European Parliament decision to raise no objections to the draft Commission regulation amending Commission Regulation (EU) No 1178/2011 as regards pilot training, testing and periodic checking for performance-based navigation (D042244/03 – 2016/2545(RPS))

P8_TA(2016)0074 B8-0287/2016

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the draft Commission regulation (D042244/03),

–  having regard to Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 February 2008 on common rules in the field of civil aviation and establishing a European Aviation Safety Agency, and repealing Council Directive 91/670/EEC, Regulation (EC) No 1592/2002 and Directive 2004/36/EC(1), and in particular Article 7(6) thereof,

–  having regard to the opinion delivered on 18 December 2015 by the committee referred to in Article 65 of the above regulation,

–  having regard to the Commission’s letter of 12 February 2016 asking Parliament to declare that it will raise no objections to the draft regulation,

–  having regard to the letter from the Committee on Transport and Tourism to the Chair of the Conference of Committee Chairs of 23 February 2016,

–  having regard to Article 5a(3) of Council Decision 1999/468/EC of 28 June 1999 laying down the procedures for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission(2),

–  having regard to the recommendation for a decision of the Committee on Transport and Tourism,

–  having regard to Rules 106(4)(d) and 105(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 105(6) of its Rules of Procedure, which expired on 8 March 2016,

A.  whereas the draft Commission regulation is aimed at, among other things, prolonging by one year an existing transition period for holders of a private pilot licence, from 8 April 2016 to April 2017;

B.  whereas the deadline for Parliament to object to the draft Commission regulation will expire on 23 April 2016;

C.  whereas the entry into force of the Commission regulation by 8 April 2016 would prevent a legal void regarding the situation of several thousand EU citizens who hold a private pilot licence (PPL) issued by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) of the United States;

D.  whereas if the date is not modified these pilots will be obliged to validate or convert their FAA licence into an EU licence, which will require significant resources and time both from national authorities and from pilots;

E.  whereas the Commission and the European Aviation Safety Agency are willing to negotiate a simplified procedure to facilitate the reciprocal recognition and conversion of such pilot licences between the EU and the USA, and whereas this new procedure is likely to become available to pilots in the second half of 2016;

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

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

(1) OJ L 79, 19.3.2008, p. 1. (2) OJ L 184, 17.7.1999, p. 23.

European Parliament legislative resolution of 9 March 2016 on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council relating to a reduction in the sulphur content of certain liquid fuels (codified text) (COM(2014)0466 – C8-0107/2014 – 2014/0216(COD))

P8_TA(2016)0075 A8-0037/2016

(Ordinary legislative procedure – codification)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to the European Parliament and the Council (COM(2014)0466),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 192(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C8‑0107/2014),

–  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 October 2014(1),

–  after consulting the Committee of the Regions,

–  having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 20 December 1994 - Accelerated working method for official codification of legislative texts(2),

–  having regard to Rules 103 and 59 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs (A8-0037/2016),

A.  whereas, according to the Consultative Working Party of the legal services of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission, the proposal in question contains a straightforward codification of the existing texts without any change in their substance;

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

2.  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 9 March 2016 with a view to the adoption of Directive (EU) 2016/... of the European Parliament and of the Council relating to a reduction in the sulphur content of certain liquid fuels (codification)

(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Directive (EU) 2016/802.)

(1) OJ C 12, 15.1.2015, p. 117. (2) OJ C 102, 4.4.1996, p. 2.

European Parliament legislative resolution of 9 March 2016 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council to avoid trade diversion into the European Union of certain key medicines (codified text) (COM(2014)0319 – C8-0015/2014 – 2014/0165(COD))

P8_TA(2016)0076 A8-0038/2016

(Ordinary legislative procedure – codification)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to the European Parliament and the Council (COM(2014)0319),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 207(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C8‑0015/2014),

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

–  having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 20 December 1994 - Accelerated working method for official codification of legislative texts(1),

–  having regard to Rules 103 and 59 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs (A8-0038/2016),

A.  whereas, according to the Consultative Working Party of the legal services of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission, the proposal in question contains a straightforward codification of the existing texts without any change in their substance;

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

2.  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 9 March 2016 with a view to the adoption of Regulation (EU) 2016/... of the European Parliament and of the Council to avoid trade diversion into the European Union of certain key medicines (codification)

(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Regulation (EU) 2016/793.)

(1) OJ C 102, 4.4.1996, p. 2.

