal to the Council regarding the categories and the conditions laid down in paragraph 1, including the condition that information concerning residents in other Member States has to be available, or the items referred to in paragraph 3a, or both. 5.  Before 1 July 2017, the Commission shall submit to the European Parliament and to the Council a report that provides an overview and an impact assessment of the statistics and information received, on issues such as the administrative and other relevant costs and benefits of the automatic exchange of information, as well as practical aspects linked thereto. If appropriate, the Commission shall present a proposal to the European Parliament and to the Council regarding the categories of income and capital, the conditions laid down in paragraph 1, or both, including the condition that information concerning residents in other Member States has to be available, or the items referred to in paragraph 3a, or both. Amendment 21 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 a (new) Directive 2011/16/EU Article 18 – paragraph 2 a (new) 1a.  In Article 18, the following paragraph is inserted: "2a. Member States shall lay down penalties for breaches of this Directive and shall take the measures necessary to ensure compliance therewith. Such penalties shall be effective, proportionate and persuasive." Amendment 22 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 b (new) Directive 2011/16/EU Article 19 a (new) 1b.  The following Article is inserted: "Article 19a Mandate for negotiations with third countries From [the date of entry into force of this Directive], only the Commission shall negotiate agreements with third countries on automatic exchange of information (AEOI) on behalf of the Union. From that date Member States shall not engage in bilateral agreements." Amendment 23 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 c (new) Directive 2011/16/EU Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new) 1c.  In Article 22(1), the following point is added: "(ca) make available the human, technological and financial resources needed for the implementation of this Directive, given the amount and the complexity of information, subject to the automatic exchange starting on 1 January 2015." Amendment 24 Proposal for a Directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 d (new) Directive 2011/16/EU Article 23 – paragraph 3 1d.  In Article 23, paragraph 3 is replaced by the following: 3.  Member States shall communicate to the Commission a yearly assessment of the effectiveness of the automatic exchange of information referred to in Article 8 as well as the practical results achieved. The form and the conditions of communication of that yearly assessment shall be adopted by the Commission in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 26(2). "3. Member States shall communicate to the Commission a yearly assessment of the effectiveness of the automatic exchange of information referred to in Article 8 as well as the practical results achieved. The form and the conditions of communication of that yearly assessment shall be adopted by the Commission in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 26(2). The Commission shall inform the European Parliament of the assessments by the Member States on an annual basis." Amendment 25 Proposal for a Directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 e (new) Directive 2011/16/EU Article 25 1e.  Article 25 is replaced by the following: Article 25 "Article 25 Data protection Data protection All exchange of information pursuant to this Directive shall be subject to the provisions implementing Directive 95/46/EC. However, Member States shall, for the purpose of the correct application of this Directive, restrict the scope of the obligations and rights provided for in Article 10, Article 11(1), Articles 12 and 21 of Directive 95/46/EC to the extent required in order to safeguard the interests referred to in Article 13(1)(e) of that Directive. 1.   All exchange of information pursuant to this Directive shall be subject to the provisions implementing Directive 95/46/EC. However, Member States shall, for the purpose of the correct application of this Directive, restrict the scope of the obligations and rights provided for in Article 10, Article 11(1), Articles 12 and 21 of Directive 95/46/EC to the extent specifically required in order to safeguard the interests referred to in Article 13(1)(e) of that Directive. 2.  Member States shall take appropriate measures to protect the exchanged information from unauthorised access by third parties or by third countries." Amendment 31 Proposal for a directive Article 2 – paragraph 2 a (new) 2a.  By ....* [12 months after the date of entry into force of this Directive], the Commission shall review the functioning of this Directive and, if appropriate, submit a legislative proposal to the Council to provide for transparency of information exchanges.

European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 December 2013 on the proposal for a Council regulation establishing a Community system for registration of carriers of radioactive materials (COM(2012)0561 – C7-0320/2012 – 2011/0225(COD))

P7_TA(2013)0574 A7-0385/2013

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to the Council (COM(2012)0561),

–  having regard to Articles 31 and 32 of the Euratom Treaty, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C7‑0320/2012),

–  having regard to the opinion of the Committee on Legal Affairs on the proposed legal basis,

–  having regard to Article 294(3) and Article 91 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 22 February 2012(1),

–  having regard to Rule 55 and 37 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 the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (A7-0385/2013),

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

2.  Calls on the Commission to alter its proposal accordingly, in accordance with Article 293(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;

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

Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 11 December 2013 with a view to the adoption of Regulation (EU) No .../2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a Community system for registration of carriers of radioactive materials [Am. 1]

THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular the second paragraph of Article 31 and Article 32 91 thereof, [Am. 2]

Having regard to the proposal from the Commission, drawn up after obtaining the opinion of a group of persons appointed by the Scientific and Technical Committee European Commission, [Am. 3]

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

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

Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament Acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure(3), [Am. 4]

Whereas:

(1)  Article 33 of the Treaty requires Member States to lay down the appropriate provisions to ensure compliance with the basic safety standards for the protection of the health of workers and the general public against the dangers arising from ionising radiation.

(2)  The basic safety standards for the protection of the health of workers and the general public against the dangers arising from ionising radiation are established by Council Directive 96/29/Euratom(4). That Directive applies to all practices which involve a risk of ionising radiation emanating from an artificial or a natural radiation source, including transport.

(3)  In order to ensure compliance with the basic safety standards persons, organisations or undertakings are subject to regulatory control by the authorities of the Member States. For that purpose Directive 96/29/Euratom requires Member States to submit certain practices involving a hazard from ionising radiation to a system of reporting and prior authorisation or to prohibit certain practices.

(4)  Transport being the only practice of a frequent cross-border nature, carriers of radioactive materials may be required to comply with requirements related to reporting and authorisation systems in several Member States. This Regulation replaces those reporting and authorisation systems in the Member States with a single registration system valid across the European Atomic Energy Community (hereinafter the ‘Community’).

(4a)  There is a need to ensure efficient and harmonised implementation of this Regulation by defining common criteria which Members States should apply in issuing registration certificates and by setting up a mechanism for feasible and mandatory exchange of information with other Member States in order to ensure control of carriers, verify compliance, and react efficiently to emergency situations. [Am. 5]

(5)  For carriers by air and sea, such registration and certification systems already exist. Council Regulation (EEC) No 3922/91(5) lays down that air carriers need a specific air operator certificate for the transportation of dangerous goods. For transports by sea, Directive 2002/59/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council(6) establishes a Community vessel traffic monitoring and information system. The certificates issued by the civil aviation authorities and the reporting system for maritime vessels are deemed to satisfactorily implement the reporting and authorisation requirements of Directive 96/29/Euratom. Registration of air and sea carriers under this Regulation is therefore not necessary to enable Member States to ensure compliance with the basic safety standards in these transport modes.

(6)  Carriers of radioactive material are subject to a number of requirements of Union and Euratom legislation as well as international legal instruments. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Regulations for the Safe Transport of Radioactive Material (TS-R-1) and the Model Regulations for the Transport of Dangerous Goods continue to apply directly or are implemented by Member States under Directive 2008/68/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council(7) for road, rail and inland waterway transport. The provisions of that Directive are, however, without prejudice to the application of other provisions in the fields of occupational safety and health and environmental protection.

(6a)  In order to take into account possible risks related to the safety standards for the protection of the environment and health of workers and the general public, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 TFEU should be delegated to the Commission in respect of the establishment of common criteria to be complied with by carriers of radioactive materials in order to obtain a registration certificate. 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. [Am. 60]

(7)  In order to ensure uniform conditions for implementation of this Regulation, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission. Those powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council(8).

(7a)  Given the broad aim of reducing the regulatory burden on industry, the economic impact of this Regulation on the many small businesses that transport radioactive material within a single Member State's territory should be further monitored by the Commission. [Am. 7]

HAVE ADOPTED THIS REGULATION

Article 1

Subject matter and scope

1.  This Regulation establishes a Community system for the authorisation and registration of carriers of radioactive materials which facilitates the Member States’ task of ensuring that the basic safety standards for the protection of the health of workers and the general public against the dangers arising from ionising radiations laid down in based on Directive 2008/68/EC and Directive 96/29/Euratom are complied with. [Am. 8]

2.  This Regulation shall apply to any carrier transporting radioactive materials by road, rail and inland waterway within the Community, from third countries into the Community and from the Community into third countries. It shall not apply to carriers transporting radioactive materials by air and sea. [Am. 9]

2a.  This Regulation shall apply without prejudice to national provisions dealing with the protection of transport of radioactive materials against theft, sabotage or other malicious acts. [Am. 10]

Article 2

Definitions

For the purposes of this Regulation

(a)  ‘carrier’ means any person, organisation or public undertaking conducting the carriage of radioactive material by any means of transport in the Community. This includes carriers for hire or reward and carriers on own account; [Am. 11]

(b)  ‘competent authority’ means any authority designated by the Member State to carry out tasks provided for in this Regulation;

(ba)  ‘common criteria’ means a set of safety standards based on the Model Regulations for the Transport of Dangerous Goods (the European Agreement on the International Carriage of Dangerous Goods by Road (ADR), the Regulations concerning the International Carriage of Dangerous Goods by Rail (RID) and the European Agreement concerning the International Carriage of Dangerous Goods by Inland Waterways (ADN)), Directive 96/29/Euratom and Directive 2008/68/EC with which carriers of radioactive materials must comply with in order to obtain a registration certificate; [Am. 12]

(c)  ‘transport’ means all transport operations undertaken by the carrier from the place of origin to the place of destination, including loading, storage in transit and unloading of radioactive material; [Am. 13]

(d)  ‘radioactive material’ means any material containing radionuclides where both the activity concentration and the total activity in the consignment exceed the values specified in paragraphs 402–407 of the IAEA Regulations for the Safe Transport of Radioactive Material, Safety Requirements No. TS-R-1, Vienna, 2009 has the same meaning as in the Model Regulations for the Transport of Dangerous Goods (ADR, RID and ADN) which are implemented by Member States under Directive 2008/68/EC; [Am. 14]

(e)  ‘high consequence dangerous goods - radioactive material’ means radioactive material which have the potential for accidental release or misuse in a terrorist incident and which may, as a result, produce serious consequences such as mass casualties or mass destruction as defined in Appendix A.9. of the IAEA Nuclear Security Series No.9 ‘Security in the Transport of Radioactive Material’, Vienna, 2008; [Am. 15]

(f)  ‘excepted package’ means any package in which the allowed containing radioactive content does not exceed the activity levels laid down in Table V of Section IV of the IAEA material that meet the requirements for packages classified as "excepted packages" as specified in the Model Regulations for the Safe Transport of Radioactive Material, Safety Requirements No. TS-R-1, Vienna, 2009, or one tenth of these limits for transport by post and which is labelled as UN No. 2908, 2909, 2910 or 2911 Dangerous Goods (ADR, RID and ADN) which are implemented by Member States under Directive 2008/68/EC; [Am. 16]

(g)  ‘fissile material’ means uranium-233, uranium-235, plutonium-239 and plutonium-241 or any combination of these radionuclides.

Article 3

General provisions

1.  Carriers of radioactive materials shall have a valid registration obtained in accordance with Article 5. The registration shall allow the carrier to conduct transport throughout the whole Union.

2.  Individual transport operations shall be accompanied by a copy of the carrier’s registration certificate or by the licence or registration obtained in accordance with the applicable national procedure in the case of transport referred to in paragraph 3. [Am. 17]

3.  A holder of valid licences or registrations issued in accordance with Directive 96/29/Euratom for the handling of radioactive material or for the use of equipment containing radioactive material or sources may transport these materials or sources without registration under this Regulation if transportation is included in the licences or registrations for all Member States where the transport takes place. [Am. 18]

4.  National reporting and authorisation requirements that are additional to the requirements laid down by this Regulation may only apply to, but are not limited to, the carriers of the following materials:

(a)  fissile material, except for natural uranium or depleted uranium which has been irradiated in a thermal reactor only; [Am. 52]

(b)  high consequence dangerous goods - radioactive material.

5.  A registration shall not be required for carriers transporting exclusively excepted packages.

5a.  Any transport of radioactive materials shall comply with the international rules and standards set by UNECE on dangerous and polluting goods, as well as the corresponding ADR, RID, and ADN, as defined in Directive 2008/68/EC. [Am. 19]

5b.  When applying for registration, the applicant shall submit evidence of its financial capacity to provide compensation for any damage in the event of an accident for which its convoy is responsible, in accordance with the ‘polluter pays’ principle. [Am. 53]

5c.  The carriage of radioactive material on a convoy transporting explosives shall be prohibited. [Am. 54]

Article 4

Electronic System for Carrier Registration (ESCReg)

1.  Electronic System for Carrier Registration (ESCReg) shall be established and maintained , maintained and secured by the Commission for the supervision and control of the registration of carriers transport of radioactive material. The Commission shall define the information to be included in the system, technical specifications and requirements for the ESCReg. In order to avoid misinterpretation, those specifications shall be complete and unambiguous. [Am. 20]

1a.  The ESCReg shall be secured, robust and fully operational before the entry into force of this Regulation. In addition, an information exchange mechanism between the competent authorities and the ESCReg shall be set up in order to facilitate at least cross border transport. [Am. 21]

2.  The ESCReg shall grant restricted and secure access to the competent authorities of the Member States, to registered carriers and to applicants, subject to the relevant provisions on personal data protection, as laid down by Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council(9). The competent authorities shall have access to all data available. The ESCReg shall provide the public with access to the list of registered carriers. [Am. 22]

3.  The Commission shall not competent authorities of the Member States shall be responsible for the content and the accuracy of information submitted through the ESCReg, which shall be accurate, timely and transparent. [Am. 23]

Article 5

Registration procedure

1.  A carrier shall apply for registration through the ESCReg to the competent authority referred to in paragraph 3. [Am. 24]

The applicant carrier shall submit the completed electronic application form set out in Annex I. Online guidelines with contact data and information on how to reach the contact point or the competent authority shall be available at all times in order to assist the applicant. [Am. 25]

A transitional period of one year after ...(10) shall apply, in order for all carriers to apply for and obtain a registration certificate under this Regulation. During this transitional period, the provisions of Directive 96/29/Euratom and Directive 2008/68/EC shall apply. [Am. 26]

2.  Upon completion and submission of the application form, the applicant shall receive an automatic acknowledgement of receipt, together with an application number. The competent authority shall receive the same acknowledgement. The Commission shall be responsible for ensuring compliance with paragraph 3 of this Article. In the event of rejection an error message shall be sent to the applicant giving the reasons for which the application was rejected. [Am. 27]

3.  If the applicant is established in one or more Member States, the competent authority of the Member State where the head office of the applicant is established shall process the application.

If the applicant is established in a third country, the competent authority of the Member State where the carrier intends to first enter the territory of the Union shall process the application.

The competent authority of the Member State which issues the first certificate of carrier registration shall issue also the new certificate in the event of modification of data in accordance with Article 6.

4.  Within eight weeks of issuing the acknowledgement of receipt the competent authority shall issue a certificate of carrier registration if it considers the submitted information to be complete and in compliance with this Regulation, Directive 96/29/Euratom and Directive 2008/68/EC and that the applicant fulfils the requirements of the common criteria. [Am. 28]

5.  The certificate of carrier registration shall contain the information set out in Annex II and shall be issued in the form of the standardized registration certificate through the ESCReg.

A copy of the certificate of carrier registration shall be provided automatically through the ESCReg to all the competent authorities of the all Member States where the carrier intends to operate. [Am. 29]

6.  The competent authority shall ask the applicant to provide, within three weeks of receipt of this request, the necessary corrections or supplementary information, if needed. If the competent authority refuses to issue a certificate of carrier registration on the grounds that the application is not complete or not in compliance with the applicable requirements, it shall respond in writing to the applicant within eight weeks after issuing the acknowledgement of receipt. Prior to such refusal, the competent authority shall require that the applicant corrects or suplements the application within three weeks from the receipt of this request. The competent authority shall provide a statement of the reasons for refusal. [Am. 30]

A copy of the refusal and statement of the reasons shall be provided automatically through the ESCReg to all the competent authorities of the all Member States where the carrier intends to operate. [Am. 31]

7.  If the request for a certificate of carrier registration is refused, the applicant may lodge an appeal in accordance with the applicable national legal requirements.

8.  A valid certificate of registration shall be recognized by all Member States.

9.  The certificate of carrier registration shall be valid for a period of five years and may be renewed upon application by the carrier.

9a.  The competent authority shall retain all historical data for all applicants in order to ensure their traceability, to facilitate better monitoring and to prevent any falsification. [Am. 32]

Article 6

Modification of data

1.  The carrier shall be responsible for ensuring the continued accuracy of the data provided in the application form for Community carrier registration submitted to the ESCReg. An applicant shall therefore be authorised to update its own data easily with a limited administrative burden. [Am. 33]

1a.  The competent authority that issued the certificate shall be responsible for monitoring, through inspections, the continued compliance of the registered carrier with the requirements of this Regulation for the period of validity of the certificate. [Am. 34]

2.  The carrier shall apply for a new certificate in the event of modification of the data contained in part A of the application form for Community carrier registration.

2a.  In order to ensure equal treatment for all applicants, the competent authorities shall ensure that the criteria for delivering the registration certificate are identical and consistent with IAEA definitions and that the registration process is harmonized. [Am. 35]

Article 7

Compliance assurance

1.  If a carrier does not comply with the requirements of this Regulation the competent authority of the Member State where the non-compliance was discovered shall apply enforcement measures within the legal framework of that Member State, such as written notices, training and education measures, suspension, revocation or modification of the registration or prosecution, depending on the safety significance of the non-compliance and the record of compliance of the carrier.

The enforcement measures shall be immediately notified to the Member State that issued the certificate. Within a maximum of four weeks, the notified Member State shall modify, renew or revoke the registration. The decision shall be issued through the ESCReg to the competent authorities of all Member States. [Am. 36]

1a.  Depending on the safety significance of the non-compliance and the record of compliance of the carrier, the Member State where the non-compliance was discovered may suspend the carrier's registration.

The suspension shall be immediately notified to the Member State that issued the certificate. Within a maximum of four weeks, the notified Member State shall modify, renew or revoke the registration. The decision shall be issued through the ESCReg to the competent authorities of all Member States. [Am. 37]

2.  The competent authority of the Member State where the non-compliance was discovered shall communicate to the carrier and to the competent authorities of the all Member States where the carrier was planning to transport radioactive materials, and the Commission information on enforcement action applied and a statement of reasons for application of that action. If the carrier does not comply with the enforcement action applied pursuant to paragraph 1, the competent authority of the Member State of establishment of the head office of the carrier or, if the carrier is established in a third country, the competent authority of the Member State, where the carrier intended to first enter the territory of the Community shall revoke the registration. [Am. 38]

3.  The competent authority shall communicate to the carrier and to the other competent authorities concerned the revocation together with a statement of reasons. [Am. 39]

3a.  All cases of non-compliance shall be reported to the Commission and to the ESCReg. [Am. 40]

Article 8

Competent authorities and national contact point

1.  Member States shall designate a competent authority and a national contact point for the transport registration of carriers of radioactive materials. That information shall be made available on the registration page of the applicant. [Am. 41]

Member States shall forward to the Commission not later than one month after the entry into force of this Regulation the name(s), address(es) and all necessary information for rapid communication with the competent authorities and with the national contact point for the transport of radioactive materials, as well as any subsequent change to such data.

The Commission shall communicate this information and any changes thereto to all competent authorities in the Community through the ESCReg and make it available to the public on the internet. [Am. 42]

2.  The information on the national rules on radiaton protection applicable to the transport of radioactive materials shall be easily accessible to carriers through the contact points. [Am. 43]

3.  Upon carriers’ request the contact point and the competent authority of the respective Member State shall provide complete information on the requirements for the transport of radioactive materials on the territory of that Member State.

The information shall be easily accessible at a distance and by electronic means and kept up to date.

The contact points and the competent authorities shall respond as quickly as possible to any request for information and in cases where the request is faulty or unfounded, inform the applicant accordingly without delay within two weeks. [Am. 44]

Article 9

Cooperation between competent authorities

Competent authorities of Member States shall cooperate with a view to harmonising their requirements for issuing a registration and to ensuring the harmonised application and enforcement of this Regulation.

Where there are several competent authorities within a Member State, they shall liaise and cooperate closely on the basis of legal or formal agreements between them covering the responsibilities of each authority. They shall communicate with and provide information to each other, to the national contact point, and to other governmental and non-governmental organisations that have related responsibilities.

Article 9a

Delegated acts

The Commission shall adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 9b establishing the common criteria referred to in point ba of Article 2. [Am. 58]

Article 9b

Exercise of the delegation

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 referred to in Article 9a shall be conferred on the Commission for a period of five years from 1 January 2014.

3.  The delegation of power referred to in Article 9a may be revoked at any time by the European Parliament or by the Council. A decision to revoke shall put an end to the delegation of the power specified in that decision. It shall take effect the day following the publication 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 9a shall enter into force only if no objection has been expressed either by the European Parliament or by 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. [Am. 59]

Article 10

Implementation

The Commission shall adopt implementing acts establishing the Electronic System for Carrier Registration (ESCReg) described in Article 4.

Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the advisory procedure referred to in Article 11(2).

Article 11

Advisory Committee

1.  The Commission shall be assisted by a committee. That committee shall be a committee within the meaning of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011.

2.  Where reference is made to this paragraph, Article 4 of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 shall apply.

3.  The committee shall advise and assist the Commission in the performance of its tasks provided for in this Regulation.

4.  The committee shall be composed of experts nominated by the Member States and of experts nominated by the Commission and shall be chaired by a representative of the Commission.

Article 11a

Review

The Commission shall review this Regulation by ...(11) in order to assess its effectiveness and propose, if necessary, further measures to ensure safe carriage of radioactive materials within the Community and from third countries. [Am. 47]

Article 12

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.

The application of this Regulation shall take into account the availability of a validated and operational registration system. [Am. 49]

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

APPLICATION FORM FOR COMMUNITY CARRIER REGISTRATION

PLEASE SEND THIS APPLICATION ONLY USING THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION’S SECURE ELECTRONIC SYSTEM FOR CARRIER REGISTRATION (ESCReg)

IF THERE IS ANY CHANGE IN THE INFORMATION IN PART A, A NEW REGISTRATION MUST BE REQUESTED. The carrier is responsible for ensuring that the data provided in the application form for Community carrier registration submitted through this system remain accurate.

The information provided in the present application form will be processed by the European Commission in compliance with Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council.

 NEW CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION

 MODIFICATION OF AN EXISTING REGISTRATION

 RENEWAL OF AN EXISTING REGISTRATION

Registration Certificate number/s:

Please give details of why a change to an existing registration is being sought

1.  IDENTIFICATION OF THE APPLICANT:

2.  NATURE OF TRANSPORT:

3.  GEOGRAPHICAL COVERAGE

Please tick in the list below those Member States in which radioactive material is planned to be transported and select the nature of the activity

4.  TYPE OF CONSIGNMENTS

Registration is requested for:

5.  RADIATION PROTECTION PROGRAMME (RPP)

6.  QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAMME (QAP)

This QAP must be available for inspection by the competent authority (in accordance Article 1(7)(3) of the ADR)

7.  Declaration

 I, the carrier, hereby certify that I comply with all the relevant international, Community and national regulations relating to the transport of radioactive materials.

 I, the carrier, hereby certify that the information contained in this form is correct.

Date ……….. Name ………..…….. Signature ………

ANNEX II

ELECTRONIC CERTIFICATE OF CARRIER REGISTRATION FOR THE TRANSPORT OF RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL

NOTE:

A COPY OF THIS CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION SHALL ACCOMPANY EACH TRANSPORT FALLING UNDER THE SCOPE OF THIS REGULATION.

This certificate of registration is issued in compliance with Council Regulation (Euratom) xxxxx

This certificate does not relieve the carrier from compliance with the other applicable transport regulations.

1)  REGISTRATION REFERENCE NUMBER: BE/ xxxx / dd-mm-yyyy

2)  NAME OF THE AUTHORITY / COUNTRY:

3)  COMPANY NAME & ADDRESS

4)  MODE OF TRANSPORT:

 ROAD

 RAIL

 INLAND WATERWAYS

7)  MEMBER STATES where the certificate is applicable

8)  PACKAGE TYPE – UN NUMBER (see annex 1- same format )

9)  DATE

ELECTRONIC SIGNATURE

VALIDITY PERIOD : DATE + 5 years

(1) OJ C 143, 22.5.2012, p. 110. (2) OJ C 143, 22.5.2012, p. 110. (3) Position of the European Parliament of 11 December 2013. (4) Council Directive 96/29/Euratom of 13 May 1996 laying down basic safety standards for the protection of the health of workers and the general public against the dangers arising from ionising radiation (OJ L 159, 29.6.1996, p. 1). (5) Council Regulation (EEC) No 3922/91 of 16 December 1991 on the harmonization of technical requirements and administrative procedures in the field of civil aviation (OJ L 373, 31.12.1991, p. 4). (6) Directive 2002/59/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 June 2002 establishing a Community vessel traffic monitoring and information system and repealing Council Directive 93/75/EEC (OJ L 208, 5.8.2002, p. 10). (7) Directive 2008/68/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 September 2008 on the inland transport of dangerous goods (OJ L 260, 30.9.2008, p. 13). (8) Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for the control by the Member States of the Commission’s exercise of implementing powers (OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13). (9) OJ L 281, 23.11.1995, p. 31. (10) Date of entry into force of this Regulation. (11) Two years after the entry into force of this Regulation.

European Parliament resolution of 11 December 2013 on the Annual Report on Human Rights and Democracy in the World 2012 and the European Union's policy on the matter (2013/2152(INI))

P7_TA(2013)0575 A7-0418/2013

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and other UN human rights treaties and instruments,

–  having regard to the United Nations Millennium Declaration of 8 September 2000 (A/Res/55/2) and the relevant resolutions adopted by the UN General Assembly,

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

–  having regard to the EU Annual Report on Human Rights and Democracy in the World in 2012 adopted by the Council on 6 June 2013,

–  having regard to its resolution of 13 December 2012 on the Annual Report on Human Rights and Democracy in the World 2011 and the European Union’s policy on the matter(1),

–  having regard to the EU Strategic Framework and Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy (11855/2012), as adopted by the Foreign Affairs Council on 25 June 2012,

–  having regard to its resolution of 13 December 2012 on the Review of the EU’s Human Rights Strategy(2),

–  having regard to Council Decision 2012/440/CFSP of 25 July 2012 appointing the European Union Special Representative for Human Rights(3),

–  having regard to its recommendation of 13 June 2012 on the EU Special Representative for Human Rights(4),

–  having regard to the Council Conclusions of 14 May 2012 on ‘Increasing the Impact of EU Development Policy: an Agenda for Change’,

–  having regard to its recommendation to the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and Vice-President of the European Commission, to the Council and to the Commission of 13 June 2013 on the 2013 review of the organisation and the functioning of the EEAS(5),

–  having regard to the European Union’s Guidelines on Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law(6),

–  having regard to the European Union’s Guidelines on the Promotion and Protection of Freedom of Religion or Belief, and to Parliament’s recommendation to the Council of 13 June 2013 on the draft EU Guidelines on the Promotion and Protection of Freedom of Religion or Belief,

–  having regard to the European Union’s Guidelines to Promote and Protect the Enjoyment of all Human Rights by Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Intersex (LGBTI) Persons,

–  having regard to the EU Guidelines on Human Rights Dialogues adopted by the Council on 13 December 2001 and reviewed on 19 January 2009,

–  having regard to its resolution of 8 October 2013 on corruption in the public and private sectors: the impact on human rights in third countries(7),

–  having regard to its resolution of 7 February 2013 on the 22nd session of the United Nations Human Rights Council(8),

–  having regard to its resolution of 17 November 2011 on EU support for the ICC: facing challenges and overcoming difficulties(9),

–  having regard to its resolution of 14 December 2011 on the review of the European Neighbourhood Policy(10),

–  having regard to the Joint Communications of the European Commission and of the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy of 20 March 2013 on ‘European Neighbourhood Policy: Working towards a Stronger Partnership’ (JOIN(2013)4), and of 25 May 2011 on ‘A new response to a changing Neighbourhood: A review of the European Neighbourhood Policy’ (COM(2011)0303),

–  having regard to the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights (EIDHR) Strategy Paper for 2011-2013 and to the Commission‘s proposal for a new financial regulation for the EIDHR 2014-2020 (COM(2011)0844),

–  having regard to its recommendation of 29 March 2012 to the Council on the modalities for the possible establishment of a European Endowment for Democracy (EED)(11),

–  having regard to its resolution of 17 June 2010 on EU policies in favour of human rights defenders(12),

–  having regard to its resolution of 7 July 2011 on EU external policies in favour of democratisation(13),

–  having regard to its resolution of 11 December 2012 on a digital freedom strategy in EU foreign policy(14),

–  having regard to the UN General Assembly resolution 67/176 of 20 December 2012 on a moratorium on the use of the death penalty,

–  having regard to United Nations Security Council resolutions 1325 (2000), 1820 (2008), 1888 (2009), 1889 (2009), 1960 (2010) and 2106 (2013) on women, peace and security,

–  having regard to the report on the EU indicators for a Comprehensive Approach to the EU implementation of UN Security Council resolutions 1325 and 1820 on women, peace and security, adopted by the EU Council on 13 May 2011,

–  having regard to the UN General Assembly resolutions on the rights of the child, most recently that of 4 April 2012 (66/141),

–  having regard to its resolution of 25 November 2010 on human rights and social and environmental standards in international trade agreements(15),

–  having regard to its resolution of 25 November 2010 on international trade policy in the context of climate change imperatives(16),

–  having regard to its resolution of 25 November 2010 on corporate social responsibility in international trade agreements(17),

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

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Foreign Affairs and the opinions of the Committee on Development and the Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality (A7-0418/2013),

A.  whereas the various transitional processes, including popular uprisings, conflict and post-conflict situations, as well as trapped transitions in authoritarian countries, have posed increasing challenges to the EU’s policies in support of human rights and democracy in the world; whereas the EU Annual Report on Human Rights and Democracy in the World in 2012 demonstrates the need for the EU to continue to develop flexible policy responses; whereas the most fundamental policy choice for the EU concerns the resilience and political determination to stay true to the founding values of the European Union in challenging times under the pressure of other policy objectives and interests;

B.  whereas justice, the rule of law, responsibility, transparency and accountability, the fight against impunity, fair trials and an independent judiciary are indispensable elements in the protection of human rights;

C.  whereas Article 21 of the TEU further strengthened the EU’s commitment to act on the international scene guided by the principles of democracy, the rule of law, the universality and indivisibility of human rights and fundamental freedoms, respect for human dignity, the principles of equality and solidarity, and respect for the principles of the United Nations Charter, the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and international law;

D.  whereas the Copenhagen political criteria of ‘stability of institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights and respect for and protection of minorities’ remains a fundamental feature of the enlargement process;

E.  whereas the uprisings in the Arab world prompted the European Union to acknowledge the failure of past policies and to commit itself to a ‘more for more’ approach in the Review of the Neighbourhood Policy, based on a commitment to ‘adapt levels of EU support to partners according to progress on political reforms and building deep democracy’, as well as respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, including free and fair elections, freedom of association, expression and assembly, a free press and media, the rule of law administered by an independent judiciary, and freedom of thought, conscience and religion or belief;

F.  whereas the Council Conclusions on the European Commission’s Agenda for Change in EU Development Policy, adopted in May 2012, specifically state that ‘support to partners will be adapted to their development situation and commitment and progress with regard to human rights, democracy, the rule of law and good governance’; whereas the latest EU Common Position regarding the High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness pledges that systematic reference should be made in development co-operation to ‘democratic ownership’ where partner countries are responsible for promoting an enabling environment for civil society and for strengthening the role of parliaments, local authorities, national audit institutions and the free media;

G.  whereas the EU Council, in June 2012, adopted a Strategic Framework and Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy, committing the EU institutions to the attainment of several tangible policy objectives; whereas the EU Council, in July 2012, created the position and named the first thematic EU Special Representative for Human Rights; whereas the procedure to adopt a new Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy, due to take effect in January 2015 when the current action plan expires, needs to start in the spring of 2014;

H.  whereas the European Endowment for Democracy was established in October 2012 with the main purpose of making direct grants to pro-democracy activists or organisations struggling for democratic transition in the European Neighbourhood and beyond;

I.  whereas the establishment of the European External Action Service (EEAS) was accompanied by assurances that support for human rights and democracy would be a silver thread running through the new EU diplomatic service; whereas the network of EU Delegations around the world provide the Vice President of the Commission/EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (VP/HR) with a new capability to carry out EU human rights policy;

J.  whereas in its resolutions on the previous Annual Report and on the review of the EU human rights strategy (both of which were adopted in December 2012), Parliament stressed the need for a reform of its own practices to mainstream human rights in its activities and follow up on its urgent resolutions condemning breaches of democracy, human rights and the rule of law;

K.  whereas the European Parliament Eurobarometer survey of public opinion, carried out in the 27 EU Member States in November and December 2012, shows once more that the protection of human rights remains the most important value in the eyes of Europeans; whereas credible implementation of stated EU commitments to support human rights and democracy in its external policies is crucial to maintaining the overall credibility of EU foreign policy;

L.  whereas in December 2012 the European Union received the Nobel Prize for its contribution to the advancement of peace and reconciliation, democracy and human rights in Europe;

General points

1.  Considers human rights to be at the centre of the EU’s relations with all third countries, including its strategic partners; stresses that EU human rights policy needs to be consistent in complying with the Treaty obligations, ensuring coherence between internal and external policies and avoiding double standards in external policies; calls, therefore, for the adoption of EU Foreign Affairs Council Conclusions on human rights and strategic partners that would establish a common threshold for Member States and for EU officials in terms of the human rights concerns that they have to raise, as a minimum, with their strategic partner counterparts;

2.  Calls on the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security (VP/HR), the EU Special Representative for Human Rights and the EEAS to pursue these commitments and mainstream human rights and democracy in the EU’s relations with its partners, including at the highest political level, by making use of all relevant EU external policy instruments;

3.  Recognises the crucial role played by civil society in the protection and promotion of democracy and human rights; calls on the VP/HR to ensure close cooperation and partnership with civil society, including human rights defenders; considers also that the EU should throw its full weight behind all advocates of human rights, democracy, liberty and transparency throughout the world;

4.  Recognises that EU institutions and all Member States should take a firm and coherent approach to human rights abuses worldwide in a transparent and accountable manner; considers that, when faced with cases of persistent human rights violations, the EU should speak up with one voice and ensure that its message is heard by both abusive governments and their peoples; calls on the Foreign Affairs Council to hold an annual public debate on human rights;

5.  Recalls its determination to be closely associated with and consulted on the implementation of the EU Strategic Framework on Human Rights and Democracy;

The 2012 EU Annual Report

6.  Welcomes the adoption of the EU Annual Report on Human Rights and Democracy in the World in 2012; expects a continuous commitment from the VP/HR, with regular reports to Parliament; calls for active and constructive discussions among EU institutions in preparing future reports that will raise the profile of the EU‘s activities in this field;

7.  Believes that the Annual Report should become an essential tool for the communication and discussion of EU activities in the area of human rights and democracy; welcomes therefore the commitment of the VP/HR and the EEAS to use EU annual reports as implementation reports on the EU Strategic Framework and the Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy;

8.  Notes the references to actions by the EU Special Representative on Human Rights in the Annual Report and encourages the VP/HR and the EEAS to include more in-depth analyses, especially when it comes to his role in implementing the Strategic Framework and the Action Plan, in order to provide an adequate description of his role and work;

9.  Acknowledges the efforts made to list the various EU actions in the field of human rights and democracy support in the country reports, which provide a wealth of information about the work of the EU institutions around the world; regrets, nevertheless, that the country reports still seem to lack a systematic, clear and coherent framework that would allow for more rigorous analysis on the impact and efficiency of EU action;

10.  Reiterates its view that the country reports should be further strengthened and should reflect the implementation of the human rights country strategies and thus refer to specific benchmarks based on a set of indicators to assess both positive and negative trends, evaluate the efficiency of EU actions and provide grounds for adapting the levels of EU support according to progress on human rights, democracy, the rule of law and good governance;

11.  Welcomes the effort to include activities by the European Parliament in the Annual Report, calls for use to be made of Parliament’s achievements and potential, including the numerous studies and analyses carried out by Parliament, and strongly encourages the VP/HR and the EEAS to report on the EU action taken on Parliament’s resolutions, including on urgency resolutions relating to breaches of human rights; calls or a constant flow of information and cooperation between Parliament and the EU Special Representative for Human Rights, particularly in emergency situations;

12.  Welcomes the EU Annual Report on Human Rights and Democracy in the World in 2012, as it shows the efforts that the EU is deploying to promote the mainstreaming of human rights, gender equality, democracy and good governance in development policies and instruments;

EU Policy Framework

Strategic Framework and the Action Plan

13.  Reiterates its appreciation of the EU Strategic Framework and Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy as an important milestone in integrating and mainstreaming human rights across all EU external policies; underlines the need for a general consensus and enhanced coordination of the EU‘s human rights policy between the EU institutions and the Member States; calls on the EEAS to step up its efforts to increase the sense of ownership of this Action Plan among Member States; calls for the inclusion of a section on the implementation of the Action Plan by Member States in the Annual Report;

14.  Stresses the vital importance of efficient and credible implementation of the stated commitments, both in the Strategic Framework and in the Action Plan; points out that credibility requires adequate resourcing of dedicated human rights policies and consistent mainstreaming at a high political level, such as at ministerial and summit meetings with third countries, including with strategic partners;

15.  Regrets the fact that economic, social and cultural rights remain largely neglected by the EU‘s human rights policy in contrast with the EU‘s stated commitment to the indivisibility and interdependence of rights, and calls on the EEAS, the Commission and the Member States to step up their efforts in this direction, including in the field of labour and social rights;

16.  Notes that the current Action Plan will be concluded at the end of 2014; expects the VP/HR and the EEAS to engage in a timely review and consultations with the Member States, the Commission, Parliament and civil society, leading to the adoption of a new Action Plan that will take effect in January 2015;

EU Special Representative for Human Rights

17.  Recognises the importance of the mandate given to the first EU Special Representative (EUSR) for Human Rights; encourages the EUSR to enhance the visibility, mainstreaming, coherence, consistency and effectiveness of EU human rights policy, in particular on women’s rights and the rights of all minorities, and to strike the right balance between silent and public diplomacy in carrying out his mandate; repeats its recommendation that the EUSR provide Parliament with a regular report on his activities and clarification of his thematic and geographic priorities, and ensure that concerns raised by Parliament are followed up;

18.  Commends the EUSR on the openness of the dialogue which he has conducted with Parliament and civil society, thus establishing an important practice that should be continued and consolidated to ensure due transparency and accountability; welcomes the EUSR‘s cooperation with regional bodies and in multilateral fora and encourages him to further expand such activities;

19.  Welcomes the fact that cooperation with the EUSR for Human Rights was included in the mandate of the geographic EUSR for the Sahel, and urges the Council and the VP/HR to adopt this practice too, with regard to the mandates of future geographic EUSRs;

EU Guidelines on Human Rights

20.  Welcomes the adoption of the EU Guidelines on Freedom of Religion or Belief, and on the human rights of LGBTI persons; reminds the EEAS, however, to respect good interinstitutional practice and engage in a timely manner and with the proper political bodies within Parliament when developing any new strategic tools such as guidelines or when reviewing existing ones; recalls Parliament’s recommendation to the Council on the Guidelines on Freedom of Religion or Belief, in which Parliament proposed an ambitious set of instruments, providing suggestions for the practical implementation of the Guidelines in order to achieve substantial progress in the protection and promotion of this fundamental and universal freedom; commends the practice adopted by the EEAS and the Council of reviewing and revising older guidelines; encourages the EEAS to adopt a more rigorous review process involving thorough consultation of stakeholders in order to adapt to changing circumstances;

21.  Urges the EEAS and the Council to pay particular attention to the issue of proper implementation plans for the Guidelines; recommends further training and awareness-raising among EEAS and EU Delegation staff, as well as among Member State diplomats; expresses its particular concern regarding the implementation of the Guidelines on international humanitarian law and the Guidelines on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment;

Human rights dialogues with third countries

22.  Notes the continued difficulties in achieving concrete progress in several of the EU’s human rights dialogues and consultations; encourages the EU to seek new ways of making the dialogues with countries of concern more meaningful; underlines the need to pursue determined, ambitious, and transparent human rights policy in these dialogues; calls, therefore, on the EU to draw clear political conclusions when the human rights dialogue is not constructive and, in such cases or in cases of persistent human rights violations, put more emphasis on political dialogue, démarches and public diplomacy; warns, furthermore, against diverting human rights discussions away from high-level political dialogues;

23.  Believes that human rights dialogues and consultations should be strengthening and supporting civil society, human rights defenders, trade unions, journalists, lawyers and parliamentarians who stand up and challenge abuses at home and demand that their rights be respected; calls on the EU to ensure that human rights dialogues and consultations are ambitious and accompanied by clear public benchmarks on the basis of which their success can be objectively measured;

24.  Recalls the fact that corruption in the public and private sectors perpetuates and aggravates inequalities and discrimination when it comes to equal enjoyment of civil, political, economic or social and cultural rights, and underlines the fact that it is proven that acts of corruption and human rights violations involve the misuse of power, lack of accountability and various forms of discrimination; requests the highest level of accountability and transparency of external aid and public budgets in relation to the EU budget and external aid;

Human rights country strategies and human rights focal points

25.  Notes the efforts made by the EEAS to finalise the first cycle of EU human rights country strategies; reiterates its support for the objective of giving ownership of the country strategy to the EU Delegation and Member States‘ embassies on the ground, while ensuring quality control at headquarters level; regrets, however, the lack of transparency regarding the contents of the country strategies; reiterates its call for public disclosure of, at least, the key priorities of each country strategy, and for Parliament to have access to the strategies so as to allow a proper degree of scrutiny; encourages the EU to produce a public assessment of the lessons learnt during the first cycle of EU human rights country strategies and to identify best practices for the next cycle;

26.  Welcomes the nearly complete network of human rights focal points in EU Delegations; calls on the VP/HR and the EEAS to develop a plan on how this network can be used to realise its full potential; invites the EU Delegations to publish the contact details of all human rights focal points and EU Liaison Officers for Human Rights Defenders;

Human rights in the EU‘s trade policy

27.  Supports the practice of including legally binding and non-negotiable human rights clauses in the EU‘s international agreements concluded with third countries, and considers that human rights clauses should also be systematically included in trade agreements; calls for effective monitoring of their application and reporting back to Parliament’s relevant committee on their assessment and suggested response;

28.  Points out that Parliament should withhold its consent to international agreements when serious breaches of human rights occur;

29.  Recalls that the revised GSP scheme will come into force on 1 January 2014; welcomes the continuation of the GSP+ scheme whereby countries can enjoy additional preferential tariffs once they have ratified and implemented the 27 core human rights, labour and environment conventions; recalls the possibility of suspending GSP, GSP+ and Everything But Arms (EBA) preferences in the event of serious human rights violations; calls on the Commission to make the assessments for GSP+ eligibility publicly available, in order to increase transparency and accountability;

30.  Calls, furthermore, on the EU to define and adopt specific policy guidelines on the effective inclusion of human rights in its trade and investment agreements in order to achieve methodological consistency and rigour in the human rights impact assessments;

Human rights in EU development policies

31.  Underlines the fact that the Busan Partnership for Effective Development Cooperation has called on the international community to adopt a human rights-based approach (HRBA) to international cooperation in order to boost the effectiveness of development efforts;

32.  Calls on the Commission to conduct extensive impact assessments of EU development cooperation projects, which should include an assessment of their impact on the human rights situation, in order to ensure that EU development efforts do not contribute to further marginalisation of groups suffering discrimination and that EU funds are distributed fairly among different regions within a country, on the basis of their needs and level of development;

33.  Reiterates that the Commission and the European External Action Service (EEAS) should be accountable for the adoption of a rights-based approach in the future programming exercise;

34.  Takes the view that national parliaments and civil society organisations play an important role in implementing human rights provisions effectively, and stresses that appropriate conditions should be put in place for their participation in decision making in order to promote genuine ownership of development strategy policy choices;

European Union policy on transition processes

35.  Notes the overwhelming evidence from recent years indicating the crucial importance of EU foreign policy adequately addressing dynamic transition processes in third countries; encourages the EU to continue to learn from past experiences, both positive and negative, to avoid repeating certain policy mistakes, and to establish best practices in order to influence and consolidate democratisation processes; acknowledges the requirement for policy flexibility in diverging situations, and encourages the development of policy tools that could be applied in different transition scenarios in order to integrate human rights and democracy support measures into the EU approach in a flexible and credible manner;

36.  Emphasises that political transition and democratisation need to be combined with respect for human rights, the promotion of justice, transparency, accountability, reconciliation, the rule of law and the establishment of democratic institutions, with due regard for gender equality and juvenile justice; stresses the importance of the right to redress concerning human rights abuses committed by former regimes; stresses that the EU should always advocate a context-sensitive approach to transitional justice while strictly upholding the principle of accountability for violations of human rights and international humanitarian law;

37.  Emphasises that the EU should give its full support to countries that have dislodged authoritarian regimes and are undergoing a transition to democracy by supporting civil society as a crucial actor in advocating the rule of law, accountability and transparency and in promoting social movements for political change and participation; recalls that the police, the military and the judiciary are often used as mechanisms to perform systematic violations of human rights; stresses, therefore, that institutional reform of these bodies needs to provide for greater accountability and transparency in transition processes;

38.  Considers the EU’s external financial instruments an important tool for promoting and defending EU values abroad; welcomes, in this context, the commitment to put human rights, democracy and the rule of law at the core of EU external action; calls for improvements in the coherence and effectiveness of different thematic and geographic instruments in order to achieve this strategic objective;

39.  Strongly encourages the EU to support an active and independent civil society worldwide, both politically and financially, in particular through the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights (EIDHR); suggests that opening -up European student exchange programmes to young people from non-EU countries and establishing training programmes for young professionals would foster the active participation of young people in democracy-building and would strengthen civil society; regrets that freedom of assembly, as a fundamental condition for any democratic development and as a particularly sensitive issue in transition countries, appears to have been overlooked in the EU‘s Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy; calls on the EEAS and the Member States to draw up Guidelines on freedom of assembly;

40.  Welcomes the establishment of the European Endowment for Democracy (EED) and calls for it to engage in providing support for those striving for democratic change by offering them flexible funding tailored to their needs; calls for appropriate financial support for the EED to be guaranteed by the EU and its Member States; recalls the critical importance of avoiding any overlap between the mandate and activities of the EED and those of EU external instruments, especially those in the field of human rights and democracy;

Enlargement policy, democratisation and human rights

41.  Stresses the momentous importance of the enlargement process as a means of supporting democratisation and enhancing human rights protection;

42.  Welcomes the Commission‘s decision to place the rule of law at the heart of the enlargement process; urges the EU to remain vigilant during the enlargement processes and to demand rigorous implementation of provisions critical to human rights, such as active protection of the rights of persons belonging to national minorities in order to safeguard equal treatment of these minorities with regard to education, healthcare, and social and other public services, the establishment of the rule of law together with vigorous action to combat all forms of corruption, effective access to justice and steps to guarantee fundamental freedoms and full and effective equality between persons belonging to national minorities and those belonging to the national majority, in all areas of social, economic, political and cultural life;

43.  Stresses the urgent need to bring about a fair and lasting solution to the conflict in the Middle East with a view to achieving a two-State solution – an independent, democratic and viable Palestinian State and the State of Israel, living side by side in peace and security on the basis of the internationally recognised 1967 borders;

44.  Notes with concern that respecting the rights of minorities is one of the key challenges identified in the Commission‘s Enlargement Strategy for 2012-2013; encourages the Member States, as well as the candidate and potential candidate countries, to launch a general public debate on the acceptance of minorities and their inclusion in the education system, civil society engagement, improved living conditions and awareness-raising in general; regrets the fact that the Roma community is particularly disadvantaged throughout the Western Balkans, and that this has an adverse effect on partnership processes; urges the countries concerned to implement effective measures so as to address problems such as discrimination and segregation, and access to housing and healthcare; condemns the fomenting of hatred and prejudices in general, and negative acts and discrimination based on gender or sexual orientation, or against vulnerable groups and people with disabilities; stresses that this is a recurring issue in many enlargement countries and in a majority of the Member States;

45.  Notes that media freedom has generally advanced in enlargement countries; deplores, however, the lack of measures to ensure freedom of expression in certain enlargement countries, which often leads to self-censorship, political interference, economic pressures, harassment and the use of violence against journalists; is seriously concerned, in this connection, about increasing violations of freedom of expression and press freedom in Turkey;

Challenge of transitions in the Neighbourhood Policy

46.  Recognises the challenges related to democratic transitions in the Southern and Eastern Neighbourhood; notes the increasing divergence in democratic reforms across the EU neighbourhood; reiterates the importance of civil society and human rights organisations in the democratic transition process; encourages, therefore, a differentiation to be made between the Southern and Eastern dimensions of the Neighbourhood Policy in order to target the specific properties and needs of each geographical area more effectively;

47.  Calls on the EU to act consistently as a democratic reform-driven partner in its neighbourhood; supports, in this connection, further engagement in association processes with the neighbourhood countries; acknowledges the conclusions of the Vilnius Summit and calls for further strengthening of relations between the EU and the Eastern Partnership countries, supports the democratic and pro-European processes in Ukraine and condemns the recent use of force against peaceful public demonstrations in Kiev as a violation of the fundamental principles of freedom of assembly and freedom of expression;

48.  Notes the new EU approach aimed at strengthening the partnership between the EU and the countries and societies of its Neighbourhood, based on mutual accountability and shared commitment to the universal values of human rights, democracy, social justice and the rule of law;

49.  Notes with concern the fragile state of democratic processes and the deterioration of human rights and fundamental freedoms in most of the Neighbourhood countries; emphasises that good governance, transparency, the freedom of association, expression, thought, conscience, religion and assembly, a free press and free media, the rule of law and an independent judiciary are essential for underpinning democratic transitions; reiterates the importance of upholding and promoting gender equality and women‘s rights, together with social development and the reduction of inequalities; recognises the key role of civil society in building public support for democratic reforms in the Neighbourhood countries;

50.  Regrets the fact that in some countries civil society organisations continue to face serious constraints such as obstacles to the freedom of movement, lawsuits against NGO leaders and human rights defenders, cumbersome administrative procedures, the aggressive use of criminal defamation laws against NGOs or a complete ban on their operation, restrictive rules controlling foreign funding or making the acceptance of financial support subject to authorisation; stresses, in this context, the importance of the European Endowment for Democracy as a flexible and discreet means of supporting the pro‑democratic potential of societies in countries prior to or during the process of democratic transformation;

51.  Regrets the lack of progress in achieving a sustainable political solution as regards ‘frozen conflicts‘; stresses that the political dialogue should give full consideration to and fully respect the territorial integrity and the internationally recognised borders of the countries concerned; urges the EU to engage more actively in this respect;

52.  Underlines the importance of national human rights institutions (NHRIs) in the human rights architecture at national level, including in terms of human rights monitoring and awareness raising and ensuring redress for violations; urges the EEAS and the Commission to develop a policy in support of NHRIs, and to support the establishment and strengthening of NHRIs in line with the Paris Principles as a priority in external assistance, notably under the ENPI;

53.  Remains concerned about the lack of democracy, rule of law, fundamental freedoms and respect for human rights in Belarus;

54.  Notes with concern instances of selective justice in certain Eastern Neighbourhood countries; recalls that the EU has continually asked for the release of political prisoners such as Yuliya Tymoshenko in Ukraine; reiterates that political and criminal responsibility should be clearly separated in countries that are committed to democratic values;

55.  Supports all steps leading to political dialogue, which is essential to move the transition in Egypt forward; expresses its deep concern about recent crises and the political polarisation in the country, including the street battles between the army and Muslim Brotherhood supporters, terrorism and violent clashes in the Sinai; condemns the extremist violence against minorities, including Coptic Christian communities; expresses its solidarity with Egyptian people fighting for democracy, welcomes the efforts by the European Union and the VP/HR to find a way out of the crisis, and points once again to the urgent need for a constructive and inclusive political dialogue in order to set up a clear roadmap for transition to a real and sustainable democracy; calls on all political leaders in the country to find a way to break the dangerous stalemate and agree on implementing tangible confidence-building measures in order to avoid the risk of more bloodshed and polarisation in the country; calls for a rapid return to the democratic process, including the holding of free and fair presidential and parliamentary elections in a fully inclusive process; urges the Egyptian authorities to advance the work on an inclusive constitution with equal rights for all;

56.  Calls for an immediate end to all acts of violence, sexual assault and other forms of degrading treatment against female protesters and women‘s rights activists and for serious and impartial investigations into all such cases and full accountability for those responsible;

57.  Remains deeply concerned about the critical situation in Syria; deplores in the strongest possible terms the use of chemical weapons and the excessive use of force and violence against the civilian population and minorities in the country, which cannot be justified under any circumstances, and abhors the scale of state abuses that may constitute crimes against humanity; reiterates its strong endorsement of the call by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights for the situation in Syria to be referred to the ICC by the UN Security Council (UNSC) for a formal investigation; calls on all armed factions to put an immediate end to violence in the country; expresses grave concern at the ongoing humanitarian crisis, including the situation of refugees, and the implications for neighbouring countries and stability in the region; stresses again that humanitarian assistance to those in need of basic goods and services in Syria and its neighbours must be an immediate priority for the international community and the European Union; believes that the key to solving the conflict lies in political mechanisms and diplomatic processes; stresses the importance of the strict implementation of the Convention on the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on their Destruction; welcomes the recent UNSC resolution and the UN Secretary General‘s proposal for a Geneva II conference to be held in December 2013; condemns the persecution of Christians and other religious minorities in the Middle East;

58.  Recalls its resolutions of 25 November 2010 on the situation in Western Sahara(18), of 22 October 2013 on the situation of human rights in the Sahel region(19), and calls for a guarantee of human rights for the Saharawi people and stresses the need to address these rights in Western Sahara and in the Tindouf camps, including freedom of association, freedom of expression and the right to demonstrate, to be respected; demands the release of all Sahrawi political prisoners; demands the opening of the territory to independent observers, NGOs and the media; supports a fair and mutually acceptable political solution on Western Sahara, in accordance with the relevant United Nations resolutions, including those allowing self-determination;

Transitional justice and the challenge of post-conflict peacebuilding

59.  Considers accountability for past violations to be an integral element in the process of building sustainable reconciliation; calls on the EU and its Member States to support, and stresses the vital importance of, the systematic participation of women in peace processes and in political and economic decision making, including in democratic transition and conflict resolution situations; calls for war criminals to be brought before the ICC, and calls on the Member States to enhance their cooperation with the ICC in this respect; welcomes the intention of the EEAS to develop a dedicated policy on transitional justice in order to help societies deal with past abuses and fight impunity, and encourages the timely development of such a policy; stresses the need to deal with transitional justice in a manner that is consistent with the EU‘s support for international criminal justice in general, and the ICC in particular; draws particular attention to the EU‘s experience in the Western Balkans as a source of inspiration; calls on the EU to actively support the newly created mandate of the UN Special Rapporteur for the promotion of truth, justice, reparation and guarantees of non-recurrence;

60.  Emphasises that a key element of the EU approach to transitional justice should be support for institutional reform of the judiciary to enhance the functioning of the rule of law in line with international standards; stresses the need for criminals whose crimes were committed some time ago to be prosecuted through national or international courts; emphasises the importance of public dialogue to confront the past and for proper victim consultation and compensation programmes, including reparations; considers that vetting the background of personnel working in the transitional institutions is a credibility test for transitional justice;

61.  Notes the particular complexity of developing consistent policies for transitions in post-conflict contexts; emphasises, therefore, the need to enhance compliance with, and monitoring of, international human rights and humanitarian law norms in armed conflict situations, and encourages the EEAS to support civil society organisations dedicated to promoting respect for humanitarian law by armed state and non-state actors, with a special focus on women‘s rights and the best interests of the child;

62.  Condemns in the strongest terms serious human rights violations perpetrated in armed conflict situations in recent and ongoing crises such as Syria, Mali, the Democratic Republic of Congo and the Central African Republic, and in particular summary executions, rape and other forms of sexual violence, acts of torture, arbitrary arrests and detentions, especially regarding the situation of women and children, who are particularly vulnerable; calls on the EU to fight against impunity in all of these cases and to support action by domestic judiciaries and the ICC to bring the perpetrators to justice; encourages the EU to integrate torture prevention mechanisms into all EU external relations activities;

63.  Calls on the VP/HR and the EEAS to conduct a thorough policy review of the tragic events in Syria, Libya and Mali and other recent conflicts in order to revise the EU Guidelines on International Humanitarian Law (IHL), and to seek more effective implementation of those guidelines; calls on the EU to support the on-going initiative of the International Committee of the Red Cross and the Swiss Government to reform the current international governance framework regarding IHL; supports the EU in engaging in a reform of the UNSC, in order to enable it to respond effectively to contemporary crises;

64.  Welcomes the launch in January 2014 of the EU Aid Volunteers initiative, which will create opportunities for more than 8 000 EU and non-EU citizens to be trained for and deployed to humanitarian operations worldwide, and notes that another 10 000 people are expected to support the EU Aid Volunteers as ‘online volunteers‘, with tasks that can be carried out from home on a computer;

65.  Calls for the EU to develop a common EU position on armed drones,

Trapped transitions and countries of concern

66.  Draws attention also to the trapped transitions in countries and regions where reform movements and transitional processes have been stopped or put down by the ruling regime; calls on the EU to continue its efforts to persuade the ruling elites in these countries, as well as in other countries of concern still under authoritarian rule, to initiate a reform process to develop strong and stable democracies in which the rule of law, human rights and fundamental freedoms are upheld; takes the view that this persuasion must take place in all dialogues with its partners, including at the highest political level, by making use of all the relevant fields of EU external policy, i.e. development, trade, etc.;

67.  Recalls that countries and regions trapped in transition lack democratic reforms and political accountability; reiterates that all citizens have the right to fully and freely participate in political life in which free, fair and open elections take place with more than one party and with different alternative and independent media sources;

68.  Expresses its serious concern about recent repressive laws and their arbitrary enforcement by the Russian authorities, often leading to the harassment of NGOs, civil society activists, human rights defenders, minorities and LGBTI persons, and calls for the EU to express this concern at all political levels; calls for the release of Mikhail Khodorkovsky and other political prisoners, and deplores the political use of justice; urges the Russian authorities to impartially investigate and bring to justice those responsible for the deaths of Sergei Magnitsky, Natalia Estemirova, Anna Politkovskaya, Stanislav Markelov, and Vasily Alexanian; regrets the Council‘s failure to consider Parliament‘s recommendation of 23 October 2012 on the Magnitsky case; calls on the Council, therefore, to adopt a decision establishing a common EU list of officials involved in the death of Sergei Magnitsky; adds that this Council decision should impose targeted sanctions on those officials; expresses its deepest concern at the activities of far-right vigilante groups contacting LGBTI persons online to entrap and assault them and post hundreds of videos of these acts online; calls on the EU delegation and Member State embassies in Russia to increase their support for defenders of the human rights of LGBTI persons, in line with the relevant guidelines;

69.  Expresses its concern about continued repression of independent journalists and human rights activists and the suppression of political dissent in Cuba; draws attention to the situation of prisoners of conscience in Cuba, who continue to be sentenced on trumped-up charges or held in pre-trial detention; calls on the EEAS and the VP/HR to promote, in the framework of the United Nations, an international and independent committee of inquiry to investigate the circumstances in which the Cuban human rights defenders and peaceful dissidents Oswaldo Payá Sardiñas (Sakharov laureate 2002) and Harold Cepero died in July 2012;

70.  Stresses the need for international monitoring of the human rights situation in China and calls on the EU Member States to actively engage in establishing this monitoring in the light of the failure of the EU-China dialogue on human rights to achieve significant and tangible results; remains concerned about the increasing restrictions targeting human rights defenders, lawyers, civil society activists, journalists and bloggers; supports the internal demand among Chinese people for the basic freedoms and rights to which they are entitled; recalls that the EU could serve as a facilitator in this regard by creating greater trust, finding new modalities for dialogue, and improving already existing instruments;

71.  Urges the Chinese authorities to engage seriously with the Tibetan people in order to assess the underlying causes of the high number of self-immolations; condemns the non-voluntary resettlement and relocation of Tibetan nomads which is a threat to the survival of a way of life that is integral to Tibetan identity; urges the EEAS , in line with the newly adopted EU Guidelines on Freedom of Religion and Belief, to pay particular attention to the issue of religious repression in Tibet and to call on China to put an end to its restrictive policies on Tibetan Buddhism; stresses the need for improvement of the education system with special regard to bilingual education in the region in order to preserve national identity and heritage and to tackle the causes of youth unemployment;

72.  Expresses grave concern regarding the human rights situation in Iran, the continued repression of reformists, the growing number of political prisoners and prisoners of conscience and faith, the discrimination against and persecution of the Baha‘i community, the consistently high number of executions, including of minors, the widespread torture, the unfair trials and exorbitant sums demanded for bail, and the heavy restrictions on the freedom of information, expression, assembly, religion, education and movement; welcomes the release of several prisoners of conscience in Iran, including lawyer and Sakharov Prize winner Nasrin Sotoudeh; calls on the Iranian authorities to release the three opposition leaders held under house arrest with no charges for over two years, Mehdi Karroubi, Zahra Rahnavard and Mir Hossein Mousavi, allow the UN Special Rapporteur on human rights in Iran to visit the country, work towards a moratorium on the death penalty, remove internet censorship and allow freedom of expression in Iran; notes the resumption of diplomatic contacts between Iran and the international community and hopes for a satisfactory and mutually acceptable conclusion to negotiations between the E3+3 and Iran on Iran‘s nuclear programme;

73.  Expresses its deepest concern regarding the deteriorating human rights situation in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK), draws attention to the relevant urgency resolutions (Rule 122) adopted by the European Parliament, and calls on the DPRK to engage in a meaningful dialogue on human rights with the European Union; calls on the DPRK to put an end to extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances, release political prisoners and allow its citizens to travel freely both within and outside the country; calls on the DPRK to allow freedom of expression and press freedom for national and international media, and to allow its citizens uncensored access to the internet; notes that all the provocative actions of the DPRK and the restrictive measures imposed on its citizens have led to widespread poverty and material deprivation;

74.  Raises profound concerns with reference to Kashmir, where any act of violence against civilians is to be strongly deplored; is aware that investigations into the issue of unidentified graves have been undertaken; urges, nevertheless, human rights protection mechanisms to be placed at the heart of any attempt to identify responsibility and ensure accountability for abuses against civilians;

75.  Calls for the European Union to embark on a coordinated and inclusive strategy in the Sahel to improve security in the region on the one hand and to promote human rights on the other, so that human rights violations such as torture, the often arbitrary arrest of opponents and journalists, the suppression of peaceful demonstrations, acts of violence against women such as rape, forced marriage or genital mutilation, and ethnic or caste-based discrimination come to an end, thereby helping to establish the rule of law guaranteeing fundamental rights and freedoms;

76.  Is highly concerned by the growing trend of state violence against LGBTI persons in several sub-Saharan countries, especially Uganda, Nigeria, Cameroon and Senegal; firmly condemns attempts to enact ever more repressive laws in countries where homosexuality is already criminalised; calls on fellow parliaments to stop responding to populist and conservative pressure, including from religious leaders, and to protect the rights of all citizens, including LGBTI persons; points out that 76 countries still criminalise homosexuality, including five which provide for the death penalty; regrets again that the Cotonou Agreement was signed with no discussion of discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation as part of its political dialogue, as requested numerous times by this Parliament; reminds the Commission and the Council of Parliament’s firm resolve to include this aspect in the next revision of the Agreement;

77.  Calls on the EU to build an efficient sanctions policy towards all regimes exercising repressive methods towards civilians;

78.  Calls on the EU to continue to actively support human rights defenders, including by the timely provision of temporary shelter to those at risk; calls for the EU to extend its policy in support of human rights defenders to whistle-blowers and investigative journalists, who may significantly contribute to the protection and promotion of human rights;

Election observation and democracy support policies

79.  Welcomes the EU’s continued support for electoral processes around the globe by deploying Election Observation Missions (EOMs) and Electoral Expert Missions (EEMs) and providing electoral assistance and support for domestic observers; notes that these missions have recently contributed to support for democratic development in the EU’s neighbourhood, and have witnessed the transfer of power to the opposition (Senegal) and the consolidation of democracy emerging from conflict (Sierra Leone);

80.  Stresses the importance of following up on the reports and recommendations of Election Observation Missions; highlights its initiative of strengthening the follow-up to EOM recommendations by using them as part of the ‘road map for democracy‘ in the country concerned, and to charge the Chief Observer with a special role to ensure follow-up and implementation of the recommendations with the support of Parliament’s standing bodies;

81.  Emphasises the importance of enhancing the operational capacity of parliaments between elections; recalls, in this context, the EU pledge in the High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness to base development cooperation on ‘democratic ownership’, with particular reference to the strengthened role of parliaments; urges the EU to work towards a rights-based approach, with the aim of integrating human rights principles into EU operational activities, and to advocate human rights issues on the global development agenda, as undertaken in the Action Plan;

82.  Recalls the VP/HR’s commitment to focus on the participation of women and national minorities in election observation and on persons with disabilities both as candidates and voters; requests that the conclusions of EU Election Observation Missions (EOMs) always be taken into account when drawing up programmes to support women’s full and equal participation in electoral processes and in implementing the missions’ recommendations;

Freedom of expression

83.  Emphasises the particular importance of freedom of expression, including free media, in transition situations; welcomes the EU’s commitment to producing Guidelines on Freedom of Expression (online and offline), and further recommends that the EU develop a methodology to monitor and react to changes in legislation which restrict pluralism and freedom of the press in third countries;

84.  Expresses serious and continuing concern regarding online censorship and its unfortunate prevalence in many countries; stresses that in its policies the EU must prioritise the implementation of the right to participation and the right to access information as core principles of democracy that must also be realised online, and make use of available mechanisms to enhance public accountability, such as the principles of open data; considers that this should be the case at all levels of dialogue with third countries, including in bilateral relations and at the highest levels; emphasises the importance of online media to the operation and effectiveness of civil society, including for human rights defenders, trade unions and whistle-blowers; calls on the Commission and the EEAS to step up efforts to mainstream digital freedom in EU external relations;

85.  Notes the regrettable trend to enact laws restricting freedom of expression and assembly for those who support the human rights of LGBTI persons; notes that such laws currently exist in Lithuania and Russia, are under consideration in Ukraine and have been proposed in Georgia, Armenia and Kazakhstan; congratulates Moldova for repealing a law prohibiting the ‘propagation of any other relations than those related to marriage or family’; calls on EU delegations in the relevant countries to express the EU’s particular concern about these laws;

EU support for universal human rights

86.  Supports fully the affirmative position taken by the EU in the Strategic Framework on Human Rights and Democracy regarding the promotion and protection of all human rights, as well as the pledge to ‘speak out against any attempt to undermine respect for the universality of human rights’; reiterates its full support for, and calls on the EU to uphold, the indivisibility and universality of human rights, which includes the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in conformity with Article 21 of the Treaty on European Union (Title V, Chapter 1 – General Provisions on the Union’s External Action);

UN human rights system

87.  Reiterates its support for strengthening the UN human rights system as fundamental to the advancement of universal human rights; acknowledges the EU’s efforts in the Review of the UN Human Rights Council, and calls on all members of the Human Rights Council to uphold the highest standards of human rights and to live up to their pledges made before their election; considers the independence of the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and of the UN Special Procedures mandate holders as a key prerequisite to their efficient functioning, and emphasises the need for non-earmarked funding to ensure this;

88.  Welcomes the start of the second cycle of the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) process, and calls for continued close EU attention to enhancement of the UPR procedure and the degree of implementation of UPR recommendations which countries have accepted and promised to carry out;

89.  Calls on the EU Member States to build upon the commitment they made in the EU Strategic Framework to ratify and implement the key international human rights treaties, by ratifying and implementing, in particular, the ten core UN human rights treaties and the optional protocols thereto, and to make the relevant declarations on ensuring the acceptance of all individual complaints and inquiry procedures; stresses the importance of these ratifications for the internal and external credibility of the EU‘s human rights policy; expresses its deep concern at the fact that the persistent failure of certain EU Member States to submit their periodic reports to the relevant UN human rights monitoring bodies in a timely manner is also undermining the credibility of the EU‘s human rights policy towards third countries;

90.  Calls on the EU to encourage third countries to fully cooperate with UN Special Rapporteurs and Independent Experts on human rights including through issuing standing invitations and receiving such experts;

91.  Encourages the EU and its Member States to support the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights in the implementation of her 2012 report on strengthening the UN Treaty Bodies which play a key role in monitoring the actual implementation of human rights obligations by states which are parties to the UN human rights treaties;

92.  Regrets the adoption by the United Nations Human Rights Council of its resolution A/HRC/RES/21/3 on traditional values, undermining the principle of universal and indivisible human rights, and commends the EU’s opposition to it; regrets the absence of follow-up to resolution A/HRC/RES/17/19 on ‘Human rights, sexual orientation and gender identity’, and calls on the group of states working on this issue, including South Africa, to follow up on this resolution as soon as possible; commends the work of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to promote and protect the enjoyment of all human rights by LGBTI persons, notably through statements, reports, and the new Free and Equal campaign; calls on the UN High Commissioner to continue this work, and voice strong concern regarding so-called ‘anti-propaganda’ laws limiting freedom of expression and assembly;

93.  Emphasises, in view of the principles of international humanitarian law spell out in the 1907 Hague Regulations (Articles 42-56) and the Fourth Geneva Convention (GC IV, Articles 27-34 and 47-78) and in provisions of Additional Protocol I, the need for the EU to ensure that those partners falling within the occupying power category fulfil their duties towards the population in occupied territories; recalls that, according to international humanitarian law, public health standards and the provision of food and medical care to the population under occupation must be granted by the occupying power; reiterates that any transfer of the civilian population of the occupying power into the occupied territory is prohibited, and that those charged with criminal offences must be afforded proceedings providing internationally recognised judicial guarantees, such as being informed of the reason for their arrest, charged with a specific offence and given a fair trial as quickly as possible;

International Criminal Court

94.  Reiterates its strong support for the International Criminal Court (ICC); considers the increasing number of states parties to be an important development in strengthening the universality of the Court; welcomes the ratification of the Rome Statute by Guatemala in April 2012 and by Côte d’Ivoire in February 2013;

95.  Calls on the EU Foreign Ministers to adopt Foreign Affairs Council conclusions affirming the strong support of the EU and its Member States for the International Criminal Court, taking note of the EU‘s efforts to continuously review, update, and expand its instruments on the International Criminal Court, and expressing renewed commitment to working towards the universality of the Rome Statute in order to widen access to justice for victims of serious crimes under international law;

96.  Regrets that the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court is still not included in the new GSP Regulation’s list of conventions required for GSP+ status; notes that a number of GSP+ applicants are not states parties to the Statute or have not ratified it (e.g. Armenia and Pakistan); reiterates its recommendation that the Rome Statute be added to a future list of conventions;

97.  Calls for the EU and its Member States to emphasise the need to ratify and implement the Statute and the Agreement on Privileges and Immunities of the Court (APIC) in negotiations and political dialogues with third countries, regional organisations and other regional groups, and to include provisions concerning the ICC and international justice in EU agreements with third countries;

98.  Encourages the EEAS to ensure that all EU Delegations and EU Special Representatives are fully informed of the EU Council’s Decision and Action Plan on the ICC, and the EU‘s complementarity toolkit and actively promote the ICC, the enforcement of its decisions and the fight against impunity for Rome Statute crimes;

99.  Calls on the EU Delegations and EU Special Representatives, in particular the EU Special Representative on Human Rights, to actively promote the ICC, the enforcement of its decisions, and the fight against impunity for Rome Statute crimes, in political dialogues and meetings with third countries; suggests, furthermore, the strengthening of the financial support provided to the ICC;

100.  Welcomes the adoption of the EU Toolkit on Advancing Complementarity and calls on the EEAS and the Commission to take additional steps for its effective implementation; encourages the EU to ensure that support for the ICC is appropriately mainstreamed in all relevant areas of EU foreign policy;

101.  Calls on the EU Member States to fully implement the Rome Statute by aligning national legislation with all Statute obligations and to comply with the ICC‘s requests for assistance and cooperation at all stages of the Court‘s proceedings, particularly with regard to preliminary examination, investigation, arrest and surrender, protection of victims and witnesses, interim release and the enforcement of sentences; regrets that contributions to the Trust Fund for Victims remain insufficient and calls on EU Member States to provide the resources required for it to fully fulfil its mandate;

102.  Expresses support for appropriately funded outreach and public information activities through the regular budget of the Court and underlines the importance of these activities in ensuring that justice is visible;

103.  Calls on the EU Member States to ratify the Kampala Amendments to the Rome Statute and to encourage its ratification by third countries;

104.  Calls on the EU and its Member States to increase their efforts to fight impunity within the EU‘s own borders; encourages them in this connection to take into consideration the recommendations of the European Network of contact points in respect of persons responsible for genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes;

The death penalty and capital punishment

105.  Reiterates its univocal opposition to capital punishment, and considers implementation of a universal moratorium with a view to the global abolition of the death penalty to be a central objective of the EU‘s policy on human rights; emphasises the fact that the death penalty has never been proved to be an effective deterrent to crime and that, according to the data available, it is the disadvantaged who are punished most by the death penalty; applauds the efforts of the European Union and its Member States at the United Nations that led to the adoption of the General Assembly resolution regarding the moratorium on the use of the death penalty in December 2012; is concerned, however, by the resumption of executions in a number of countries; calls for the EU to continue to undertake targeted campaigns on the death penalty and to intensify engagement with retentionist countries; expects to be appropriately consulted in the course of the review of Regulation (EC) No 1236/2005 on trade in goods which can be used for capital punishment or torture, which was planned for 2013;

106.  Deplores the fact that Belarus remains the last country on the European continent to retain the death penalty; reiterates again that the executions of Dmitri Konovalov and Vladislav Kovalev are deeply regrettable; repeats its call to Belarus to implement a moratorium on the death penalty, which should ultimately lead to its abolition;

Business and human rights

107.  Reaffirms that European companies should ensure that their activities respect human rights standards, including when operating outside the EU; expresses its concern regarding the reported cooperation of certain EU companies with authoritarian regimes, especially where trade in sensitive goods, e.g. in the field of information technologies and communication, has led to human rights abuses.

108.  Recalls the importance of promoting corporate social responsibility (CSR), including in business operations outside the EU, and ensuring CSR along the whole supply chain; is convinced that European companies and their subsidiaries and subcontractors should play a key role in the promotion and dissemination of the international standards on business and human rights worldwide; stresses the importance of meaningful reporting on the human rights, social and environmental impact of projects supported by the European Investment Bank (EIB) or by export credits granted by European credit agencies; underlines the fact that financing operations carried out by these institutions should contribute to the general principles guiding Union external action, as referred to in Article 21 of the TEU;

109.  Calls on the EEAS to report on implementation of the commitments made in the EU Action Plan on Human Rights with regard to the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights; regrets the lack of progress made by the Commission in answering Parliament’s request that it propose legislation requiring EU companies to ensure that their purchases do not support perpetrators of conflicts and grave human rights violations;

110.  Reminds the Commission of its commitment in September 2010 to examine the issue of forced prison labour in third countries and to review the EU response accordingly, and requests that the Commission report to Parliament on the outcome of this process; calls on the Commission to introduce legislation banning imports into the EU of goods manufactured by forced and prison labour;

Eradication of all forms of discrimination

111.  Recalls the articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights stating that all human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights and are entitled to the rights and freedoms therein without distinction of any kind; stresses the importance of fighting all forms of discrimination, including those based on race, colour, sex, sexual orientation, language, religion, caste, social origin, culture, age, birth, disabilities or other status; reiterates its call for the EU to combat discrimination and intolerance as a key part of its human rights policy, and to base this policy on an inclusive and comprehensive definition of non-discrimination; emphasises that respect for the rights of minorities is a crucial factor for peace, development and democracy; welcomes and further encourages EU engagement with the United Nations and regional organisations in this cause;

112.  Calls for the EU to pay particular attention to discrimination based on forms of social stratification, such as caste and analogous systems of inherited status, which have a seriously harmful and sometimes destructive impact on the prospects for equal enjoyment of human rights; considers that those countries where a caste system still exists should be urged to prohibit it and ensure that laws against the caste system are genuinely implemented;

Freedom of thought, conscience, religion or belief

113.  Stresses that the right to freedom of thought, conscience, religion or belief, as encapsulated in Article 18 of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights and other international human rights instruments, is a fundamental human right, interrelated with other human rights and fundamental freedoms, encompassing the right to believe or not to believe, the freedom to practise theistic, non-theistic or atheistic belief alike, either in private or public, alone or in a community with others, and the right to adopt, change and abandon or return to a belief of one‘s choice; calls for the EU to promote the right to freedom of religion or belief within international and regional fora and in bilateral relations with third countries;

114.  Recalls that the right to conscientious objection to military service constitutes a legitimate exercise of the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, and urges the EEAS and the Member States to call on countries with a system of compulsory military service to allow for an alternative service of a non-combatant or civilian character, in the public interest and not of a punitive nature, and to refrain from punishing, including through prison sentences, conscientious objectors for failure to perform military service;

115.  Condemns in the strongest terms discrimination, intolerance, violence and killings on grounds of religion or belief, wherever and to whomever they occur; is particularly concerned about the increasing attempts to resolve differences within peoples divided along religious lines by resorting to violence and persecution, as these actions constitute an impediment to long-lasting peace and reconciliation; is also concerned about the increasingly hostile attitudes of governments society at large in many countries which continue to deny minority religious or belief groups the freedom to worship or publicly express their religion or belief; notes that social hostility and attacks against religious or belief groups, which have resulted in many deaths and injuries, are on the increase, and that impunity and the lack of protection for minority religious or belief communities remain a concern;

116.  Opposes any legislation that penalises individuals for changing their religion or belief; expresses profound concern at the fact that, as a result of such legislation, individuals in certain countries face imprisonment or even the death penalty; is also concerned at the fact that those who have left or changed their religion are subjected to social hostility, such as violence and intimidation; opposes laws that penalise expressions deemed blasphemous, defamatory or insulting to religion or religious symbols, figures or feelings; states that these laws do not comply with accepted international human rights standards; condemns blasphemy law provisions in Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Egypt, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, which allow for imprisonment and the death penalty;

117.  Welcomes recent EIDHR calls for proposals prioritising and supporting civil society actions combating discrimination on the basis of religion or belief; encourages the EU to support inclusive efforts towards intercultural and interfaith dialogue and cooperation at various levels, involving community leaders, women, youth and ethnic minority representatives, and with the aim of promoting peace building and societal cohesion; calls for the EU and the Member States to develop grant schemes for the protection and promotion of freedom of religion or belief in countries where this right is most at risk;

118.  Welcomes the EU‘s commitment to promoting the right to freedom of religion or belief within international and regional fora including the UN, the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), the Council of Europe and other regional mechanisms; encourages the EU to continue tabling its yearly resolution on freedom of religion or belief at the UN General Assembly and supporting the mandate of the UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief;

The rights and empowerment of women and children

119.  Expresses its full support for the UN‘s work to uphold the rights and empowerment of women; encourages the EU to undertake a targeted campaign on the political and economic participation of women and to support initiatives against gender-based violence and feminicide; supports the implementation of the Plan of Action on Gender Equality and Women‘s Empowerment in Development; calls on the EU Delegations to introduce specific measures on the role of external assistance and development cooperation in their local strategies for the implementation of the EU Guidelines on violence against women and girls and combating all forms of discrimination against them, including forced marriages; highlights the fact that the role of the Commission and the Member States in this area, both within and outside the EU, cannot be limited to combating violence against women in all its forms, whether physical, psychological, social or financial, and that priority must be given to non-gender based education from the youngest possible age; urges the Commission and the Council to further encourage third countries to take account of women’s rights when drawing up national legislation and to ensure that all relevant provisions are duly implemented;

120.  Reaffirms its condemnation of abuse and of all forms of violence against women including domestic violence; calls, therefore, on all member states of the Council of Europe to sign and ratify the Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and on the EU to engage in the process of accession to the Convention in order to ensure consistency between EU internal and external action on violence against women; stresses the importance of conducting information and awareness campaigns in communities where female genital mutilation (FGM), sexual abuse of young girls, early and forced marriages, feminicides and other gender-based human rights violations are practised, and of involving human rights defenders already fighting for an end to these practices in the preparation and implementation of these campaigns ; encourages the EEAS and the Member States to continue to address the issue of FGM in their political and policy dialogue with partner countries where FGM is still practised;

121.  Calls for the EU to further protect reproductive rights and stresses the need to place these policies at the heart of development cooperation with third countries; strongly condemns the disgraceful practice of female genital mutilation in certain parts of Africa, honour killings, gender-based abortion and forced marriage; recalls the important conclusions reached at the International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) in Cairo;

122.  Supports the ‘Education First‘ initiative of the UN Secretary-General, as access to education increases protection against threats to girls‘ futures, such as early marriage and pregnancy, HIV, poverty, domestic and sexual violence, and also reduces child and maternal mortality;

123.  Calls for efforts to be stepped up to ensure the fullest possible achievement, prior to the expiry of the deadlines, of the Millennium Development Goals as regards gender equality, maternal health and access to adequate health systems, education and sexual and reproductive health rights, especially for the most vulnerable groups such as girls and young women, on the basis of a solid commitment on the part of governments to enhance accountability and monitoring mechanisms for existing human rights obligations, promote access to justice for all and ensure effective participation for all, including the most marginalised and disadvantaged, in development, decision making and implementation; strongly recommends that a stand-alone goal for women’s rights and gender equality be included in the post-2015 Millennium Development Goals, with a strong emphasis on Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights;

124.  Urges the EU and its Member States to ensure that the ICPD+20 review process results in a comprehensive review of all aspects related to the full enjoyment of sexual and reproductive rights and to reaffirm a strong and progressive approach to the issue of sexual and reproductive rights for all in conformity with international human rights standards, as well as calling for greater accountability as regards achievement; also calls on them, in particular, to ensure that the review process is conducted in a participatory manner and provides opportunities for the different stakeholders, including civil society as well as women, adolescents and young people to participate in a meaningful manner; recalls that the framework for such a review must be based on human rights and must have a specific focus on sexual and reproductive rights;

125.  Expresses its serious concerns regarding the issue of rape; deplores the extremely high degree of impunity with regard to rape in countries like India and Pakistan;

126.  Condemns the extended use of sexual violence and rape as a weapon of war, especially in the Great Lakes region; draws attention to the fact that gender-related crimes and crimes of sexual violence are included in the Rome Statute among war crimes, crimes against humanity or constitutive acts with respect to genocide or torture; welcomes, in this context, UN Security Council Resolution 2106 (2013) on the prevention of sexual violence in conflict, adopted on 24 June 2013, which reaffirms that the ICC plays a key role in the fight against impunity for sexual and gender-based crimes; calls on the EU to support the implementation of these principles in full; reiterates also the EU’s commitment to mainstreaming human rights and gender aspects in CSDP missions in line with the landmark UN Security Council resolutions 1325 and 1820 on women, peace and security;

127.  Calls for the EU to prioritise the fight against trafficking in human beings; stresses the need to consider both internal and external aspects when addressing human trafficking; encourages the Member States to implement the EU Directive (2011/36/EU ) and Strategy towards the Eradication of Trafficking in Human Beings 2012-2016;

128.  Calls for the universal ratification of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child; calls on the Commission and the EEAS to take action regarding the rights of the child, with a specific focus on violence against children, specifically on the issues of forced child labour, child marriage, enlistment of children in armed groups, their disarmament, rehabilitation and subsequent reintegration, as well as placing the issue of child witchcraft on the agenda of human rights dialogues with the countries concerned; stresses the importance of prioritising children’s rights within EU external policy;

129.  Stresses the need to step up efforts to implement the Revised Implementation Strategy of the EU Guidelines on Children and Armed Conflict; encourages the EU to further deepen its cooperation with the UN Special Representative for Children Affected by Armed Conflicts; welcomes the launch in 2012 of a new funding line to support children affected by conflict through humanitarian assistance providing access to education in emergencies;

130.  Recalls its earlier recommendations on improving its own procedures in relation to human rights issues and stepping up its efforts to mainstream human rights effectively into its own structures and processes; regrets that no improvements have been made with regard to the plenary debates and resolutions on cases of breaches of human rights, democracy and the rule of law, and their follow-up; welcomes efforts to improve cooperation on human rights issues with the national parliaments of the Member States;

o
o   o

131.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission and the European External Action Service, the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, the EU Special Representative on Human Rights, the governments and parliaments of the Member States and the candidate countries, the United Nations, the Council of Europe, and the governments of the countries and territories referred to in this resolution.

(1) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2012)0503. (2) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2012)0504. (3) OJ L 200, 27.7.2012, p. 21. (4) OJ C 332 E, 15.11.2013, p. 114. (5) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0278. (6) http://www.eeas.europa.eu/human_rights/docs/guidelines_en.pdf. (7) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0394. (8) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0055. (9) OJ C 153 E, 31.5.2013, p. 115. (10) OJ C 168 E, 14.6.2013, p. 26. (11) OJ C 257 E, 6.9.2013, p. 13. (12) OJ C 236 E, 12.8.2011, p. 69. (13) OJ C 33 E, 5.2.2013, p. 165. (14) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2012)0470. (15) OJ C 99 E, 3.4.2012, p. 31. (16) OJ C 99 E, 3.4.2012, p. 94. (17) OJ C 99 E, 3.4.2012, p. 101. (18) OJ C 99 E, 3.4.2012, p. 87. (19) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0431.

European Parliament resolution of 11 December 2013 on the Annual Report on EU Competition Policy (2013/2075(INI))

P7_TA(2013)0576 A7-0357/2013

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission Report on Competition Policy 2012 (COM(2013)0257) and the accompanying Commission staff working document (SWD(2013)0159),

–  having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), in particular Articles 101, 102 and 107 thereof,

–  having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 of 16 December 2002 on the implementation of the rules on competition laid down in Articles 81 and 82 of the Treaty(1),

–  having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 169/2009 of 26 February 2009 applying rules of competition to transport by rail, road and inland waterway(2),

–  having regard to the proposal for a directive of the European Council and of the Council on certain rules governing actions for damages under national law for infringements of the competition law provisions of the Member States and of the European Union (COM(2013)0404),

–  having regard to the Commission Communication on quantifying harm in actions for damages based on breaches of Article 101 or 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C(2013)3440),

–  having regard to the Commission staff working document entitled ‘Public consultation: Towards a Coherent European Approach to Collective Redress’ (SEC(2011)0173),

–  having regard to the Commission Communication of 11 June 2013 entitled ‘Towards a European Horizontal Framework for Collective Redress’ (COM(2013)0401),

–  having regard to the Commission Recommendation on common principles for injunctive and compensatory collective redress mechanisms in the Member States concerning violations of rights granted under Union Law (C(2013)3539/3),

–  having regard to the study published by the Policy Department of the Directorate-General for Internal Policies, entitled ‘Collective redress in Antitrust’ of June 2012,

–  having regard to the Commission Communication published pursuant to Article 27(4) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 in Case AT.39740 – Google (2013/C 120/09),

–  having regard to the commitments offered to the Commission pursuant to Article 9 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 in Case COMP/39.398 – Visa MIF,

–  having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 of 20 January 2004 on the control of concentrations between undertakings (the EC Merger Regulation)(3),

–  having regard to the Commission consultation of 27 March 2013 on EU merger control – draft revision of simplified procedure and merger implementing regulation,

–  having regard to the Commission Communication of 13 October 2008 on the application of State aid rules to measures taken in relation to financial institutions in the context of the current global financial crisis (the Banking Communication)(4),

–  having regard to the Commission Communication of 5 December 2008 entitled ‘The recapitalisation of financial institutions in the current financial crisis: limitation of aid to the minimum necessary and safeguards against undue distortions of competition’ (the Recapitalisation Communication)(5),

–  having regard to the Commission communication of 25 February 2009 on the treatment of impaired assets in the Community banking sector (the Impaired Assets Communication)(6),

–  having regard to the Commission Communication of 23 July 2009 on the return to viability and the assessment of restructuring measures in the financial sector in the current crisis under the State aid rules (the Restructuring Communication)(7),

–  having regard to the Commission Communication of 17 December 2008 on a temporary Community framework for State aid measures to support access to finance in the current financial and economic crisis (the original Temporary Framework)(8),

–  having regard to the Commission Communication of 1 December 2010 entitled "Temporary Union framework for State aid measures to support access to finance in the current financial and economic crisis"(9) (the new Temporary Framework replacing the one which ended on 31 December 20101),

–  having regard to the Commission Communication on the application, from 1 August 2013, of State aid rules to support measures in favour of banks in the context of the financial crisis (‘Banking Communication’)(10),

–  having regard to the issues paper from the Commission for the attention of the EFC on the revision of the State aid guidelines for the restructuring of banks,

–  having regard to the study published by the Policy Department of the Directorate-General for Internal Policies, entitled ‘State aid – Crisis rules for the financial sector and the real economy’ of June 2011,

–  having regard to the Commission Communication on the application of the European Union State aid rules to compensation granted for the provision of services of general economic interest(11),

–  having regard to Commission Decision 2012/21/EU of 20 December 2011 on the application of Article 106(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to State aid in the form of public service compensation granted to certain undertakings entrusted with the operation of services of general economic interest(12),

–  having regard to the Commission Communication entitled ‘European Union framework for State aid in the form of public service compensation (2011)’(13),

–  having regard to the Commission Regulation (EU) No 360/2012 of 25 April 2012 on the application of Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to de minimis aid granted to undertakings providing services of general economic interest(14),

–  having regard to its resolution of 15 November 2011 on reform of the EU State aid rules on Services of General Economic Interest(15),

–  having regard to the Commission Communication entitled ‘EU State Aid Modernisation (SAM)’ (COM(2012)0209),

–  having regard to its resolution of 17 January 2013 on State aid modernisation(16),

–  having regard to the Commission proposal for a Council regulation amending Council Regulation (EC) No 994/98 of 7 May 1998 on the application of Articles 92 and 93 of the Treaty establishing the European Community to certain categories of horizontal State aid and Regulation (EC) No 1370/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2007 on public passenger transport services by rail and by road (COM(2012)0730),

–  having regard to the Commission proposal for a Council regulation amending Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 93 of the EC Treaty (COM(2012)0725),

–  having regard to the Commission guidelines on State aid for railway undertakings(17),

–  having regard to its resolution of 12 June 2013 on regional policy as a part of wider State support schemes(18),

–  having regard to the Framework Agreement of 20 November 2010 on relations between the European Parliament and the European Commission(19) (hereinafter ‘the Framework Agreement’), in particular paragraphs 9, 12, 15 and 16 thereof,

–  having regard to the legal action filed in one Member State claiming the violation of the basic legal principle ‘nulla poena sine lege‘, according to which a company cannot be fined for a cartel infringement where the size of the fine has not been established by law;

–  having regard to its resolutions of 22 February 2005 on ‘the Commission’s XXXIIIrd Report on Competition Policy – 2003’(20), of 4 April 2006 on the Commission Report on Competition Policy 2004(21) , of 19 June 2007 on the Report on Competition Policy 2005 (22), of 10 March 2009 on the Reports on competition policy 2006 and 2007 (23), of 9 March 2010 on the Report on Competition Policy 2008 (24), of 20 January 2011 on the Report on Competition Policy 2009(25), of 2 February 2012 on the Annual Report on EU Competition Policy(26) and of 12 June 2013 on the Annual Report on EU Competition Policy(27),

–  having regard to Rules 48 and 119(2) of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs and the opinion of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs (A7-0357/2013),

A.  whereas the equivalent of EUR 1,6 trillion was granted in State aid to banks in the EU in the period from 2008 until the end of 2011, and whereas State aid was generally provided by subscribing to debt or guarantee issues or, in exceptional cases, in the form of a grant;

B.  whereas in many Member States a severe credit crunch is affecting SMEs, which account for 98 % of EU firms;

C.  whereas each year losses of EUR 181-320 billion – approximately 3 % of EU GDP – accrue owing to the existence of cartels;

D.  whereas the lack of liberalisation and openness in rail passenger and freight transport is partly due to the absence of truly independent supervisory bodies at national level in some Member States;

E.  whereas the Annual Report on Competition Policy should serve as an instrument to further the Union’s overall competitiveness by expanding competition and opening up to new actors, thereby widening and deepening the internal market, and not only in relation to the practical implementation of competition policy by the Commission;

F.  whereas the elimination of obstacles to the free movement of goods, services, people and capital is a precondition for growth;

G.  whereas sectors in which the level of competition is lower are often the ones where economic output is underperforming;

H.  whereas competition policy seeks to ensure the smooth running of the internal market and a level playing field, to protect consumers from anti-competitive practices and to optimise pricing; whereas the purpose of competition policy is not to micromanage but to enforce clear and fair rules within which market forces can effectively function;

I.  whereas public action, public investment and services of general economic interest (SGEIs) play an essential role in ensuring social cohesion, particularly at a time of crisis;

J.  whereas Article 14 of the TFEU establishes that codecision should be used to secure the conditions, particularly the economic and financial conditions, for the operation of SGEIs;

K.  whereas Protocol No 26 to the TFEU guarantees public authorities wide discretion in providing, commissioning and organising SGEIs;

L.  whereas the Altmark judgment establishes four criteria for distinguishing between compensation for a public service and State aid;

Competition policy as a tool to foster the single market

1.  Welcomes the Commission report and its focus on the contribution of competition policy to merger control, as well as to eliminating barriers, abuses of dominant positions, collusion agreements and distortive State aid measures for the benefit of the single market, taking into account the evolution of the global economy;

2.  Regrets the fact that in its 2012 report on competition policy the Commission focuses heavily on unfair competition practices resulting from State practices, while it pays relatively little attention to unfair practices due to the concentration of companies in the Single Market;

3.  Believes that competition policy is a driver of economic growth and job creation, especially in crisis times;

4.  Points out that competition policy and the smooth functioning of the single market are essential to confronting the crisis, encouraging growth and sustainable employment under the Europe 2020 Strategy and helping to achieve the goals of the European Union;

5.  Agrees with the Commission, therefore, that the crisis should not be used as a pretext for relaxing the enforcement of competition rules;

6.  Takes the view that competition policy should be adjusted so as to better respond to the challenges posed by globalisation;

7.  Takes the view that it should be possible for the new EU competition policy to include flexibility clauses;

8.  Acknowledges that too many sectors are still largely divided by national borders and by public or private artificial barriers, and agrees that competition policy has a fundamental role to play in fighting such fragmentation and in creating a level playing field in all sectors of the single market, taking into account the special needs of SMEs and of final consumers;

9.  Highlights the fact that implementation of competition policy in the broader sense must not strengthen already established companies and providers of goods and services, but rather have as its overarching objective to facilitate the entry of new actors and the emergence of new ideas and techniques, thereby maximising the benefit to Union citizens;

10.  Considers that competition policy should contribute to promoting and enforcing open standards and interoperability in order to prevent technological lock-in of consumers and clients by a minority of market players;

11.  Considers that the prices of products still vary from one Member State to another, e.g. as regards medicines, due to different agreements between Member States and the pharmaceutical industry; calls on the Commission to look into this problem and to come up with proposals to create a more transparent internal market, avoiding any unnecessary price differences, in the interest of consumers;

12.  Welcomes the EU unitary patent as a step forward to complete the single market and to respond to the challenges of globalisation; calls for steps to be taken to ensure that all the Member States can participate in it; considers it necessary to reconcile intellectual property rights with the demands of competition, protecting the general interest and ensuring that patent holders do not abuse their rights to the detriment of the public; calls on the Commission to prosecute conduct aimed at unduly delaying the market entry of generic medicines;

Legitimacy and effectiveness of EU competition policy

13.  Considers that it should have legislative codecision powers in the establishment of the competition policy framework; regrets the fact that Articles 103 and 109 of the TFEU provide only for consultation of Parliament; believes that this democratic deficit cannot be tolerated; proposes that this deficit be overcome as soon as possible through interinstitutional arrangements in the field of competition policy and that it be corrected in the next Treaty change; recalls that the political accountability of the Commission to Parliament covers competition policy and that the structured dialogue with the relevant Commissioner is an important tool with which to carry out sound democratic control in this field;

14.  Considers that the type of dialogue engaged in by the Commissioner for Competition cannot replace genuine democratic control by Parliament; stresses that parliamentary control is all the more necessary since, under competition policy, the Commission monitors decisions taken by democratically-elected national and local authorities; also underlines the need to develop a better dialogue between the Commission, the Member States, local and regional authorities and civil society;

15.  Stresses the importance of treating Parliament and Council equally as regards access to meetings and the provision of information for the preparation of legislation or soft law in the field of competition policy, as provided for in the Framework Agreement; regrets the fact that this has not been respected by the Commission;

16.  Stresses the need to instil a competition culture which promotes its own values and helps nurture a positive approach to compliance with a preventive and beneficial effect for the development of competition policy;

17.  Points out that the cross‑cutting facet of EU competition policy calls for complete consistency between that policy and EU policies in other fields, and that to ensure the smooth functioning of the internal market, sector‑specific regulations need to comply with the principles of competition policy;

18.  Believes that the Commission should put forward a proposal in order to regulate the competition issues related to minority shareholding;

19.  Encourages the Commission to continue to issue soft law guidelines in the field of competition policy, duly taking into account the existing ECJ case law, in order to ensure some legal certainty for stakeholders; considers, however, that soft law cannot replace legislation in areas where legal certainty is crucial;

20.  Stresses that imposing fines is a dissuasive tool, which plays an important role in competition policy and that quick action is needed for the success of investigations; believes that legal certainty, the simplification of procedures and the possibility of early termination by means of suitable agreements, are crucial, and therefore reiterates its call on the Commission to incorporate the rules on fines into Regulation (EC) No 1/2003; at the same time, considers that the Commission should increase unannounced inspections, taking action against suspected infringements;

21.  Believes however that the use of ever higher fines as the sole antitrust instrument may be too blunt, not least considering potential job losses as a result of an inability to make payments; emphasises that a policy of high fines should not be used as an alternative budget financing mechanism; favours a ‘carrot-and-stick’ approach, with penalties that serves as an effective deterrent, in particular for repeat offenders, while encouraging compliance;

22.  Calls on the Commission to ensure that its fining and enforcement policy restores a balanced market and incentivises companies to identify infringements internally and implement restorative action voluntarily; urges the Commission to take into account the level of illicit profit and loss incurred by those who were affected;

23.  Reiterates that the number of requests for fine reductions on account of an inability to pay has increased, particularly from ‘mono-product’ undertakings and SMEs; continues to believe that a system of delayed and/or split payments could be considered as an alternative to fine reduction in order to avoid putting undertakings out of business;

24.  Notes that the use of global turnover for the 10 % ceiling can lead to cumulative sanctions being imposed for the same infringement, given the increasing number of competition authorities worldwide; considers, therefore, that EEA-based turnover would be more appropriate than global turnover;

25.  Still awaits an adaptation of the fining guidelines concerning ‘‘mono-product’’ undertakings and SMEs; welcomes, however, the fact that the Commission has recently taken into account the specific needs of ‘mono-product‘ undertakings in its decision on ‘Mountings for windows‘ (COMP/39452 of 28/03/2012);

26.  Invites the Commission to increase its cooperation with national courts in order to facilitate private enforcement and the correct resolution of State aid disputes; welcomes the Commission’s training programmes for national judges;

27.  Takes a positive view of the role played by judicial bodies in competition policy, and urges them to use their powers to obtain information and opinions from the Commission and to participate in Community training activities; recommends that the Commission cooperate closely with the judicial authorities, actively exercise its remit to make contributions to judicial bodies as an ‘amicus curiae’, which should be published in a timely manner on the Commission’s web site, and consider the possibility of taking legal action to avoid the EU being left without protection and to safeguard the interests it should protect;

28.  Acknowledges the ’Commission proposal of 11 June 2013 on actions for damages under national law for infringements of competition law provisions on which it is currently working; is determined to find a satisfactory outcome to address the specific issues arising in this field;

29.  Maintains that the EU should actively promote the substantive and procedural convergence of competition rules in the international sphere; considers international cooperation to be essential to ensuring consistency and interoperability in the implementation of competition policy by the various competent authorities, with this helping to increase the effectiveness of research and create a level playing field;

30.  Highlights the importance of fostering the global convergence of competition rules; encourages the Commission to conclude bilateral cooperation agreements on competition enforcement; is currently working on the proposed agreement between the EU and Switzerland concerning cooperation on the application of their competition laws; is determined to find a satisfactory outcome to address the specific issues arising in this field;

31.  Considers that resources for the Commission’s Directorate-General for Competition should be brought into line with its increased workload and range of tasks, inter alia by redeploying resources from obsolete or underused budget lines, in order to enable more proactive action to be taken;

Competition authorities

32.  Calls on the Member States to ensure the independence of all national competition authorities (NCAs) and sector regulators from national governments, making the nomination of non-political chairpersons and board members with no conflicts of interest essential; calls on the Member States to ensure that the staff and resources of NCAs and sector regulators are sufficient and vary according to market‑derived needs and those of the effective performance of their duties;

33.  Stresses the importance of full transparency of NCAs and sector regulators; requests that all relevant information on cases and official decisions be made clearly visible and accessible online through an open database, taking account of confidential commercial information that may have a significant influence on competition;

34.  Supports the structured cooperation within the European Competition Network (ECN), which allows EU-wide coherence of public enforcement of competition rules and encourages its further development, given that some markets tend to have more national dimensions than others, due to different legal, economic and cultural conditions; believes that, as a general rule, the working programmes and conclusions of ECN meetings should be made public on the DG Competition website;

35.  Believes that NCAs and other national sector regulators should continue to cooperate to ensure complementary action, particularly in sectors where liberalisation is not yet completed or fully operative; suggests the creation of a wider network for European regulators including NCAs and sector regulators for the exchange of best practices;

State aid and effects on the real economy

State aid to banks

36.  Acknowledges the important role played by State aid control since the beginning of the crisis as a restructuring and resolution mechanism for distressed banks;

37.  Believes that State aid control during the crisis should focus on stabilising the banking system, tackling unfair segmentation of the credit conditions in the real economy as well as discrimination of SMEs and households in the single market; calls on the Commission, however, to ensure that the goal of stabilising the banking system does not lead to a further increase in public debt; urges the Commission to link the extension of temporary State aid to the banking sector with enhanced and more stringent conditions governing the focus to be placed on retail lending, and stronger restrictions and transparent rules on bonuses, fee structures and dividend distribution;

38.  Recalls that it has urged the Commission to revise the rules on State aid to banks introduced in 2008 as temporary measures on several occasions; welcomes, therefore, the recent actions taken by the Commission in this field;

39.  Calls on the Commission regularly to provide detailed country‑ and organisation‑specific statistics on the State aid granted to the financial sector since the onset of the crisis, on consolidated losses and on developments in the repayments made, and to publish the results on the Commission’s website in order to ensure total transparency on the scale of public intervention since the beginning of the crisis and its impact on taxpayers;

40.  Believes that accounting methods should be harmonised before any assessment is made of the amount of State aid to be given to banks, such that the accounting treatment of loans refinanced for the second time, for example, is the same regardless of the Member State concerned;

41.  Stresses that, particularly in the case of banks receiving State aid, the refinancing of loans should take fully into account the viability of the receiver; considers that, in the case of multinational corporations, the selling of assets and shares in participated companies should be made a condition for loan refinancing;

42.  Urges the Commission to monitor closely those markets in the banking sector where concentration is high or growing, in particular as a result of restructuring in response to the crisis; recalls that oligopolistic markets are particularly prone to anticompetitive practices; fears that this concentration may ultimately harm consumers; stresses that excessive concentration poses a risk for both the financial industry and the real economy;

43.  Stresses that banking sector consolidation has increased the market share of several major financial institutions; urges the Commission to maintain a close watch on the sector in order to enhance competition and consumer protection in European banking markets, including in investment banking, where retail deposits are cross-subsidised with riskier investment banking activities;

44.  Urges the Commission to carefully consider the range of assets and holdings of financial institutions prior to the dispensation of State aid;

45.  Underlines the fact that depositors with up to EUR 100 000 in their bank accounts should be afforded maximum protection and be excluded from any burden-sharing arrangement resulting from bank restructuring or resolution;

46.  Believes that the Commission should consider the possibility of State aid to banks sometimes being made conditional on credit being granted to SMEs;

47.  Emphasises that ’SMEs have been disproportionately affected in their ability to access finance since the financial crises; points out that ’SMEs constitute 98 % of all euro area firms, employ around three-quarters of euro area employees, and generate around 60 % of value added, and that access to finance is preventing them from investing and growing; calls on the Commission, therefore, to prioritise measures which recalibrate financial regulation in order to promote growth and ease the funding crisis which SMEs’ are going through;

48.  Stresses that banks receiving State aid should not increase their size and complexity; urges the Commission to encourage them to focus their business model on the viable part of their activities, remuneration policy and fee structure and not to increase their exposure to public debt, especially if they are reducing the credit flow to SMEs and households at the same time; points out that a new, permanent regulatory system is necessary in order to tackle the flaws found in the pre-crisis legal system, in particular as regards the financial sector as well as to remedy distortions’ created during the financial and economic crisis, and to ensure that priority attention is paid to the consequences and benefits for taxpayers, consumers and the single market as a whole when banks are receiving State aid;

49.  Deplores that SMEs undergoing adjustment programmes in the Member States have difficulties in accessing credit from banks and are obliged to pay higher interest rates solely on account of their location in the eurozone, creating distortions in the single market;

50.  Stresses that external investors, too, should be encouraged to participate as much as possible in asset management companies (AMCs) created under State aid programmes as a means of separating impaired assets, to ensure that there is no conflict of interests between investors holding or transferring assets and the objectives of any given AMC;

51.  Believes that AMCs should try to sell their assets as soon as possible in order to regain market normality and end public intervention in a specific sector;

52.  Believes that DG COMP’s experience in with regard to bank crises should be considered best practice and be used in the future as a means of prevention rather than for ex-post interventions;

State aid modernisation

53.  Welcomes again the Commission’s communication on State Aid Modernisation (COM(2012)0209) and the Council’s recent adoption of revised State aid rules on block exemptions and procedures; calls on the Commission, however, to ensure that the stimulation of economic growth, as one of the overall aims of this reform, will not lead again to an increase in public debt;

54.  Considers that companies should restructure in accordance with clear limits, keeping to a minimum any damaging effects for competitors which have not received support from public funding;

55.  Calls on the Commission to examine at what point companies become too big to fail and to consider which measures can be taken at national or EU level to prevent companies becoming dependent on future government bailouts;

56.  Notes the Commission’s general intention to exempt more measures from the notification requirement; stresses, however, that Member States will have to ensure ex ante compliance with State aid rules of de minimis measures and block-exempted schemes to preserve a sufficient level of control while the Commission will continue to exercise ex post control of such cases;

57.  Shares the Commission’s view that State aid procedures need to be accelerated to allow more concentration on complicated cases with serious effects for competition on the internal market; notes the Commission’s proposal to raise its level of discretion to decide how to deal with complaints; calls on the Commission to provide for detailed criteria on how to distinguish important from less important cases in this context; points out that higher thresholds in the de minimis regulation and the extension of the horizontal categories in the enabling regulation and the general block exemption regulation are appropriate ways of making this distinction;

58.  Stresses that the Commission should ensure better exchanges with Members States in terms of quality and timeliness of submission of information and the ’preparation of notifications; underlines the fact that effective national systems must ensure that State aid measures exempted from ex ante notification obligations comply with Union law; points out higher thresholds in the de minimis regulation and the extension of the horizontal categories in the enabling regulation and the general block exemption regulation are appropriate ways of making this distinction;

59.  Notes that until now relevant information for State aid control cases has been delivered exclusively by the Member States; reiterates its request that the Commission assess whether additional human resources will be needed to extend its information gathering tools and enable it to receive direct information from market participants; notes, however, that the Commission should not be able to include additional quality and efficiency considerations in the compatibility assessment and that these decisions must be left to the granting authority;

60.  Points to the lack of clarity in some Member States as to whether public funding to European Consumer Centres (ECCs) can be considered as unjustified State aid within the meaning of Union competition law; is concerned that this puts Member States’ support to ECCs at risk and has already resulted in the temporary suspension of funding for ECCs; urges the Commission, therefore, to ensure the proper functioning of ECCs by clarifying as soon as possible that this type of funding does not qualify as State aid under the terms of Union law, given that ECCs do not engage in economic activities but ensure support services for consumers;

Transport sector

61.  Believes that the Commission should further strengthen the links between competition policy and transport policy in order to improve the competitiveness of the European transport sector;

62.  Calls on the Commission and the Member States to ensure open and fair competition in all transport modes;

63.  Calls on the Commission to develop public transport networks with the aim of improving services for customers;

64.  Urges the Commission, with a view to countering the continuing rise of CO2 emissions, to devote particular attention to meet the international commitment to limit global warming to two degrees Celsius (°C) above pre-industrial levels, as set as a goal for 2020;

Rail

65.  Urges the Commission to complete the implementation of the Single European Railway Area, ensure full transparency in the flows of money between infrastructure managers and railway undertakings, and verify that each Member State has a strong and independent national regulator;

66.  Calls on the Commission and the Members States to increase their efforts in order to guarantee the opening of the railway transport sector to fair competition, as well as a better quality of services;

67.  Calls on the Commission to study the possibility of adopting a legislative proposal for a European regulatory body that would cooperate with existing national regulators and act where they do not exist or, where appropriate, when they are inactive;

68.  Stresses that the single market in the rail freight sector is affected by incorrect or incomplete transposition of EU law by Member States and by bottlenecks to cross-border mobility that harm competition and growth; calls on the Commission to verify whether market barriers put in place by operators or technical aspects that differ from one Member State to another, such as track gauges, energy supplies, signalling systems and other similar obstacles concerning the interoperability and accessibility of infrastructure, can be considered infringements of competition rules;

Aviation

69.  Welcomes the intention of the Commission to revise the EU aviation and airport state aid guidelines by the end of 2013 which will have to eliminate any distortion of competition and establish a level playing field for all market participants;

70.  Invites the Commission to provide a justified overview to ascertain which air carriers behave in an anti‑competitive manner through undue use of special conditions or abuses of their dominant position in certain airports;

71.  Encourages the Commission to investigate whether certain practices regarding the designation of specific hub airports – based on the terms of the over 1000 bilateral air services agreements signed by Member States with non-EU countries – distort competition against European consumers’ interests;

Automotive sector

72.  Calls on the Commission to ensure a fair balance of bargaining power between manufacturers and distributors, while emphasising the following:

asks the Commission to insist on the need to develop principles of good conduct between manufacturers and dealers with regard to vertical agreements in the motor vehicle sector, particularly with regard to the protection of investments after termination of a contract and the possibility of transferring a business to another member of the same brand network, in order to promote transparency in commercial and contractual relations between the parties;

Shipbuilding sector

73.  Calls for efforts to be made to ensure the competitiveness of the European shipbuilding sector by promoting shipbuilding in the EU in the face of an increasingly competitive international environment;

74.  Stresses the need to guarantee legal certainty and equal treatment for European shipowners in all the Member States;

Financial services sector

75.  Calls on the Commission and the national regulatory authorities to investigate cases of possible collusion between companies and abuse of dominant positions on the motor vehicle insurance markets;

Energy sector

76.  Notes that a single market for energy will not only result in lower prices for consumers but also increase the competitiveness of EU undertakings;

77.  Welcomes the implementation of the Commission’s anti-monopoly measures in the energy sector;

78.  Urges the Commission to pursue the full implementation of the internal energy market package, given that an open and competitive single market in the energy sector has not yet been fully achieved; urges the Commission to be resolute in continuing the steps taken in light of the sector inquiry to bring competition rules to bear effectively on the energy sector; welcomes, in this connection, the ongoing competition law procedures in the energy sector, aimed at completing the internal energy market by 2014 and eliminating obstacles re-established by energy suppliers;

79.  Considers that a single European energy market would lower the price of energy paid by consumers and businesses alike, and would strengthen the competitiveness of European business operators on a global scale; believes that, for this reason, the Commission should be encouraged to develop a single European energy market by 2014;

80.  Stresses that it is vitally important that the Member States and the Commission ensure timely and correct implementation of existing legislation for the energy market, including the regulatory work called for by the Third Internal Energy Market Package, in order to achieve an integrated and competitive European internal energy market by 2014;

81.  Asks the Commission to ensure that energy regulations and directives are transposed and applied correctly in all Member States; calls on the Commission to be particularly vigilant when prices reach above the EU-average, as high prices distort competition and harm consumers;

82.  Believes that the Commission needs to be strict with the introduction of energy market reforms to reduce its prices, particularly in those Member States under the excessive deficit procedure;

83.  Calls on the Commission and the national regulatory authorities to investigate cases of possible collusion between companies and abuse of dominant positions on the fuel retailing markets;

84.  Welcomes in this connection the Commission’s recent inquiries into the oil sector, acknowledging that a violation of competition rules in this area has massive implications for consumers;

85.  Calls on the Commission and national regulators to investigate whether the ‘Monday effect’ – an alleged manipulation of petrol prices by companies depending on the specific day of the week – is real; urges the Commission to closely monitor the level of competition since the three largest players still represent about 75 % (electricity) and above 60 % (gas) of the market despite the gradual opening of the markets in the mid-1990s; invites the Commission to issue guidelines in order to improve the access of renewable energy sources to the energy network;

86.  Calls on the Commission to examine in its next annual report the extent to which the concentration of critical raw material suppliers may be harmful to the activity of client sectors and a more eco-efficient economy, given that some of these are of paramount importance to the deployment of the eco-efficient technologies needed to achieve environmental goals;

87.  Emphasises the role of smart grids in allowing two-way communication between electricity producers and customers, and points out that smart grids can allow consumers to observe and adapt their electricity use; stresses that Member States should make this information available on websites for consumers and for all relevant actors, such as builders, architects and suppliers of heating, cooling and electricity equipment;

Payment services

88.  Is concerned that the European market for electronic payments is still fragmented and that competition issues remain to be solved; acknowledges the two Commission proposals of 24 July 2013 on interchange fees for card-based payment transactions and on payment services in the internal market, on which it is currently working; is determined to find a satisfactory outcome to address the specific issues arising in this field;

89.  Stresses that, despite the fact that the Late Payments Directive (2011/7/EU) was to be transposed into national law by March 2013, not all Member States have implemented it; notes that this is harmful to competition in the single market, and affects SMEs in particular;

Telecommunications

90.  Urges the Commission to redouble its efforts in the telecommunications markets to help end their fragmentation and prevent abuses of dominant positions by operators with power in those markets; calls on it to ensure that the services provided by operators, and in particular internet access, are transparent, comparable and free of any contractual obstacles to competition;

91.  Welcomes the Commission’s support for the deployment of broadband infrastructure throughout Europe, which will generate economic competitiveness and social cohesion; wonders whether digital services in Europe can be classified as SGEIs;

92.  Considers the contribution that competition policy has to make to the rolling‑out of broadband services in the internal market to be of utmost importance in enabling a balance to be struck between public and private investment in order to meet the objectives of the Digital Agenda and ensure coverage in remote, rural and sparsely‑populated areas of the EU;

New technologies and innovation

93.  Stresses the overriding importance of ‘essential patents’ for innovation in the ICT sector and, in this respect, calls on the Commission to act swiftly to ensure that their holders grant fair, accessible and non‑discriminatory licences to other operators to enable continued technical progress and the development of new products to the benefit of consumers; highlights the fact that competition policy should include tools to prevent the creation of artificial obstacles to interconnection, interoperability and the development of economies of scale in the markets;

94.  Welcomes the progress made in the Commission’s investigation of Google’s anticompetitive practices and recent news of a possible settlement by spring 2014; urges the Commission to act decisively on all concerns that have been identified, and, as a priority, to take all the necessary measures to ’ensure fair competition in the online search and search advertising markets, given Google’s dominance, with a market share of over 90 % in most Member States, and the possible abuse of this dominance;

95.  Urges the Commission to market test the new proposals put forward by Google in order to thoroughly assess their adequacy and impact; stresses, given the importance that search engines have in the digital economy, that the Commission must – in any event – ensure that Google fully commits to, and implements, solutions to address the four areas of concern raised by the Commission; calls on the Commission, if this cannot be achieved through a settlement, to promptly send a Statement of Objections to the search ’company;

96.  Recalls that net neutrality is of the uttermost importance to ensure that there is no discrimination between internet services and that competition is fully guaranteed;

State aid to football

97.  Welcomes the Commission’s action opening investigations into the existence of State aid in football as such aid creates a distortion in the use of public resources;

98.   Believes that the Commission should carefully study any loan or any refinancing of loans from banks that have received State aid directed to football clubs, particularly the loan rates compared to the average rate in lending and its size compared to the debt of the football club in question;

99.  Urges the Commission to address in a structured manner the relationships between professional sports and competition policy, particularly non-payment of social charges, the meeting of tax obligations by football clubs and termination clauses;

The food chain

100.  Welcomes the creation of the Food Task Force within DG COMP with the aim of monitoring developments in competition in the food chain and its impact on consumers, as well as the launch of a study into the retail sector; considers that the establishing of a balanced system of relationships in the food sector must not be done to the detriment of competition policy or by way of a purely commercial approach which fails to reflect that policy’s basic principles;

101.  Welcomes the actions of the Commission inspecting the supply of the white sugar market and looks forward to hearing the results of the investigation;

Social aspects

102.  Notes that the principles of subsidiarity, democratic control and promoting the public interest are founding principles of the European Union;

103.  Stresses that, in line with the general principles of the Treaties (non-discrimination, equal treatment, proportionality), the Member States and local authorities must be free to decide how social services of general interest (SSGIs) are financed and organised; draws attention, in this connection, to the Union’s social objectives and to the need to promote the quality, accessibility and effectiveness of these services, irrespective of whether they are provided by public or private operators;

104.  Notes that the Union is faced with major challenges in the fields of reindustrialisation, energy transition and digital equipment, which call for considerable investments; and that investments in education, training and up-skilling designed to counter youth unemployment complement, rather than contradict, the goals of competition policy;

105.  Points out that competition policy should be implemented in accordance with Article 9 of the TFEU, which states that, in defining and implementing its policies and activities, the Union shall take into account requirements linked to the promotion of a high level of employment;

106.  Is convinced that a social convergence policy can be implemented in close coherence with robust economic and competition policies;

107.  Takes the view that ensuring a level playing field for companies in the internal market also depends on combating social dumping, which should be regarded as an anticompetitive practice; believes that the Commission should look out for intra-EU dumping practices, whereby a firm, internationally or domestically, sells units below the production price to bankrupt one or more competitors; believes that the Commission should therefore strive towards upward convergence of Member States in terms of economic and social performance; underlines the need for structural reforms to include an overhaul of the taxation system in order to combat fraud, tax evasion and tax havens;

o
o   o

108.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission and the national competition authorities (NCAs).

(1) OJ L 1, 4.1.2003, p. 1. (2) OJ L 61, 5.3.2009, p. 1. (3) OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1. (4) OJ C 270, 25.10.2008, p. 8. (5) OJ C 10, 15.1.2009, p. 2. (6) OJ C 72, 26.3.2009, p. 1. (7) OJ C 195, 19.8.2009, p. 9. (8) OJ C 16, 22.1.2009, p. 1. (9) OJ C 6, 11.1.2011, p. 5. (10) OJ C 216, 30.7.2013, p. 1. (11) OJ C 8, 11.1.2012, p. 4. (12) OJ L 7, 11.1.2012, p. 3. (13) OJ C 8, 11.1.2012, p. 15. (14) OJ L 114, 26.4.2012, p. 8. (15) OJ C 153 E, 31.5.2013, p. 51. (16) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0026 (17) OJ C 184, 22.7.2008, p. 13. (18) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0267. (19) OJ L 304, 20.11.2010, p. 47. (20) OJ C 304 E, 1.12.2005, p. 114. (21) OJ C 293 E, 2.12.2006, p. 143. (22) OJ C 146 E, 12.6.2008, p. 105. (23) OJ C 87 E, 1.4.2010, p. 43. (24) OJ C 349 E, 22.12.2010, p. 16. (25) OJ C 136 E, 11.5.2012, p. 60. (26) OJ C 239 E, 20.8.2013, p. 97. (27) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0268.

European Parliament resolution of 11 December 2013 on maintaining milk production in mountain areas, disadvantaged areas and outermost regions after the expiry of the milk quota (2013/2097(INI))

P7_TA(2013)0577 A7-0383/2013

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to Title III of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union concerning, in particular, agriculture,

–  having regard to Article 174(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union concerning, in particular, mountain regions, and to Article 349 concerning outermost regions,

–  having regard to Regulation (EC) No 247/2006 laying down specific measures for agriculture in the outermost regions of the Union(1),

–  having regard to Regulation (EU) No 261/2012(2) on ‘contractual relations in the milk and milk products sector’,

–  having regard to Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007(3),

–  having regard to the Protocol on the implementation of the 1991 Alpine Convention in the field of mountain farming, Mountain Farming Protocol, published on 30 September 2006 in the Official Journal of the European Union(4),

–  having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions NAT-V-028 of 30 May 2013 on the evolution of the market situation and the consequent conditions for smoothly phasing-out the milk quota system – second ‘soft landing’ report

–  having regard to the report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council entitled ‘Evolution of the market situation and the consequent conditions for smoothly phasing-out the milk quota system – second ‘soft landing’ report’ (COM(2012)0741),

–  having regard to the study ‘Labelling of agricultural and food products of mountain farming’, commissioned by the Directorate General for Agriculture and Rural Development (administrative arrangement AGRI-2011-0460 / JRC-IPTS No 32349-2011-10),

–  having regard to the study carried out by the Commission on ‘Economic impact of the abolition of the milk quota regime – regional analysis of the milk production in the EU’ of February 2009,

–  having regard to the study carried out by the Policy Department B (Structural and Cohesion Policies) on ‘the future of milk quota – different scenarios’ of January 2008,

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

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development (A7-0383/2013),

A.  whereas the expiry of milk quotas will affect the entire European milk market and particularly dairy farmers in mountain areas and outermost regions, where it will not be possible to take advantage of the growth opportunities generated by deregulation, due to the natural and permanent handicaps of these regions;

B.  whereas, according to Article 32 of Regulation (EU) No 1305/2013, areas north of the 62nd parallel and certain adjacent areas shall be regarded as mountain areas, and whereas the definition and status of the outermost regions is defined under Article 349 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;

C.  whereas the decisions made by young farmers in these areas about their future will depend on the size of the farms and their financial resources, taking into account the fact that farms which have recently invested in the quota system will, once the quotas are exhausted, face a more acute liquidity crisis and be under a greater financial burden;

D.  whereas there are serious cost disadvantages associated with milk production in mountain areas and in the outermost regions, owing to the locations involved and that given the additional constraints and, in particular, restrictions on land-use, farmers must be guaranteed economically viable and profitable work once quotas have expired;

E.  whereas the expiry of quotas may also place parts of other less favoured areas at a competitive disadvantage, endangering the sustainability of production in these areas, partly because production density is so low that collection and processing enterprises could relocate to more competitive areas where, in particular, the cost of milk collection is lower or the cost of transporting the products to market is lower;

F.  whereas one of the main objectives of the new CAP is to maintain productive agriculture in mountainous and less favoured areas or the outermost regions;

G.  whereas the costs of production, collection, transport and commercialisation of milk and dairy products outside the region of production are substantially higher in these areas than in more favourable locations;

H.  whereas the formation of producer associations can help to cut production costs and give dairy farmers greater bargaining power, particularly where the setting of milk prices is concerned;

I.  whereas existing framework conditions mean that it is often not possible to process dairy products close to where they are produced; notes the need to take infrastructure into account and to allow specific designations such as ‘mountain produce’ to be used for products which are processed within a certain distance of the mountain area concerned; considers it essential for this measure to be applied to all products made from milk from mountain areas;

J.  whereas in many of these areas milk production is the most important and most widespread sector of agricultural activity and is key to production of high-quality dairy products with EU-recognised designations; whereas it is important to maintain production bases in all territories of the Union in order to be able to supply each consumption region without incurring unreasonable transport and environmental costs;

K.  whereas in many Member States and regions, milk production is a key pillar of the regional economy and a key contributor to agricultural added value;

L.  whereas the development and promotion of high-quality dairy products is one possible way of addressing increased milk production;

M.  whereas in many regions, milk production is broadly the domain of small and medium‑sized family farms;

N.  whereas 59 % of farmland in mountain areas is permanent grassland or dairy pastureland, no other agricultural activity generally being possible or viable; whereas 9.5 % of milk is produced in mountain areas; whereas orography and climate limit agricultural alternatives and agricultural diversity is very limited;

O.  whereas in some outermost regions there can be no substitute for milk production as one of the main motors of the economy, social stability environmental quality and land-use; whereas in these regions the POSEI programmes constitute the best instruments for channelling increased aid to maintain production levels;

P.  whereas stockbreeding in these regions is not just an economic activity and a means of livelihood for their inhabitants, but also a key component of their traditional cultures and social structures, closely linked with the life and traditions of the local populations;

Q.  whereas, in mountain areas, outermost regions and parts of other less-favoured areas, the abandonment of stockbreeding and related dairy production frequently leads to the abandonment of agriculture, the neglect of good farmland and subsequent depopulation and migration from rural to urban areas;

R.  whereas, in these areas, agriculture frequently helps to conserve the landscape and biodiversity and limit natural hazards, making it a cornerstone of successful regional development, without which other sectors such as tourism are unable to grow; whereas the abandonment of farming in such areas is likely to have a severe knock-on effect on those sectors;

S.  whereas in many disadvantaged areas, milk production ensures economic and social cohesion, and this must not be put at risk by the expiry of quotas; whereas preservation of the agricultural landscape, the tourism industry, local production-processing-marketing circuits, jobs and long-term perspectives for young people must be safeguarded and promoted;

T.  whereas the removal of milk quotas will lead to Europe-wide competition amongst production regions; whereas product differentiation is vital to maintaining market access for mountain areas and for those outermost regions which produce milk or dairy products;

1.  Notes that, in many Member States, direct payments from the first agricultural policy pillar are, even under the current CAP reform, based on historic reference amounts, which can seriously disadvantage grassland areas and milk production in these regions; calls on Member States affected by such situations accordingly to introduce without delay a system correct the disadvantage suffered by these regions when implementing agricultural reforms at national level;

2.  Notes that mountain milk accounts for around 10 % of milk from the EU-27, but constitutes two thirds of milk production, involving three quarters of producers, in Austria, Slovenia and Finland, and that the corresponding figures also remain very significant in a further 10 or so countries; also notes that in most of these humid mountain regions and also in outermost regions, grasslands are mainly used as grazing for dairy herds, keeping landscapes accessible and inhabited and thereby benefiting tourism, biodiversity and the environment;

3.  Takes the view that permanent grassland and pastureland, which can generally be used for no other purpose than cattle, sheep and goat breeding in these areas, must never be treated as inferior to other types of farmland for the purpose of calculating direct payments from the first pillar;

4.  Considers it essential that a stock grazing premium be earmarked under the first pillar of the CAP and under the POSEI in the outermost regions for farms with grazing and forage areas for livestock; rejects any new requirements regarding the feeding of ruminants which might lead to a breakdown in existing agricultural practice;

5.  Stresses the important role of coupled payments under the first agricultural policy pillar; points out that the Member States in these areas should be given additional possibilities to couple payments, whether national or EU-funded, as agreed in the current CAP reform;

6.  Stresses the need for CAP provisions to give due attention to small farms in these areas, given that they are structurally more labour intensive, are obliged to pay higher prices for inputs and make a valuable contribution to sustaining employment levels and rural development;

7.  Notes that the expiry of the milk quota in mountain areas and in the outermost regions must be evaluated separately, in light of the particular characteristics of such areas, if targeted measures to support and maintain production are to be drawn up;

8.  Given the irreplaceable nature of milk production in some outermost regions, the Commission and the Member States should, in these regions, use the POSEI programmes to strengthen support in the area of direct payments and market measures and the rural development programmes to strengthen support under the second pillar of the CAP;

9.  Calls for additional measures to be made available as part of the development of the Common Strategic Framework, with the participation of the regional development programme, the European Social Fund and the Cohesion Fund; considers that the objective of the Common Strategic Framework should be to promote regional development concepts and structural preservation programmes focusing on safeguarding agriculture and strengthening the upstream and downstream value chain;

10.  Calls on the Member States and regions to formulate, where applicable, a specific rural development programme for milk production in these areas;

11.  Underlines, in this regard, the need to support the consolidation or establishment of projects which generate added value, differentiate products by territory and offer new strategies for enhancing mountain areas and the outermost regions; calls on the Commission to propose wide-ranging measures to support the establishment and running of these projects and related collective investments;

12.  Calls on the Member States to take action against the disappearance of grassland and to take this into account in legislation on land-use planning;

13.  Stresses that second-pillar measures such as compensation allowances, agro-environmental premiums, individual or collective investment aid for production, processing – without forgetting, in the case of the outermost regions (which are covered by the POSEI system), the possibility of having products considered essential for the transformation of regional agricultural production, particularly dairy products, included in the Special Regime Supply, with the objective of maintaining competitiveness –, and marketing, start-up aid for young farmers and aid to promote quality, diversification, innovation and cooperation (including with local authorities) are of great importance for sustainable milk production in these areas; therefore urges that Member States and regions be given the legal framework, the level of funding and the necessary opportunities to ensure the payment of adequate and clearly differentiated compensatory allowances and to promote environmentally friendly, sustainable and organic forms of agriculture; calls for adequate compensation payments from the second CAP pillar to offset the higher investment costs of milk production in mountain areas and outermost regions, occasioned by the particular nature of the terrain, the remoteness of these regions, the extreme fragmentation of plots and the geographical discontinuity of these islands;

14.  Calls in addition for targeted investment aid, for example in connection with depreciation and interest on farm buildings and technology to be made available to dairy farms with development potential, in order to reduce production costs and improve the competitiveness of farms;

15.  Calls on the Member States to promote, in particular, measures under the second pillar, such as cooperative ventures for the rational use of agricultural machinery or buildings;

16.  Calls on the Commission to redefine a coherent rural and milk development programme for mountain areas and the outermost regions, for disadvantaged milk production areas and for Member States where most of the milk is produced by very small farms;

17.  Points out that, given the substantial logistical problems existing with regard to transport and the generally small quantities of milk produced on individual farms, collection costs and finished product transport costs in mountain areas and outermost regions are particularly high, placing them at a major geographical and competitive disadvantage; calls for aid for processing plants, especially cooperative-owned plants, in order to offset the higher costs of collection and production, including inputs, and transport of the finished products in these areas, compared to more favourable locations;

18.  Stresses that a milk production market monitoring tool (Milk Observatory) is needed in order to collect and disseminate data and information on production and supply, to provide early warning of the risks of market imbalances, taking into account the diversity of dairy products, and to carry out prospective short-term analysis in the context of price volatility with a view to fine-tuning the adjustment of milk volumes to market demand;

19.  Points out that in-situ processing and marketing on farms or in mountain pastures means greater added value for smallholdings and micro-farms in mountainous regions, outermost regions and other less-favoured areas and enhances the tourist potential of these locations; stresses that such initiatives should be funded under the second CAP pillar;

20.  Emphasises that the considerable distance between the outermost regions and consumer markets creates the need for double storage, in line with modern logistical organisation; therefore urges the Commission to consider these storage facilities located outside the territory of the outermost regions as eligible within the framework of regulations concerning investment in these regions;

21.  Considers that areas with alpine pastures and those areas of the outermost regions which produce milk are particularly in need of investment and specific measures to maintain or re-establish a suitable environment for the production, processing and sale of milk;

22.  Points out that measures should be put in place to allow the production of typical products in an artisanal way;

23.  Calls on the Commission and Member States, when drafting all legislation, to take into account the need to avoid excessive bureaucracy and keep health, labelling and compulsory information requirements within reasonable bounds, so as to ensure that they are feasible for small producers and processors;

24.  Points out that small farmers in mountain areas and disadvantaged areas , such as those outermost regions which produce milk or dairy products, should be supported in establishing producer organisations which strengthen their bargaining power, as it is important for small-scale farmers in these areas that they maintain and develop more regionalised, local markets;

25.  Stresses that hygiene and marketing rules need to be adjustable to the size of markets and their demands and that hygiene standards should therefore be suitable and applicable to farmers and milk processors in mountainous and disadvantaged areas and in the outermost regions;

26.  Points out that stockbreeding methods aimed at efficient milk production are particularly cost-intensive on small farms; therefore calls for breeding to be promoted, so that dairy farms in these areas can breed their own high quality livestock in spite of this;

27.  Takes the view that the formation of dairy producer organisations should be encouraged, in order to ensure adequate market access for all farms and to create partnerships for the promotion of agro-environmental tourism;

28.  Points out that, in line with arrangements under the CMO for fruit and vegetables, producer organisations should be given the opportunity to create EU-funded operational programmes; in this context producer organisations should be given the opportunity to promote access to new markets, market development, quality control and product innovation and advertising initiatives, particularly in respect of the new ‘mountain product’ designation or other optional reserved terms which may be approved, protected designations of origin and other quality marks, and to foster the development of skills and crisis management measures;

29.  Calls on the Commission and Member States to expand joint research programmes to encompass grassland areas and milk production in mountain areas, the outermost regions and other less favoured areas and to devote particular attention to them under joint research projects encouraging innovative solutions for these areas, bearing in mind the need to address the challenges of productivity and climate change; considers that this research should also seek to identify health benefits for consumers;

30.  Calls on the Commission to closely follow the development of milk production in these areas and to review the economic impact of the expiry of milk quotas on dairy farms in these areas; asks the Commission to submit to the European Parliament and the Council a report addressing this issue by 2017, accompanied by a legislative proposal if milk production has decreased significantly in these regions;

31.  Calls on the Commission to develop programmes in cooperation with producers, producers’ associations and marketing bodies – based, for example, on the fundraising model – to reduce the impact of the anticipated rapid decline in milk prices;

32.  Calls on the Commission and Member States to implement the EU school milk programme more efficiently and, in particular, to allow calls to tender to refer specifically to milk from mountain areas designated as ‘mountain produce’; also calls on the Member States to use short supply chains in the school milk programme, in order to stimulate local milk production and limit transport carbon emissions;

33.  Calls on the Commission, when drafting and implementing legislation in relation to the ‘mountain produce’ designation, to bear in mind the special characteristics of products with a protected designation of origin and covered by specific rules of origin, by considering the possibility of introducing flexible arrangements for mountain areas, which could, because of their specific disadvantages, such as the difficulties of producing fodder crops, be excluded from the schemes provided for under Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, contradicting the aim of the regulation;

34.  Calls on the Commission and Member States to promote and support the incorporation into the production cycle of abandoned pastures, increasing grassland yields and the rational use thereof;

35.  Draws attention to the importance of measures to help young farmers and outermost regions start up in mountain areas, bearing in mind that the population in such areas is ageing at an above-average rate;

36.  Calls on the Member States to create the necessary framework to enable producers and processors in mountain areas and disadvantaged areas to access training courses and loans;

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

(1) OJ L 42, 14.2.2006, p. 1. (2) OJ L 94, 30.3.2012, p.38. (3) OJ L 299, 16.11.2007, p. 1. (4) OJ L 271, 30.9.2006, p. 63.

European Parliament resolution of 11 December 2013 on the EU approach to resilience and disaster risk reduction in developing countries: learning from food security crises (2013/2110(INI))

P7_TA(2013)0578 A7-0375/2013

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to Article 210 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU),

–  having regard to the European Consensus on Development of 20 December 2005,

–  having regard to the European Consensus on Humanitarian Aid of 18 December 2007,

–  having regard to the Commission communication of 8 December 2010 entitled ‘The mid‑term review of the European Consensus on Humanitarian Aid Action Plan – implementing effective, principled EU humanitarian action’(COM(2010)0722),

–  having regard to the Commission communication entitled ‘The EU approach to resilience: learning from food security crises’ of 3 October 2012 (COM(2012)0586) (hereinafter: 2012 Resilience Communication),

–  having regard to the Commission staff working document entitled ‘Action plan for resilience in crisis-prone countries 2013-2020’ of 19 June 2013 (SWD(2013)0227),

–  having regard to the Council conclusions on the EU approach to resilience of 28 May 2013,

–  having regard to the Commission communication entitled ‘EU strategy for supporting disaster risk reduction in developing countries’ of 23 February 2009 (COM(2009)0084),

–  having regard to the Commission staff working document entitled ‘Implementation plan of the EU strategy for supporting disaster risk reduction in developing countries 2011‑2014’ of 16 February 2011 (SEC(2011)0215),

–  having regard to the Council conclusions on an EU strategy for supporting disaster risk reduction in developing countries of 18 May 2009,

–  having regard to the UN Hyogo Framework for Action 2005-2015, as adopted at the World Conference on Disaster Reduction in January 2005 in Hyogo, Japan, and endorsed by the UN General Assembly in its Resolution A/RES/60/195, and to its midterm review,

–  having regard to the Commission communication entitled ‘Linking relief, rehabilitation and development – an assessment’ of 23 April 2001 (COM(2001)0153),

–  having regard to the Commission communication entitled ‘Social protection in European Union development cooperation’ of 20 August 2012 (COM(2012)0446),

–  having regard to its resolution of 21 September 2010 on the Commission communication: A Community approach on the prevention of natural and man-made disasters(1),

–  having regard to its resolution of 27 September 2011 entitled ‘Towards a stronger European disaster response: the role of civil protection and humanitarian assistance’(2),

–  having regard to the Commission communication entitled ‘A decent life for all: ending poverty and giving the world a sustainable future’ of 27 February 2013 (COM(2013)0092),

–  having regard to Commission communication entitled ‘Increasing the impact of EU development policy: an agenda for change’ of 13 October 2011 (COM(2011)0637) and to the Council conclusions thereon of 14 May 2012,

–  having regard to the New Deal for Engagement in Fragile States as set out in the Busan Partnership for Effective Development Cooperation adopted at the 5th High-Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness in Busan, South Korea, which took place from 29 November to 1 December 2011,

–  having regard to its resolution of 13 June 2013 on the Millennium Development Goals – defining the post-2015 framework(3),

–  having regard to the Council conclusions on ‘The overarching post-2015 agenda’ of 25 June 2013,

–  having regard to the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development – The future we want, which took place in June 2012 in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (Rio+20), and in particular to its decisions related to disaster risk reduction,

–  having regard to the fourth session of the Global Platform for Disaster Risk Reduction, which took place from 19 to 23 May 2013 in Geneva, Switzerland,

–  having regard to the Commission communication entitled ‘Enhancing maternal and child nutrition in external assistance: an EU policy framework’ of 12 March 2013 (COM(2013)0141),

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

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Development (A7-0375/2013),

A.  whereas the Commission defined resilience in its 2012 Resilience Communication as ‘the ability of an individual, a household, a community, a country or a region to withstand, to adapt, and to quickly recover from stresses and shocks’;

B.  whereas Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) is a key component in achieving resilience; whereas DRR involves analysing and managing hazards in order to reduce vulnerability to disasters, and covers activities which support preparedness, prevention and mitigation at all levels from local to international;

C.  whereas linking relief, rehabilitation and development (LRRD) is an important tool in the resilience approach, which helps overcome the operational and funding gaps between the relief and the development phases;

D.  whereas the Hyogo Framework for Action is an invaluable instrument for advancing the DRR agenda worldwide and whereas it expires in 2015; whereas it is expected that the post-2015 framework for DRR will be adopted at the World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction in Japan early in 2015;

E.  whereas the mid-term review of the European Consensus on Humanitarian Aid noted that progress has been made with DRR, but that further practical progress is essential;

F.  whereas, according to the UN, since 1992 4,4 billion people have been affected by disasters, USD 2 trillion worth of damage has been caused and 1,3 million people have been killed; whereas the cost of disaster loss was over USD 300 billion in 2011; whereas one dollar invested in disaster risk reduction in a crisis-prone area saves at least four dollars in relief and rehabilitation costs in the future, according to Asian Development Bank estimates;

G.  whereas the interconnected supply chains of today’s globalised world mean that economic losses sustained in one region have global reverberations; it is estimated, for example, that the 2011 floods in Thailand set global industrial production back by 2,5 %;

H.  whereas the cost of disasters is increasing as climate change generates more severe weather‑related events, in addition to rapid and inadequately managed urbanisation, population growth, land degradation and scarcity of natural resources; whereas food and nutrition crises are becoming more frequent in many regions of the developing world;

I.  whereas DRR and resilience efforts must be in addition to, rather than replacing, efforts by developed countries to reduce their contribution to climate change;

J.  whereas in times of financial consolidation there is a significant need to use resources effectively and efficiently; whereas funding for DRR needs to have a long-term perspective and should reflect real risks with a key focus on assisting those most vulnerable to shocks;

K.  whereas China has spent USD 3,15 billion on reducing the impact of floods, thereby averting losses estimated at USD 12 billion; whereas other examples of success include Bangladesh, Cuba, Vietnam and Madagascar, which have been able to reduce significantly the impact of meteorological hazards such as tropical storms and floods through improved early warning systems, disaster preparedness and other risk-reduction measures;

L.  whereas in most countries private-sector investment represents a high share of the overall investment and whereas national economic development and resilience to disasters depend on disaster-risk-sensitive investment by the private sector;

M.  whereas the UN predicts that the world’s urban population will increase by 72 % by 2050, and that most urban growth will occur in less developed countries, thereby greatly increasing the number of people exposed to disaster risk;

N.  whereas disasters can contribute to a range of further problems such as extreme poverty, food insecurity and undernutrition;

O.  whereas unsustainable development planning and practices of the past have led to increased vulnerability to disasters for many populations; whereas disaster risk assessment needs to be a precondition for development planning and programmes;

P.  whereas lack of coordination between EU Member States and other donor countries in post‑crisis situations reduces the impact of combined efforts; whereas increased donor coordination in both post-crisis situations and resilience-building efforts can generate significant savings and improved efficiency in development goals;

Q.  whereas the Global Assessment Report is now established as a credible global source for the analysis of hazard risks and vulnerability trends; whereas the lack of accurate disaster loss data nevertheless remains a major challenge;

R.  whereas regional integration leads to economic, political and social progress;

S.  whereas the practice of land transfer should be governed by a regulation to ensure that it does not cause harm to the rural population;

EU approach to resilience

1.  Welcomes the Commission’s 2012 Resilience Communication and its objectives; encourages the Commission to actively pursue the proposals in the communication and to ensure that a long-term approach to resilience-building and DRR is developed further which includes both humanitarian and development streams and presents a clear link between the two;

2.  Welcomes the Action Plan for Resilience in Crisis-Prone Countries 2013-2020 and its priorities; urges the Commission, together with the European External Action Service (EEAS), to implement its proposals and priorities and to ensure that consistent progress is made on achieving its objectives;

3.  Is concerned that resilience, and more specifically DRR, are mentioned only briefly in the Council conclusions on ‘The overarching post-2015 agenda’; believes that more emphasis needs to be placed on these issues in the post-2015 agenda;

4.  Calls on the Commission to actively integrate resilience measures into both the humanitarian and the development sides of programming; stresses that there needs to be a stronger link between short-term humanitarian responses and longer-term development programming and that this should fit into the EU’s overall resilience approach;

5.  Considers that the main focus of the EU’s resilience approach must be the most vulnerable, poorest and most marginalised populations, who have high exposure to risks, notably natural disasters, and little protection against such shocks, including slow-onset events; emphasises that a long-term resilience approach needs to target the root causes of risk vulnerability and to significantly reduce underlying risk factors;

6.  Stresses that the EU’s long-term resilience approach should address the deterioration of the ecosystem, particularly agriculture, water, biodiversity and fish resources, and calls on the EU to adopt a coherent policy to reduce vulnerability through its risk reduction strategy, which can be achieved by adopting sustainable agricultural production methods and systems, such as crop-rotation, agro-ecology, agro-forestry, organic agriculture and small-holder farming;

7.  Calls on the Commission to target fragile and crisis-prone countries in its resilience agenda and to invest in strengthening local institutions in order to achieve stability and ensure that basic services are provided for vulnerable populations;

8.  Stresses that the gap between the relief and the development phases can be overcome through LRRD, which seeks to ensure synergy between humanitarian and development work; takes the view that it is important to address in more detail transition strategies and parallel linkages between humanitarian aid and development cooperation, especially in disaster-prone countries, protracted crises and countries emerging from disasters;

9.  Insists that disaster-prone countries should play a leading role and should be the main actor in defining their priorities and transition strategies from humanitarian aid to a long‑ term development strategy, as they are better placed to know the local reality, so as to define what is best for their own communities;

10.  Stresses that climate change is exacerbating the underlying risk factors and therefore needs to be taken into account in resilience strategies, in particular climate adaptation;

Disaster risk reduction as an essential component of resilience

11.  Stresses that investing in DRR measures in advance of disasters is far more cost‑effective than funding disaster response after the event; therefore encourages further investment in DRR and resilience strategies in developing countries, particularly in the most vulnerable areas, and its inclusion in national development plans;

12.  Highlights that effective disaster response management takes into account the setting in place of a framework allowing for the immediate mobilisation of all necessary resources;

13.  Stresses that DRR should be prioritised accordingly in future development programming and mainstreamed into development and humanitarian programming in all fragile and risk-prone countries;

14.  Calls on the EU, its Member States and its partner countries’ governments to improve and develop DRR strategies in developing countries by implementing risk assessment programmes and enhancing early warning systems, particularly in fragile and crisis-prone countries, by strengthening disaster preparedness with a view to effective responses at all levels and by supporting more sustainable development planning in partner countries;

15.  Calls on partner countries to establish accounting systems capable of recording local losses and sharing information between the local and national levels for planning and statistical purposes; notes that a certain degree of standardisation may help to record losses better at regional level and thereby support regional cooperation;

16.  Calls on the EU and its Member States, as well as on the partner countries to consider environmental sustainability and disaster risk management in programmes of land governance reform and land registration mechanisms;

17.  Notes that DRR and climate change adaptation are interrelated issues and therefore calls on the Commission and all actors to further integrate DRR and climate change adaptation strategies such as, inter alia, existing National Adaption Programmes of Action (NAPAs) and to include them in the planning phase of the 11th EDF, to seek concrete financial support, for example through the implementation of the Global Climate Change Alliance and to coordinate efforts to harmonise these activities;

18.  Supports a complementary and coherent approach to the MDG and DRR post-2015 frameworks; considers that the post-MDG and post-HFA (Hyogo framework for action) processes need to take account of the outcomes of the current frameworks and to address the experiences faced by those most affected by disasters and crises; reiterates that DRR, climate risk management and resilience need to be strongly integrated into the post-2015 framework;

Sustainable development, social protection and community resilience

19.  Stresses that the resilience approach must bring sustainable benefits to the most vulnerable sections of society, particularly those living in extreme poverty, those living in informal settlements or slums and indigenous populations who are highly exposed to disaster risks;

20.  Stresses that sustainable development must be seen as an essential element of DRR; recognises that long-term progress can only be made if underlying factors which make communities or individuals more vulnerable, such as poor environmental management, inadequate infrastructure, land degradation and poor urban planning, are addressed;

21.  Understands that in developing countries, especially low-income countries, a large proportion of households living in a persistent state of poverty have very little or no social protection in general and are thus even more exposed when it comes to natural or man‑made disasters; calls on the Commission to further promote social protection activities in its development cooperation programmes, with specific activities to improve state-owned systems, prevention measures and insurance for natural and man-made disasters;

22.  Encourages increased attention to small-scale disasters as a key target in the resilience approach and enhanced visibility for the damage that small-scale disasters do to communities, and their impact on them;

23.  Underlines the need to strengthen and develop education in the context of disasters and emergencies and to improve the dissemination, compilation and communication of information and knowledge that will help build community resilience and promote behavioural changes and a culture of disaster preparedness;

24.  Stresses the important role that local authorities and local and national civil society organisations can play in building resilience, particularly in fragile and crisis-prone countries, and encourages local authorities to develop, in consultation with local communities and civil society organisations, coherent and coordinated processes for the implementation of resilience strategies;

25.  Highlights the fact that strong accountability mechanisms and monitoring should be established with the participation of local authorities, development partners, scientists, civil society, the media and the general public in order to enhance access to information and build awareness about the need for DRR strategies and resilience; calls for the regular collection of data, inter alia, meteorological data and data relating to harvest, livestock, the functioning of the markets, the nutritional condition of children and the poorest members of society, as well as data on existing DRR mechanisms and access to basic services; encourages the regular reporting and publishing of this data on publicly available platforms in order to facilitate access to information, early warning and improvement of the situation;

Learning from food security crises and previous disasters

26.  Points out that disasters and emergencies are often followed by food crises and malnutrition among the affected populations, especially children; stresses also that food crises are disasters in themselves and that the resilience approach, which focuses on enhancing food security and nutrition, must be systematically incorporated into programming decisions;

27.  Calls on the EU to draw lessons from its cooperation policy in the past decades and to put forward proposals to promote Policy Coherence for Development in practice by linking development aid and other EU policy areas such as agriculture, trade, taxation, climate change and investment;

28.  Urges the Commission to integrate the issue of land grabbing into its policy dialogue with developing countries in order to make Policy Coherence the corner stone of development cooperation at national as well as international level and to avoid the expropriation of small farmers, the increased vulnerability of the poor in rural areas and the unsustainable use of land and water;

29.  Notes that food and nutrition crises are becoming more frequent in the Sahel and Horn of Africa regions, where millions of people are without access to adequate food; points out that the 2011 Horn of Africa food crisis and the 2012 Sahel food crisis demonstrated that humanitarian assistance alone can neither break the cycle of chronic hunger and malnutrition nor address its root causes; stresses the importance of addressing the underlying causes of persistent food insecurity in these regions, namely poor access to appropriate basic services and education, acute poverty, inadequate support for small‑scale agriculture and livestock keeping, land access problems, environmental degradation, rapid population growth, market failures, declining per capita food production and poor governance; stress that the underlying causes leading to food crises today are more complex than in the past, with, for example, market-related and prices shocks more frequent and more likely to affect poor people;

30.  Notes that chronic food and nutrition insecurity is the first and most important factor of vulnerability to food crises, because it reduces people’s capacity to prepare for risks, to withstand crises and to bounce back after them; notes also that chronic food and nutrition insecurity produces long-term negative effects that reduce human capital by stunting the growth of children and affecting societies’ capacity to develop; recognises that high and highly volatile food price crises are costly and complex to address; points out that the resilience approach established by the Commission is going in the right direction to address the root causes of vulnerability, among the most important of which are chronic food and nutrition insecurity;

31.  Is of the view that the EU Action Plan for Resilience should aim at implementing Policy Coherence for Development and address issues relating to food security and climate resilience by eliminating unsustainable practices such as the dumping of agricultural products and unfair trade rules; calls on the EU to address sustainable agriculture in a holistic manner at national and international level;

32.  Welcomes both the joint development-humanitarian approach and the regional approach in the EU initiative ‘Supporting the Horn of Africa’s Resilience’ (SHARE) and in the EU-led Global Alliance for Resilience Initiative (AGIR) for the Sahel region; calls for even greater attention to be paid to these regions and for even better cooperation and coordination among national governments, international donors, civil society and the private sector in breaking down barriers between the development and the humanitarian approaches, between ‘normal’ and ‘crisis’ responses;

33.  Calls for an effective approach to resilience, which must be multi-institutional, coordinated, comprehensive and systematic, and include a number of elements such as the provision of predictable and targeted social safety nets for the most vulnerable, which would not only ensure that households have immediate access to food during crises, but also guarantee fast recovery and resilience to future shocks; calls for the reduction of child undernutrition to be made central to resilience through coordinated national plans prioritising in particular children under two and pregnant women;

34.  Notes that evidence from Niger, Burkina Faso and Mali indicates that low-cost agro‑ecological techniques, particularly agro-forestry and soil and water conservation, have improved small-scale farmers’ resilience to food insecurity; stresses, however, that agro-ecological agriculture alone cannot overcome the structural causes of food insecurity; calls for non-agricultural components to be incorporated into agricultural interventions and for it to be ensured that improved nutrition is an explicit objective of agricultural programmes; calls in addition for it to be ensured that women farmers also benefit from the programmes by making sure that the barriers created by gender inequalities (such as access to land, credit, extension services and input) are taken into account in the design of agricultural programmes;

Better coordination of efforts and improved funding methods

35.  Points out that it is crucial for the Member States and EU institutions to coordinate their development and humanitarian activities better and to work together to make their aid more effective; points to the European Parliament’s ‘Cost of non-Europe in Development Policy’ study of June 2013, which estimates that EUR 800 million could be saved annually in transaction costs if donors concentrated their aid efforts on fewer countries and activities, and that an extra EUR 8.4 billion in annual savings could be achieved through better cross-country allocation patterns;

36.  Notes the important contribution of mobile small-scale livestock keepers in producing meat, milk and blood in areas which are ill-suited to other forms of agriculture; stresses the important role that they play in feeding communities as well as their positive contribution to food security and nutrition, as evidenced in arid and semi‑arid lands demonstrating that children in pastoral areas tend to have better food security than those who are settled in cities and villages; calls therefore for the rights and needs of those pastoral populations to be taken into account when designing agricultural interventions and programmes;

37.  Stresses the need to increase the capacity of small farms by promoting public-private investment, including by granting microcredit to women;

38.  Takes the view that savings made by better donor coordination could, for example, be put to use in DRR activities and that these in turn would generate a significant return, thereby creating a virtuous circle;

39.  Welcomes the Commission’s proposal in the 2013 Action Plan for Resilience that an annual EU Resilience Forum should be held; looks upon this as an opportunity to coordinate resilience efforts among public institutions, including national parliaments and the European Parliament, the private sector, and NGOs and civil society, in order to make well coordinated progress on DRR and resilience, with all the actors working together;

40.  Encourages increased collaboration between the public sector and the private sector on DRR and resilience; calls on the Commission to facilitate the involvement of the private sector by creating incentives and the right environment for private entities to share their expertise on building resilience and reducing risk; however, urges the Commission in this regard to draft a proposal that establishes rules on public-private partnership, including social and ecological impact assessments, to prevent, for example, the exacerbation of land-use conflicts or conflicts over access to water, particularly to protect smallholder famers; encourages, furthermore, the offer of support to ACP countries for the purposes of scrutinising contracts with multinational investors; moreover, encourages the transparency of investments and investment objective targets, on platforms available to civil society;

41.  Recommends increased collaboration with non-EU countries and international and regional institutions when it comes to disaster preparedness, as well as disaster response and reconstruction; supports a strengthening of cooperation between the Commission and the United nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR) with a view to improving the EU’s action on DRR issues;

42.  Emphasises that while the EU and international organisations can make progress on DRR and resilience in developing countries through their programmes, it is primarily the responsibility of national governments to ensure the safety of their citizens, and that partner countries therefore need to have a strong political commitment to supporting and implementing activities that enhance resilience and DRR;

o
o   o

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

(1) OJ C 50 E, 21.2.2012, p. 30. (2) OJ C 56 E, 26.2.2013, p. 31. (3) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0283.

European Parliament resolution of 11 December 2013 on women with disabilities (2013/2065(INI))

P7_TA(2013)0579 A7-0329/2013

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the European Convention on Human Rights and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,

–  having regard to the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UN CRPD), and its entry into force on 21 January 2011, in accordance with Council Decision 2010/48/EC of 26 November 2009 on the conclusion, by the European Community, of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD)(1), and in particular to Article 6 thereof on women and girls with disabilities,

–  having regard to the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) of 18 December 1979,

–  having regard to the Community Charter of the Fundamental Social Rights of Workers,

–  having regard to Articles 10, 19 and 168 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation(2),

–  having regard to the Commission 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) and Parliament’s position thereon of 2 April 2009(3),

–  having regard to the Commission communication of 15 November 2010 entitled ‘European Disability Strategy 2010-2020: A Renewed Commitment to a Barrier-Free Europe’ (COM(2010)0636) and to the documents in the accompanying Commission staff working document entitled ‘Initial plan to implement the European Disability Strategy 2010-2020 – List of Actions 2010-2015’ (SEC(2010)1323 and SEC(2010)1324),

–  having regard to the Commission communication of 16 December 2010 entitled ‘The European Platform against Poverty and Social Exclusion: A European framework for social and territorial cohesion’ (COM(2010)0758),

–  having regard to the Commission proposal of 3 December 2012 for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the accessibility of public sector bodies’ websites (COM(2012)0721),

–  having regard to Council Recommendation 98/376/EC of 4 June 1998 on a parking card for people with disabilities(4),

–  having regard to the Council conclusions of 30 November 2009 on ‘Promoting labour market inclusion – Recovering from the crisis and preparing for the post-2010 Lisbon Agenda’,

–  having regard to the Council Draft Resolution of 2 June 2010 on a new European Disability Framework (10173/2010) and the Council Resolution on the situation of persons with disabilities in the European Union (2008/C 75/01),

–  having regard to the Commission’s report on the functioning and effects of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2006 concerning the rights of disabled persons and persons with reduced mobility when travelling by air (COM(2011)0166),

–  having regard to the ruling of the European Court of Justice in Case C-13/05, regarding Directive 2000/78/EC – Equal treatment in employment and occupation – Concept of disability(5),

–  having regard to its resolution of 17 June 1988 on sign languages for deaf people(6),

–  having regard to its resolution of 26 May 1989 on women and disability(7),

–  having regard to its resolution of 16 September 1992 on the rights of mentally disabled people(8),

–  having regard to its declaration of 14 December 1995 on the human rights of disabled people(9),

–  having regard to its resolution of 9 May 1996 on the rights of people with autism(10),

–  having regard to its position of 13 December 1996 entitled ‘Parking card for disabled people – rights of disabled people’(11),

–  having regard to its resolution of 11 April 1997 on equality of opportunity for people with disabilities(12),

–  having regard to its resolution of 4 April 2001 entitled ‘Towards a barrier-free Europe for people with disabilities’(13),

–  having regard to its resolution of 3 September 2003 on the Commission communication entitled ‘Towards a United Nations legally binding instrument to promote and protect the rights and dignity of persons with disabilities’(14),

–  having regard to its resolution of 24 April 2009 on the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and the Optional Protocol thereto(15),

–  having regard to its resolution of 25 October 2011 on mobility and inclusion of people with disabilities and the European Disability Strategy 2010-2020(16),

–  having regard to its resolution of 8 March 2011 on reducing health inequalities in the EU(17),

–  having regard to the European Pact for Gender Equality 2011-2020,

–  having regard to the Plan of Action on Gender Equality and Women's Empowerment 2010-2015,

–   having regard to the Second Manifesto on the Rights of Women and Girls with Disabilities in the European Union (‘A toolkit for activists and policymakers’),

–  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 opinions of the Committee on Development and the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs (A7-0329/2013),

A.  whereas 80 million people with disabilities living in the European Union are in significant need of an accessible and unprejudiced physical, intellectual and social environment, without barriers, obstacles or stereotypes hindering full enjoyment of their basic human rights and European citizenship; whereas of these 80 million people 46 million are women and girls, who make up 16% of the total female population of the EU;

B.  whereas an estimated one billion people worldwide(18) live with disabilities and 80 % of them live in developing countries; whereas women with disabilities are multiply disadvantaged, facing significant difficulties in obtaining access to adequate housing, healthcare, public transport, education, vocational training and employment, experiencing inequality in access to credit and other productive resources, and rarely participating in decision-making processes;

C.  whereas the number of elderly people is increasing, which means that the number of people with disabilities, including women, will increase accordingly; whereas, according to the WHO, disability prevalence is higher among women and they are particularly affected by this phenomenon owing to their longer life expectancy, whereas, therefore, the number of women with disabilities will increase in greater proportion;

D.  whereas the increase in the number of people with disabilities will increase the burden on carers, and in particular on family carers, who are mainly women who are forced to work shorter hours and even to leave the labour market in order to care for dependent family members;

E.  whereas the full economic and social participation of women with disabilities is essential if the Europe 2020 strategy is to succeed in creating smart, sustainable and inclusive growth; whereas people with disabilities, women and girls included, must be given fair and equal possibilities and opportunities to participate in the social, economic and political life of the community; whereas people with disabilities still face a variety of barriers to full participation in society, often leading to social exclusion and poverty and limiting their full enjoyment of European citizenship;

F.  whereas discriminations can lead to social isolation and insulation, psychological trauma and unhappiness;

G.  whereas the basis for any association of democratic states is to facilitate the participation of all citizens, whether female or male, in the democratic processes (especially elections), to create, where it is lacking, the infrastructure for such participation, and, therefore, to promote the inclusion of women with disabilities;

H.  whereas all stakeholders shall ensure equal access of women and girls with disabilities to quality public healthcare services, e.g. by improving vocational training and lifelong learning for medical personnel with regard to their specific needs, including those related to sexual and reproductive health;

I.  whereas women with disabilities must enjoy the rights to education, health, employment, mobility, family life, sexual relations, marriage, and motherhood, and the safeguards guaranteeing those rights;

J.  whereas the representation in the public sphere of partnership, sexuality and maternity as experienced by women and girls with disabilities contributes to efforts to combat prejudice, persisting stereotypes and misinformation; whereas such representations can be made in a variety of ways, in particular using artistic and cultural means and the media;

K.  whereas women and girls with disabilities are far more likely to be victims of violence, and particularly of domestic and sexual exploitation, and estimates show that women with disabilities are 1,5 to 10 times more likely to be abused than non-disabled women(19); whereas, depending on whether the women concerned live in the community or in institutions, specific measures must be taken to tackle this inexcusable phenomenon which constitutes a crime and a severe violation of human rights; whereas full access to support services for all women must be provided, because women and girls with disabilities suffer from greater emotional dependency, greater risk of falling victim to all forms of gender-based violence, lower levels of personal and social development, and widespread ignorance regarding sexuality and the innumerable and damaging myths surrounding this issue; whereas figures show that, as a result of increased poverty, sexual exploitation of women with disabilities has become more common;

L.  whereas women and girls with disabilities are exposed to multiple discrimination arising from gender inequalities, age, religion, ethnicity, cultural and social behaviour and disability stereotypes that need to be tackled; whereas women with disabilities are often discriminated against by comparison with men with disabilities when it comes to access to employment and education; whereas the Commission and the Member States can counter this phenomenon by implementing gender mainstreaming in all relevant areas of disability policy;

M.  whereas it is the responsibility of public authorities to set up specialised public services of a high standard, in order to provide women and girls with disabilities with an environment that is adapted in ways that can enable them to fully assume their rights and responsibilities and make decisions for themselves, thus gradually becoming more self-reliant, on an equal footing with people without disabilities; whereas the situation, infrastructure, legislation and support structures vary widely among Member States;

N.  whereas women and girls with disabilities can only enjoy equal rights if gender justice is realised, and if state administrations are as accessible to women with disabilities as to people without disabilities; notes, however, that gender equality practice and implementation vary widely within the EU;

O.  whereas the community of people with one or more physical, mental or intellectual disability is extremely heterogeneous and it is therefore necessary to ensure treatment according to individual needs;

P.  whereas the high rate of unemployment among people with disabilities remains unacceptable; whereas this puts those with disabilities, a vulnerable group more likely to suffer poverty, at a greater risk of social exclusion; whereas women and girls with disabilities encounter greater difficulties in entering the labour market, making it harder for them to lead ordered and independent lives; whereas employment is not only a source of income, but also has become a way of integrating into society by forging links with the wider world and creating a network of interpersonal relationships; whereas women and girls with disabilities often face underpayment; whereas barriers to mobility as well as higher dependence on family members and carers need to be overcome in order to encourage their active participation in education, the labour market and the social and economic life of the community;

Q.  whereas the more resources Member States invest in their integration, the more successful women with disabilities are in terms of living independent lives allowing them to develop their skills;

R.  whereas women with disabilities who come from more disadvantaged sections of society have had fewer opportunities to develop their skills and fulfil their potential by exercising self-reliance;

S.  whereas the economic crisis and the cuts in public health care and social services in most Member States are having detrimental consequences for vulnerable groups and in particular for women and girls with disabilities; whereas they were at great risk of poverty already before the crisis; whereas these austerity policies are translated into less special education and support personnel for people with disabilities, less social support for carers, lower welfare benefits for people with disabilities, reduced funding for institutions and organisations which help them, and restrictions on their access to public-sector employment, all of which has had a severe impact on the lives of women with disabilities and on their prospects for independence;

T.  whereas there is a strong relationship between mobility, disability and social inclusion, especially with regard to freedom and access to communication (including Braille, sign languages and other alternative forms of communication), freedom of movement in all fields of life and access to services; whereas the full and active participation of disabled people in all aspects of society must be fostered, and they should be given greater access to information and communications technology, domestic automation and online communication solutions;

U.  whereas from the point of view of social inclusion and cost, it would be more desirable if the support provided by Member States were such that women with disabilities could continue to live with their families instead of being institutionalised;

1.  Stresses the importance of inclusion for all EU citizens regardless of any physical, intellectual, psychosocial or mental impairments, and calls for special targets to be set to ensure this in order to improve the quality of life of people with disabilities and to enhance a coherent policy through the full participation of all; stresses that strategies, policies and legislative initiatives to ensure non-discrimination and equal opportunities must be drawn up with the active collaboration of all stakeholders involved, including women with disabilities;

2.  Insists that disability policies should be gender mainstreamed and underlines the importance of mainstreaming gender disability in gender policies, programmes and measures to strengthen the recognition and understanding of the intersectionality of gender and disability in the EU and in the Member States' legislation and policy; considers that women with disabilities should be invited to serve on the appropriate bodies as consultants, advisers, or experts; regrets the fact that the European Disability Strategy 2010-2020 does not include an integrated gender perspective or a separate chapter on gender-specific disability policies; regrets likewise that the Strategy for Equality between women and men 2010-2015 does not specifically address the issue of disability, despite the fact that women with disabilities often find they are at a greater disadvantage than men with disabilities and are more often at risk of poverty and social exclusion;

3.  Urges those Member States that have not yet ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities and its Optional Protocol to do so in order that it may be fully implemented;

4.  Highlights the fact that numerous studies have shown that women with disabilities suffer double discrimination on grounds both of their gender and their disability, and emphasises that the overlap of such discrimination has particularly negative effects on women and girls with disabilities; calls on the Commission and the Member States, given the current lack of specific provisions, to incorporate provisions for women with disabilities in the social protection system;

5.  Reminds governments that discrimination on the grounds of disability is forbidden, and calls on the Member States to make more ambitious efforts to remove the remaining obstacles;

6.  Recalls that the inclusion and participation of women and girls with disabilities can only be achieved if their movement in a physical and social environment unhindered by barriers is facilitated, and calls for efforts to that end;

7.  Stresses the role played by self-help associations in bringing together people, and particularly women, who act as carers for disabled members of their family or close circle of friends, as well as the awareness-raising work carried out by these associations;

8.  Highlights the importance of optimising the use of EU funding instruments, particularly the Structural Funds, in order to promote accessibility and non-discrimination regarding persons with disabilities, paying particular attention to women, who often face multiple discrimination, and to action to increase the visibility of funding opportunities for measures of this kind in post-2013 programmes;

9.  Maintains that information about available services for citizens (education, health, justice, transport, dealings with the authorities, etc) has to be provided in every possible language, form, and format in a simple and secure way; points out that when services of this kind are offered in the form of telephone helplines or tele-assistance, those systems must also be accessible to women who are deaf or blind and deaf;

10.  Insists that inclusion presupposes that stereotypes are countered by conveying positive images through the use of cultural expressions and awareness-raising campaigns making an objective presentation of images of women with disabilities and exhibiting the vast diversity of roles they can undertake in their everyday life in society, as well as by targeting particular depictions of disabilities in the public sphere, since this is precisely the area that is trailing behind; points out that the media play an important role in disseminating information about women with disabilities and should help bring about a change for the better in the public’s attitude towards them, in keeping with the principles and values set out in the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities;

11.  Calls on the Member States to consider sexual violence a serious crime liable to prosecution, especially in the case of women with disabilities and in particular with mental disabilities, in order to reduce the high incidence of reported rapes and sexual harassment and violence in large institutions;

12.  Stresses that, in order to prevent the seclusion, abandonment, neglect and segregation of girls with disabilities, it is necessary to launch information campaigns for families, providing them with details of community support facilities for their care and future development and confuting sexist and discriminatory stereotypes; considers that, where children with disabilities cannot be cared for by their immediate families, the authorities should seek to ensure that, as an alternative, they can be cared for within their wider family entourage or, where this is not possible, provide them with community care in a family environment; observes that it is necessary to promote the fostering and adoption of children with disabilities by speeding up bureaucratic formalities and providing suitable information and assistance for the adoptive or foster families;

13.  Proposes that, in the sphere of housing, architectural and other environmental considerations and measures must be taken into account in order to hasten a positive shift from ‘design for special needs’ to ‘integral and inclusive design for all citizens’; notes at the same time, however, that the objective of ensuring unimpeded access and the adjustments necessary to achieve this should not be of an architectural nature alone, and that universal design intended in particular to cater for the basic daily needs of women with disabilities should be a firm objective and a reality; stresses the need to guarantee women with disabilities joint or individual access to social housing schemes and to provide them with grants for the removal of obstacles to their mobility within the home, a facility which should also be extended to those living in rented accommodation; reiterates, therefore, the importance of ensuring that people with disabilities have greater access to decent living conditions, whether this be in terms of housing, mobility, access to public and social services, or participation in public life;

14.  Calls on the Commission and the Member States to boost barrier-free accessibility for women and girls with reduced mobility and disabled women and girls to the transport infrastructure, the vehicles and the information and reservation formats; notes that among public transport users with disabilities, women outnumber men; stresses, therefore, that disability and gender mainstreaming are essential with regard to transport policy formulation, implementation and assessment, so as to ensure equal opportunities and prevent discrimination against women with disabilities; therefore recommends their involvement, as being expert in the field, as transport policy consultants;

15.  Points out that accessibility to the internet and social media must also be ensured (e.g. readability of all public websites for people with visual impairment, with solutions also focusing on other types of disability that are non‑visual, such as the adapting of complex content to the needs of the intellectually disabled and incorporating sign‑language videos enabling content to be understood); expresses its concern that accessibility for citizens to government agencies and e-governance is not yet fully ensured; maintains that all people with disabilities, including older people with hearing disabilities, whose number and proportion within society is, according to WHO estimates, especially on the rise, must be given access to digital literacy; welcomes, therefore, the Commission proposal for a directive on the accessibility of public sector bodies’ websites;

16.  Stresses that democratic participation is part of the fundamental and civil rights of women with disabilities and must be facilitated and guaranteed; calls, therefore, on the Member States and on all relevant public authorities to provide adequately adapted facilities and to empower women's active involvement and participation;

17.  Points out that the UN Convention promotes a ‘support in decision making’ human rights model based on the intrinsic equality and dignity of all people, as opposed to the obsolete system of ‘substitution in decision-making’; therefore calls on the Member States to facilitate women with disabilities’ representation in the decision-making process, in order to ensure that their interests and rights are protected;

18.  Considers that women and girls with disabilities have the right to decide, as far as possible, over their own lives and needs, that they should to be heard and consulted and should be actively encouraged to be independent as far as possible, and highlights the fact that these rights should also be guaranteed in specialised public institutions in an ordinary context of life; stresses that personal assistance is a means of their autonomous living and should therefore be facilitated and promoted for women with disabilities when they receive support in educational or vocational training institutions, at the workplace, within their families, and in the event of pregnancy and maternity;

19.  Recalls that every step in a woman's life entails not only opportunities but also responsibilities and that in this sense women often have to endure a disproportionate burden in terms of pregnancy and childbearing when they have to face the negative implications of pregnancy, especially in cases when fathers neither assume their responsibilities nor contribute to their children's wellbeing and fate, having abandoned their families, recalling that in a family both parents should share the same responsibilities on a basis of equality unless they have previously mutually agreed otherwise;

20.  Emphasises that women and girls with disabilities must be informed of their rights so that they can make decisions for themselves, with this information being conveyed in such a way that they can access and understand it, taking into account the different communication methods, media and formats chosen by them and, where applicable, the extent of their mental disability;

21.  Notes that, for women and girls with disabilities in particular to receive proper care, there is a need in the medical sector for specific continuous and career-long training on the issue of mental illness/disabilities, in order that these ailments are better detected and patients suffering from these conditions are referred for treatment to the medical services specialising in this field; calls, therefore, on the Member States to ensure special training of all professionals dealing with people with disabilities, and emphasises that during their training health professionals and teachers need to be trained in and made aware of all types of disability, recalling that some are little-known despite their prevalence;

22.  Notes that education and professional training for disabled people is being carried out in some of the Member States separately and deficiently; stresses the importance of integrating women with disabilities into standard education and professional systems in all cases where the disability allows for such integration;

23.  Underlines the need to support disabled migrant girls and women in order to develop their skills and potential in vocational training and to give them opportunities to obtain suitable employment;

24.  Notes that the various stages of a woman’s life – pregnancy being one – entail specific challenges which have to be dealt with, and that when women with disabilities do so they should enjoy the same rights and opportunities as are offered to women without disabilities so as to avoid any discouragement from becoming pregnant; furthermore, bearing in mind the additional challenges faced by women with disabilities, stresses that they should be entitled to a longer period of maternity leave in order to adjust to their new situation and build a good family life; notes that forced sterilisation and coerced abortion are forms of violence against women and constitute forms of inhuman and degrading treatment that Member States must eradicate and strongly condemn;

25.  Underlines that women and girls with disabilities must be allowed to enjoy their sexuality as freely as people without impairments, and considers that women with disabilities must be able to live and fulfil their wish either to have or not to have children, as women without disabilities do; stresses that for young girls, teenage girls and women with disabilities to take responsibility for their sexual behaviour, they need access to education on sexuality, given by professionals who are experts in the field, such as local public social services educators, and adapted where necessary to the intellectual ability of the disabled woman or girl concerned: they need to know and understand how the body functions (how pregnancy occurs and how to avoid it), how to say no to sexual practices they do not wish to engage in, how to avoid sexually transmitted diseases, etc; points to the need to provide specialised support, including childcare assistance, to women with disabilities, together with their families, in order that they may enjoy motherhood to the full; maintains that Member States should, in this case, take particularly into account the needs of women with an intellectual impairment;

26.  Considers it vital for women and girls with disabilities to have complete access to medical care that meets their particular needs, including gynaecological consultation, medical examinations, family planning, and adapted support during pregnancy; urges the Member States to ensure that their national public healthcare provision includes proper access to these services;

27.  Points out the importance of eradicating prejudice, negative perceptions and social stigmas and of encouraging social acceptance, social participation, respect and tolerance and the valuing of human diversity; encourages Member States, in particular, to run awareness-raising campaigns;

28.  Stresses that violence against women and sexual violence constitute a serious breach of fundamental rights; underlines, in view of their extreme vulnerability, the need to protect women and girls with disabilities living in care homes and mental hospitals from sexual assault and other forms of physical mistreatment to which they may be subjected, and points with concern to the lack of data on this alarming phenomenon; invites the Member States to investigate how pervasive this problem is by encouraging women with disabilities who are victims to break their silence; encourages the collection of relevant data in a confidential manner, with a view to taking the appropriate measures needed to tackle the problem; calls on the European Institute for Gender Equality to carry out studies on the situation of girls and women with disabilities in regard to violence;

29.  Calls on the Member States to prevent harassment in the workplace through effective harassment protocols in accordance with the application of Directive 2000/78/EC, in order to reduce the high frequency of rape and cases of sexual harassment and violence, as well as forced sterilisations, in particular in large institutions;

30.  Stresses that in many developing countries significant barriers still exist to escaping violence, to reporting such crimes, and to accessing justice and legal and social services;

31.  Calls on the EU and the Member States to take all appropriate legislative, administrative, social and educational measures to protect women and girls with disabilities, both within and outside the home, from all forms of exploitation, violence and abuse and to facilitate their access to justice through the provision of suitable community-based assistance and support, taking into consideration their specific needs, including assistive devices, in order to avoid isolation and confinement in the home; believes that additionally, all such services and programmes should be closely monitored by independent authorities; regrets that EU and national legislation to prevent exploitation, violence and abuse often lacks a focus on disability;

32.  Urges the Commission to launch a comprehensive strategy to fight violence against women, as requested by Parliament in several resolutions and most recently in its resolution of 5 April 2011 on priorities and outline of the new EU policy framework to fight violence against women(20); reiterates the need for the Commission to present a legislative criminal law instrument to combat gender-based violence, including the protection of rights of disabled women in cases of sexual abuse and violence, both in public and within their home environment;

33.  Emphasises that women with disabilities have to be guaranteed affordable, easy and safe access to justice and that they need to be able, at each stage of the process, to use the verbal communication support systems and technologies they choose, including sign-language interpreters or guides-interpreters for deaf-blind people, in order to ensure they can communicate correctly with police and legal personnel; stresses that as many women with disabilities are highly dependent on the person caring for them, who is also in very many cases the person assaulting and abusing them, independent methods of communication need to be provided so that opportunities exist for disabled women who have been assaulted to file a complaint and be transferred immediately to a temporary full-time care centre until the complaint has been resolved through due legal process; proposes the introduction of trial procedures specifically tailored to meet the needs of women and girls with disabilities, including the provision of NGO assistance; underscores that no barriers may hinder the access of women with disabilities to legal recourse; points out in this respect that effective measures need to be taken so that women with disabilities can access the support they may need in exercising their legal capacity - support that, when required, must be in proportion to their personal needs and abilities, in regard to taking decisions concerning civil and political rights; points out that appropriate effective safeguard measures such as impartial assessment of women’s genuine needs by recognised independent experts are also needed in order to prevent third parties or institutions taking advantage of disabled women in the exercise of their legal capacity, and that these measures should be periodically reviewed;

34.  Stresses that any sterilisation agreement entered into by a woman or girl with disabilities must be voluntary and must be examined by an impartial third party charged with verifying that the decision was reached fairly and, in the absence of severe medical indications, without enforcement; further stresses that contraceptive methods must never be administered, nor a pregnancy legally terminated, against the will of a woman or girl with disabilities; believes that women and girls with disabilities must have the right to give their informed consent to and to understand all medical practices; considers that if a woman or girl with disabilities is incapable of giving her consent, then consent must always be based on respect for human rights; urges the Member States to prevent and condemn cases of forced sterilisation of women with disabilities;

35.  Notes that the terminology used to describe physical impairments and disabilities is different and that the focus should be on disabilities instead of impairments in medical terms, in accordance with the approach chosen in the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and followed by the European Court of Justice; stresses that employers should focus on the skills and abilities of employees or applicants with disabilities;

36.  Invites the Member States to encourage and ensure access to all types of formal, informal and lifelong education and to the labour market for women and girls with disabilities, as they should be encouraged to follow study courses and use new information and communication technologies, and supported and encouraged to enter the labour market, and highlights that particular talents, views and experiences can enrich working environments considerably; urges the Member States to provide training and information to teachers, trainers, senior civil servants, and employers with a view to implementing social integration processes aimed at utilising the potential and added value of women with disabilities; proposes effective use of the European Social Fund so as to improve the levels of inclusion of women and girls with disabilities in all important areas of life such as access to the labour market, as well as in reducing youth unemployment and poverty;

37.  Calls on the Member States to review their legislative and policy framework in respect of the participation of women with disabilities and women with intellectual impairments and mental disabilities in the labour market; stresses the need to adopt active labour-market policy measures for women with disabilities, which offer choices for the individual, including flexible, part-time and full-time employment, and to consider the possibility of stimulating small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) through financial incentives and other support for better reconciliation of professional and private life; stresses that women with disabilities should have equal access to financing for the creation of small enterprises and other forms of self-employment, as well as the right to choose between different forms of employment; encourages Member States to draw on best practices around Europe; calls on employers to make reasonable adjustments to workplaces and working conditions in order to place a greater focus on providing incentives for disabled people and actively including them in the labour market, with the possibility for individual cases of discrimination to be heard at labour courts in accordance with Article 5 of Directive 2000/78/EC;

38.  Notes that current education and training systems do not in general manage to prevent a high dropout rate among people with disabilities, and encourages Member States to pay special attention to boys and girls with disabilities or special needs in an educational context, in order to improve their integration and help reduce the school dropout rate to less than 10 %;

39.  Urges the Member States to provide the necessary funding and support for associations and organisations representing people with disabilities, which play a key role in promoting their rights and emphasising the value of their active citizenship and participation in society;

40.  Urges the Member States to provide the necessary specialised support to the families of women with disabilities, in the form of training and assistance for carers at every possible level, and to set up respite care institutions enabling people with disabilities to be looked after temporarily whenever families might need such a service;

41.  Underlines the existing inequalities among infrastructure facilities of Member States for people with disabilities, stressing the need for mobility within the EU to be guaranteed for women and girls with disabilities, everywhere, and that the Member State of destination must provide such women with the special facilities to which they are entitled, on an equal footing with other people with disabilities;

42.  Deplores the fact that the Council has not yet finalised its work on the draft Council Directive on implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation, despite Parliament's position given in 2009; calls on the Council to ensure that this legislation is adopted by the end of the current parliamentary term;

43.  Emphasises that people with disabilities, and women in particular, are far more likely to slip into poverty (according to the OECD, roughly every fourth person with disabilities lives in poverty); urges the Member States to take adequate measures to prevent women and girls with disabilities from slipping into poverty, and to guarantee that they receive disability allowances and entitlements and have access to social and health services, by devising national appropriate programmes and ensuring their effective implementation through continuous monitoring and evaluation; notes that the danger of poverty and unemployment is particularly serious when it comes to single mothers with disabled children; points out that the promotion of gender equality and equal opportunities and the fight against the discrimination suffered by children with disabilities and their families constitute a tool which can be used to combat stigmatisation, poverty and social exclusion, and that the link between disability, gender and poverty should be taken into account in all policies to combat poverty and social exclusion;

44.  Calls for public health systems to class vulnerable groups as users with special needs and to be equipped with the resources and referral facilities required in order to deliver proper care;

45.  Calls for elderly women, who often live alone and are confronted with diseases that bring about disability, to receive special attention through the setting-up of a prevention and assistance programme;

46.  Stresses that the introduction of austerity measures in many countries has led to the reduction of welfare benefits and essential services and that, in this regard, women with disabilities are a particularly vulnerable group; stresses also that cutting funding for disabled people and their carers – who are often women – will adversely affect the educational, social and economic needs of women with family responsibilities; therefore calls on the Member States to adopt measures aimed at removing all barriers to efficient, accessible, high-quality and affordable services for women with disabilities;

47.  Points out that the lack of affordable, accessible and high-quality care and assistance services for people with disabilities in most Member States, and the fact that care work is not equally shared between women and men, have a direct negative impact on women’s ability to participate in all aspects of social, economic, cultural and political life; in this respect insists that special attention be paid to people, often women, caring for people with disabilities and that their commitment be taken into account in accrediting their professional experience also stresses the need to encourage Member States to recognise, in their social security systems and when people retire, the involvement and unpaid work of the carers, generally women, of people with disabilities; stresses that particular attention needs to be paid to these women to ensure that they receive a proper salary and retirement pension; therefore calls on the Commission to come up with a legislative proposal on carers' leave (or filial leave) that allows people to take a period of leave to take care of ill, disabled or impaired family members and/or to stay in employment when taking leave in order to care for dependant family members;

48.  Asks the Commission and the Member States to develop large-scale awareness-raising campaigns to make women and girls with disabilities more visible, and highlights the valuable role that mass media and the internet can play in constructing a positive image of women with disabilities and encouraging them to assert their rights;

49.  Believes it is vital that Member States ensure that women and girls with disabilities enjoy equality before the law and are entitled to equality of legal protection and legal benefits, free from discrimination of any kind; believes that all discrimination on grounds of disability and gender must be banned, taking into consideration the fact that the confluence of these two factors has an exponential impact on inequality;

50.  Urges the Commission, in conducting the mid-term review of its European Disability Strategy 2010-2020 and elaborating the List of Actions 2015-2020 relating thereto, to develop a more gender-sensitive approach;

51.  Reiterates that Community policies on disability need to take account of gender equality from the very start, so that inequalities that already exist are not continued or increased during policy development; stresses the need to establish indicators that reflect disability and gender aspects jointly; believes that the lack of indicators makes it difficult to obtain an accurate picture of the situation facing women with disabilities; calls on the Commission to invite women and girls who have disabilities to participate in future studies on women and disability;

52.  Calls on the Commission, the Council and the Member States to adopt a horizontal anti-discrimination directive aimed at removing, in all areas of EU competence, the barriers which prevent disabled people, and especially disabled women and girls, from achieving their full potential for social participation and independence;

53.  Invites the Member States to support voluntary initiatives supporting human diversity and to provide adequate funding for NGOs dealing with the issue;

54.  Calls on the Commission and the Member States to collect detailed and reliable gender- disaggregated statistics for targeted research on the true situation facing people with disabilities, this being imperative for efficient policy design in order to address the intersectionality between gender, disability and violence; believes that women with disabilities should be involved in the collection of such data; also considers that all studies on people with disabilities need to take the gender aspect into account, and studies on women and girls need likewise to take the disability aspect into account;

55.  Stresses that diversity enriches society;

56.  Notes that human dignity is inviolable and must be respected and protected;

57.  Stresses the importance of adopting a gender-sensitive approach to disability in the post‑2015 development agenda;

58.  Calls on the Commission and the EEAS to mainstream disability in development policy and in projects in a coordinated way, and to promote a comprehensive poverty reduction strategy in the geographic programmes for women with disabilities, aiming to unlock their economic potential; stresses that land reform must ensure gender equality in land ownership, including for women with disabilities;

59.  Asks the Commission and the EEAS to put in place monitoring mechanisms to evaluate the impact of their policies on women with disabilities at country level; calls on the EU to support the efforts of partner countries in drafting and implementing employment laws, in compliance with the CRPD and ILO Convention 159;

60.  Calls on the Commission to promote initiatives aiming to strengthen the capacity of stakeholders to effectively implement international commitments to disability-inclusive development, in line with the objectives of the CRPD; recommends that the EU promote the participation of disabled people’s organisations in international and national decision‑making processes;

61.  Points out that hazardous situations and humanitarian crises adversely affect the safety and security of women and girls with disabilities, reducing considerably their chances of survival; emphasises that women and girls with disabilities are more vulnerable than other people before, during and after the occurrence of hazardous situations such as armed conflicts, occupation of territory, natural disasters and humanitarian crises; stresses that national and international agencies responsible for public health, disaster preparedness, emergency help and humanitarian aid need to be made aware of the rights and specific needs of women and girls with disabilities and of the need to have the human and material resources available to ensure that women and girls with disabilities benefit from universal access and equal opportunities in hazardous and emergency situations, thereby avoiding lack of care and/or unsuitable actions;

62.  Emphasises that the EU and its Member States must recognise the importance of promoting international cooperation in order to support national efforts to enforce the right of women and girls with disabilities to benefit fully and on equal terms from all its fundamental rights and freedoms; stresses that international cooperation programmes must be inclusive in regard to women and girls with disabilities, for which reason organisations representing them (mixed or specific) need to be directly involved in the design, development, monitoring and evaluation of cooperation policies implemented at local, national, Community and international level, through the sharing and distribution of information, experience, training programmes and best practice;

63.  Emphasises that the EU and its Member States need to promote the inclusion of gender and disability as a cross-cutting dimension in their development cooperation policies, programmes and projects, thereby ensuring that specific projects are devised that promote equal opportunities for people, and in particular women and girls, with disabilities; stresses that the Commission, Parliament, the UN, the specialist agencies and all other international, national and local donor agencies need to make funding for programmes targeting women and girls with disabilities one of their priorities, allocating funds to this in their general programmes and awarding funding to programmes or programme components that target women and girls with disabilities; considers that the EU must include the rights of women and girls with disabilities in its bilateral cooperation and in long-term third-country cooperation with local authorities, offering direct economic support through its multilateral development cooperation policies by means of financial contributions to international organisations, through co-funding with NGOs in the EU and elsewhere in the world, and through policies connected with humanitarian aid;

64.  Stresses the importance of encouraging the active involvement of women with disabilities in Europe, through the organisations representing them (especially the European Disability Forum, the European Women’s Lobby and their respective national member organisations), in the monitoring of international human rights treaties, supplying relevant information in alternative reports which cross-reference the situation of women and girls with disabilities with their fundamental rights and freedoms;

65.  Believes it is essential to ensure that the periodic reports by the EU and its Member States under human rights treaties contain information in relation to each right on women and girls with disabilities, including the current situation de facto and de jure and information on measures to improve their situation and on the difficulties and obstacles they have encountered, especially in rural areas; believes this practice must be extended to all institutions working for the defence of human rights, both within the EU and nationally, including organisations representing people with disabilities and their families, women in general and women with disabilities;

66.  Believes that with regard to changing the situation of women and girls with disabilities, one of the main challenges lies in including disability in all programmes, measures and policies on gender, as well as devising and developing positive action measures to achieve progress for them, given that they are at a disadvantage;

67.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, to the Council of Europe and the UN Secretary-General.

(1) OJ L 23, 27.1.2010, p. 35. (2) OJ L 303, 2.12.2000, p. 16. (3) OJ C 137 E, 27.5.2010, p. 68. (4) OJ L 167, 12.6.1998, p. 25. (5) OJ C 224, 16.9.2006, p. 9. (6) OJ C 187, 18.7.1988, p. 236. (7) OJ C 158, 26.6.1989, p. 383. (8) OJ C 284, 2.11.1992, p 49. (9) OJ C 17, 22.1.1996, p. 196. (10) OJ C 152, 27.5.1996, p. 87. (11) OJ C 20, 20.1.1997, p. 386. (12) OJ C 132, 28.4.1997, p. 313. (13) OJ C 21 E, 24.1.2002, p. 246. (14) OJ C 76 E, 25.3.2004, p. 231. (15) OJ C 184 E, 8.7.2010, p. 111. (16) OJ C 131 E, 8.5.2013, p.9. (17) OJ C 199 E, 7.7.2012, p. 25. (18) World Report on Disabilities 2011, produced jointly by the World Health Organisation and the World Bank. (19) Human Rights Watch: Human Rights for Women and Children with Disabilities (2012), p. 5. (20) OJ C 296 E, 2.10.2012, p. 26.

European Parliament resolution of 11 December 2013 on the European Retail Action Plan for the benefit of all actors (2013/2093(INI))

P7_TA(2013)0580 A7-0374/2013

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission Communication of 31 January 2013 entitled ‘Setting up a European Retail Action Plan’ (COM(2013)0036),

–  having regard to the Commission Green Paper of 31 January 2013 on ‘Unfair trading practices in the business-to-business food and non-food supply chain in Europe’ (COM(2013)0037),

–  having regard to the Commission Report of 5 July 2010 entitled ‘Retail market monitoring report – Towards more efficient and fairer retail services in the internal market for 2020’ (COM(2010)0355),

–  having regard to its resolution of 5 July 2011 on a more efficient and fairer retail market(1),

–  having regard to the Commission Communication of 22 May 2012 entitled ‘A European Consumer Agenda – Boosting confidence and growth’ (COM(2012)0225),

–  having regard to its resolution of 11 June 2013 on a new agenda for European Consumer Policy(2),

–  having regard to the Commission Staff Working Document of 29 May 2012 entitled ‘Consumer Conditions Scoreboard – Consumers at home in the single market: Monitoring the integration of the retail single market and consumer conditions in the Member States’ (SWD(2012)0165),

–  having regard to the Commission Communication of 27 November 2012 entitled ‘Protecting businesses against misleading marketing practices and ensuring effective enforcement – Review of Directive 2006/114/EC concerning misleading and comparative advertising’ (COM(2012)0702),

–  having regard to its resolution of 22 October 2013 on misleading advertisement practices(3),

–  having regard to the work of the High Level Forum for a Better-Functioning Food Supply Chain and of the Expert Platform on B2B Contractual Practices,

–  having regard to the Commission Consultation Document of 4 July 2013 entitled ‘Consultation of Social Partners under Article 154 TFEU on enhancing EU cooperation in the prevention and deterrence of undeclared work’ (C(2013)4145),

–  having regard to the Commission Communication of 28 October 2009 entitled ‘A better functioning food supply chain in Europe’ (COM(2009)0591),

–  having regard to its resolution of 7 September 2010 on fair revenues for farmers: a better functioning food supply chain in Europe(4),

–  having regard to its declaration of 19 February 2008 on investigating and remedying abuse of power by large supermarkets operating in the European Union(5),

–  having regard to the Commission Communication of 11 January 2012 entitled ‘A coherent framework for building trust in the digital single market for e-commerce and online services’ (COM(2011)0942),

–  having regard to its resolutions of 11 December 2012(6) and 4 July 2013(7) on completing the digital single market,

–  having regard to the European Economic and Social Committee’s opinion of 10 July 2013 on the Commission Communication on ‘Setting up a European retail action plan’(8),

–  having regard to the European Economic and Social Committee’s opinion of 11 July 2013 on the Commission Green Paper on ‘Unfair trading practices in the business-to-business food and non-food supply chain in Europe’(9),

–  having regard to Directive 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2011 on consumer rights(10),

–  having regard to Directive 2000/13/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 March 2000 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the labelling, presentation and advertising of foodstuffs(11), and Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2011 on the provision of food information to consumers(12),

–  having regard to Directive 2006/114/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 concerning misleading and comparative advertising(13),

–  having regard to Directive 2011/7/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 on combating late payment in commercial transactions(14),

–  having regard to Directive 2007/64/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 November 2007 on payment services in the internal market(15),

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

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection and the opinion of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs (A7-0374/2013),

A.  whereas the importance of the retail market can hardly be over-estimated, since it represents 11 % of EU GDP and delivers more than 15 % of all jobs in Europe, including both skilled and unskilled labour, and contributes to the social fabric of society;

B.  whereas the strategic importance of the retail sector has to be fully recognised as a driver for growth, employment, competitiveness and innovation, as well as for the strengthening of the European single market;

C.  whereas in a society increasingly marked by virtual contacts through the internet, shops are still the place where people meet other people, and high streets and town centres in particular, as well as direct selling by producers, can provide a setting for shared experiences, and serve as a focal point of local identity, community pride, a common heritage and shared values; whereas, nevertheless, e-commerce and brick-and-mortar shops do not exclude each other but are, in fact, complementary;

D.  whereas the current economic crisis is taking a heavy toll on retail, affecting in particular smaller, independent shops;

E.  whereas unfair trading practices (UTPs) continue to exist and negatively affect the entire supply chain, including farmers and SMEs; whereas UTPs also impact negatively on consumer interests as well as on growth and job creation;

1.  Welcomes the setting-up by the Commission of a European Retail Action Plan;

2.  States that the Action Plan should have paid more attention to the effects of the current economic crisis on retail and, in particular, on smaller, independent shops;

3.  Welcomes the Commission’s intention to create a permanent Group on Retail Competitiveness, but emphasises the importance of balanced representation, including, inter alia, of both big and small retailers, suppliers, co-operatives and consumer, environmental and social interest groups; calls on the Commission to take a holistic approach to retail, avoiding duplication and extra bureaucracy, and to ensure coherence and close co-ordination with other existing fora, such as the yearly Retail Market Roundtable;

4.  Welcomes the Commission’s establishment of the High Level Expert Group on Retail Sector Innovation and calls on the Commission to swiftly review the forthcoming recommendations by the group in order to further promote entrepreneurship, stimulate innovation and create jobs and growth in Europe;

5.  Supports the Retail Market Roundtable, organised by the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection, as the institutional forum aimed at keeping retail high on the EU political agenda, to review progress in the implementation of relevant aspects of the Retail Action Plan, to report on the work of the permanent Group on Retail Competitiveness and to update on progress made in other existing platforms and informal dialogue mechanisms; asks the permanent Group on Retail Competitiveness to work closely with Parliament to organise the annual Retail Market Roundtable;

6.  Urges Member States not to take measures in the context of austerity policies which undermine consumer confidence and directly harm the interests of the retail sector, such as increasing VAT, reclassifying products and product rates or raising charges for shops; reiterates the importance of improving access to finance, in particular for retail and wholesale trade SMEs; welcomes in this regard the 2011 Commission Action Plan and the recent legislative proposals aimed at maintaining the flow of credit to SMEs and improving their access to capital markets;

7.  Emphasises that Member States have to refrain from discriminatory measures, such as trade and tax laws that only affect certain sectors or business models and distort competition;

8.  Deplores the fact that some Member States are discriminating foreign businesses by creating new barriers making it difficult for them to establish themselves in a given Member State, which constitutes a clear breach of internal market principles;

9.  Calls on the Commission and Member States to give the highest political prominence to the retail sector as a pillar of the Single Market, including the Digital Single Market, and to lift regulatory, administrative and practical obstacles hampering the start-up of businesses, development and continuity and making it difficult for retailers to fully benefit from the internal market; considers that retail market legislation should be evidence-based, taking into account the needs of the sector, and should be based in particular on an examination and understanding of its impact on small businesses;

10.  Asks Member States to transpose internal market rules in a coherent and consistent way and to implement fully and correctly the internal market rules and legislation; stresses the fact that requirements for extra tests and registrations, the non-recognition of certificates and standards, territorial supply constraints and similar measures create extra costs for consumers and retailers, in particular SMEs, thereby depriving European citizens of the full benefits of the Single Market; calls also on the Commission, with the aim of ensuring better governance, to operate a zero-tolerance policy towards those Member States which fail to properly apply internal market rules and to do so, where appropriate, by means of infringement procedures and by speeding up those procedures using a fast-track approach;

11.  Calls for the internal market scoreboard to be extended to cover the implementation of the services directive;

12.  Encourages business federations and consumer associations to provide more information, training and legal advice to stakeholders on their rights and the problem‑solving instruments at their disposal, such as SOLVIT, and to support the exchange of best practices among themselves;

13.  Welcomes the Commission’s intention to develop instruments to facilitate consumer access to transparent, easily understandable, comparable, and reliable information on the prices, quality and sustainability of goods and services; encourages the Commission to set up an easily accessible database containing all EU and national labelling requirements; at the same time warns against the multiplication of labels and labelling requirements and calls for simplification, including by bringing together various aspects of sustainability in one label, while reducing differences in national mandatory labelling requirements and establishing common benchmarks/criteria at EU-level, where appropriate;

14.  Asks the Commission, when monitoring the implementation of its Action Plan, to pay particular attention to actions aimed at supporting the independent retailer; encourages local and regional authorities to promote actions aimed at facilitating equal access and creating a level playing field for the independent retailer, in full respect of free and fair competition, such as: the encouragement of the ‘adopt-a-shop’ principle by which larger retailers act as ‘mentors’ to smaller shops in the same locality, in particular for new market entrants; the promotion of groups of independent retailers, including co‑operatives, which benefit from mutual assistance and certain economies of scale, whilst retaining their full independence and; respect for the right of local and regional authorities to stimulate a climate favourable to small, independent shops, which are typically established in town centres, by lowering energy rates – including for signs illuminated by night – and rents via public-private partnerships, and by introducing business rate discounts on local charges for small businesses and independent retailers, in compliance with applicable EU state aid competition and internal market public procurement rules, and by promoting co-operation between the various shops in that area;

15.  Recalls that, while a concentration of shops outside city centres can be convenient for some consumers, it can also have negative environmental effects and can be a challenge for other consumers, in particular for older people, people with reduced mobility or those without a car; calls, therefore, for local and regional authorities to a adopt a balanced approach, also taking into account the fact that in many regions, especially in view of the economic crisis, the saturation point has already been reached; emphasises that retail developers should continue to assume their shared responsibility to promote sustainability, true freedom of choice for consumers and access to the market for small shops; notes that rents in shopping centres outside city centres can be too high for smaller, independent shops and stresses the need to ensure a level playing field for these shops, for example by basing rents on a percentage of turnover, in cases where this is not already an existing practice;

16.  Acknowledges the competence of local authorities with regard to urban planning; highlights, however, that urban planning should not be used as a pretext to circumvent the right to free establishment; recalls, in this connection, the importance of proper enforcement of the services directive; urges Member States to remove barriers to free movement and to open up their markets in order to stimulate competitiveness and promote diversity among shops, which is essential if shopping areas – in particular in town and city centres – are to remain attractive;

17.  Emphasises the important role of public-private partnerships in ensuring clean, safe and accessible shopping areas in town and city centres, inter alia, by addressing the negative effects of vacant buildings in shopping areas, for example by making these places available to start-up businesses at a lower rent than usual, in compliance with applicable EU state aid and public procurement rules;

18.  Notes that the rapid development of e-commerce has delivered significant benefits for consumers and businesses in terms of innovation, new market opportunities and growth, improved choice, enhanced competition and lower prices; notes, however, that shops are now facing new challenges, thereby making multichannel retail strategies even more important; encourages retailers, in view of the social and cultural role of retail, to make the most of innovative technologies and to develop new business models for their on-line customer base while also expanding the shopping experience in the brick‑and-mortar shop, by inter alia, increasing service levels, both before and after the sale;

19.  Welcomes the Commission’s intention to encourage e-commerce; regrets, however, the absence of an objective to make online services and goods accessible to consumers from all Member States; calls on the Commission to propose a strategy to prevent traders from adopting discriminatory policies in their e‑commerce practices, thereby ensuring that all European citizens have unfettered access to cross-border online trade;

20.  Emphasises that e-commerce is important so as to ensure consumer choice and access to goods and services, in particular in remote areas; stresses the fact that appropriate action must be taken to develop its full potential, including by improving access to the internet in the most remote areas of the EU; supports the measures called for in the Commission Communication of 11 January 2012 on e-commerce to enhance confidence, simplify the registration of domains across borders, improve secure online payments and delivery services, facilitate cross-border debt recovery and improve information to consumers on their rights, particularly concerning withdrawals and opportunities to appeal;

21.  Reiterates the importance of removing barriers (including linguistic, administrative and those relating to lack of information) which restrict the business potential of online cross-border trade and undermine consumers’ confidence in the Single Market;

22.  Welcomes the Commission proposal on Multi-Lateral Interchange Fees (MIF) and stresses the importance of removing card scheme rules which reinforce the anticompetitive effects of the MIF; urges the Commission to support Member States that already have transparent, competitive and innovative payment systems and to use them as best practices in further developing a cheaper and fairer payments market in Europe;

23.  Highlights the retail sector’s responsibility concerning sustainability; welcomes the fact that retailers and suppliers have been at the forefront of green responsibility, particularly regarding waste, energy consumption, transport and CO2 reduction; considers that further efforts are necessary in this area;

24.  Welcomes in particular the voluntary initiatives and commitments taken by retailers and suppliers to reduce food waste;

25.  Points to the importance of preserving retail in stalls and markets, a sector comprised chiefly of thousands of family-run micro-enterprises and which is also a distinguishing feature of the European economy;

26.  Highlights the fact that retailers are offering diverse and modern ways of purchasing and selling goods and services which contribute to wider consumer choice and flexible employment opportunities, in particular for young people and the long-term unemployed;

27.  Calls for the increased support and encouragement of SMEs and co-operatives, in particular those demonstrating innovation and contributing to the social market economy, that address new market needs and are involved in environmentally friendly and socially responsible activities, in order to increase the competitiveness of the EU retail sector, drive down prices for consumers, improve service quality and create new job opportunities;

28.  Recalls the importance of the proper implementation of existing social and labour legislation; calls for equal treatment for commercial operators in the internal market in order to combat undeclared work and tax and social fraud;

29.  Welcomes franchising as a business model which supports new business and small‑business ownership; notes, however, the existence of unfair contract terms in certain cases and calls for transparent and fair contracts; draws the attention of the Commission and Member States, in particular, to problems faced by franchisees who wish to sell their business or change their business formula, whilst remaining active in the same sector; requests that the Commission examine the ban on price-fixing mechanisms in franchise systems and the effects of long-term competition clauses, purchase options and the prohibition of multi-franchising, and to reconsider in this respect the current exemption from competition rules for contracting parties having a market share of less than 30 %;

30.  Is concerned about the rapid development of private labels; emphasises that private labels should be developed in such a way as to deliver improved consumer choice, notably in terms of transparency, quality of information and diversity, and to provide clear opportunities for SMEs to innovate and expand;

31.  Supports the work of the High Level Forum for a Better Functioning Food Supply Chain and its Expert Platform on B2B contractual practices; considers that Parliament should urgently resolve pending issues relating to its participation in the work of the Forum; stresses that UTPs also occur in the non-food supply chain; asks the Commission and business federations, in this connection, to pursue a constructive and cross-sectoral dialogue in the existing fora, also including the annual Retail Market Roundtable and the Commission’s forthcoming Group on Retail Competitiveness;

32.  Welcomes the principles of good practice and the list of examples of fair and unfair practices in vertical trading relationships in the food supply chain, as well as the framework for the implementation and enforcement of these principles; welcomes the recognition by trade associations of the need for enforcement, and emphasises that if an enforcement mechanism is to have a practical effect, it is vital that it be respected by all actors involved in the food supply chain and that all actors, including farmers’ organisations and the manufacturing and wholesale distribution industries, participate; calls on the Commission to review the practical effects of the voluntary initiative, including the enforcement of the principles of good practice, within one year of its entry into force;

33.  Notes that issues regarding vertical trading relations also arise in connection with selective and exclusive distribution arrangements in the retail of branded goods; calls, therefore, on the Commission and Member States to safeguard the rights of those retailers and store owners with more limited bargaining power;

34.  Considers that weaker market players, in particular farmers and other suppliers, often regard it as difficult to complain about UTPs and emphasises, in this connection, the important role of associations, which should be able to submit such complaints on their behalf; invites the Commission to examine the need for and the feasibility of an ombudsman or adjudicator, also examining whether such an office should have the power to take ex-officio action in the case of evidence-based UTPs;

35.  Calls on the Commission to ensure the right of small suppliers to set up groups of producers without being penalised by national competition authorities, which have assessed the importance of these groups based on national production alone;

36.  Calls on the Commission to enforce current legislation on territorial supply constraints imposed by suppliers on their customers;

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

(1) OJ C 33 E, 5.2.2013, p. 9. (2) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0239. (3) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0436. (4) OJ C 308 E, 20.10.2011, p. 22. (5) OJ C 184 E, 6.8.2009, p. 23. (6) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2012)0468. (7) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0327. (8) http://www.eesc.europa.eu/?i=portal.en.int-opinions.26063. (9) http://www.eesc.europa.eu/?i=portal.en.int-opinions.26065. (10) OJ L 304, 22.11.2011, p. 64. (11) OJ L 109, 6.5.2000, p. 29. (12) OJ L 304, 22.11.2011, p. 18. (13) OJ L 376, 27.12.2006, p. 21. (14) OJ L 48, 23.2.2011, p. 1. (15) OJ L 319, 5.12.2007, p. 1.