European Parliament legislative resolution of 9 March 2016 on the proposal for a Council decision on the conclusion, on behalf of the European Union, of the Amending Protocol to the Agreement between the European Community and the Principality of Andorra providing for measures equivalent to those laid down in Council Directive 2003/48/EC on taxation of savings income in the form of interest payments (COM(2015)0631 – C8-0028/2016 – 2015/0285(NLE))

P8_TA(2016)0077 A8-0047/2016

(Consultation)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the proposal for a Council decision (COM(2015)0631),

–  having regard to the draft Amending Protocol to the Agreement between the European Community and the Principality of Andorra providing for measures equivalent to those laid down in Council Directive 2003/48/EC on taxation of savings income in the form of interest payments (15510/2015),

–  having regard to Article 115 and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (b), and paragraph (8), second subparagraph, of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C8‑0028/2016),

–  having regard to Rules 59, 108(7) and 50(1) of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (A8-0047/2016),

1.  Approves conclusion of the Amending Protocol to the Agreement;

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

European Parliament decision of 9 March 2016 on the proposal for the appointment of the Executive Director of the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA) (C8-0023/2016 – 2016/0902(NLE))

P8_TA(2016)0078 A8-0045/2016

(Approval)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the proposal of the Board of Supervisors of the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA) of 3 February 2016 for the appointment of the Executive Director of the EIOPA for a five-year term (C8-0023/2016),

–  having regard to Article 51(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 establishing a European Supervisory Authority (European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority), amending Decision No 716/2009/EC and repealing Commission Decision 2009/79/EC(1),

–  having regard to its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (A8-0045/2016),

A.  whereas the term of office of EIOPA’s current Executive Director ends on 31 March 2016;

B.  whereas, on 28 January 2016, the Board of Supervisors of the EIOPA, following an open selection procedure, proposed to appoint Fausto Parente as Executive Director for a term of office of five years, in accordance with Article 51(2) and (3) of Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010;

C.  whereas, on 23 February 2016, the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs held a hearing with Fausto Parente, at which he made an opening statement and then responded to questions from the members of the Committee;

1.  Approves the appointment of Fausto Parente as Executive Director of the EIOPA;

2.  Instructs its President to forward this decision to the Council, the Commission, the EIOPA and the governments of the Member States.

(1) OJ L 331, 15.12.2010, p. 48.

European Parliament legislative resolution of 9 March 2016 on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on procedural safeguards for children suspected or accused in criminal proceedings (COM(2013)0822 – C7-0428/2013 – 2013/0408(COD))

P8_TA(2016)0079 A8-0020/2015

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2013)0822),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 82(2)(b) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C7-0428/2013),

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

–  having regard to the reasoned opinion submitted, within the framework of Protocol No 2 on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality, by the Netherlands House of Representatives, 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 25 March 2014(1),

–  having regard to the undertaking given by the Council representative by letter of 16 December 2015 to approve Parliament's position, in accordance with Article 294(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to Rule 59 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (A8-0020/2015),

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

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

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

Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 9 March 2016 with a view to the adoption of Directive (EU) 2016/... of the European Parliament and of the Council on procedural safeguards for children who are suspects or accused persons in criminal proceedings

(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Directive (EU) 2016/800.)

(1) OJ C 226, 16.7.2014, p. 63.

European Parliament resolution of 9 March 2016 on general guidelines for the preparation of the 2017 budget, Section III – Commission (2016/2004(BUD))

P8_TA(2016)0080 A8-0036/2016

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to Article 314 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to Article 106a of the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community,

–  having regard to Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1311/2013 of 2 December 2013 laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2014-2020(1),

–  having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 2 December 2013 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline, on cooperation in budgetary matters and on sound financial management(2),

–  having regard to 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(3),

–  having regard to its legislative resolution of 25 November 2015 on the joint text on the draft general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2016 approved by the Conciliation Committee under the budgetary procedure(4),

–  having regard to the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2016(5) and to the two related joint statements agreed between Parliament, the Council and the Commission(6),

–  having regard to the joint statement for a payment plan 2015-2016(7) agreed on 19 May 2015,

–  having regard to the Commission’s European Economic Forecast (Autumn 2015)(8),

–  having regard to the Commission’s Annual Growth Survey for 2016(9),

–  having regard to Title II, Chapter 8 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgets (A8-0036/2016),

A.  whereas the 2017 budget should lay down the path towards economic growth and job creation, in the context of a fragile economic recovery jeopardised by the situation in emerging global markets and ongoing geopolitical tensions;

B.  whereas the 2017 budget will be affected by the evolving migration and refugee crisis;

C.  whereas the 2017 budget will coincide with the mid-term revision of the multiannual financial framework (MFF);

D.  whereas the balance between internal demand and external trade makes the EU to a certain extent economically dependent on global developments;

General remarks

1.  Notes that the Union budget has proven to be a crucial resource in tackling recent crises and responding to needs that had not been necessarily anticipated during the negotiation of the MFF 2014-2020, such as the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI), the migration and refugee crisis or geopolitical tensions in Europe’s neighbourhood causing a number of serious challenges and emergencies, while within the EU the pace of economic recovery and investment is below potential and an investment gap still persists;

2.  Underlines that the limited capacity of the Union budget to tackle these crises is at this stage primarily the result of the use of all means available agreed on in the MFF negotiations, and particularly of the use of special instruments such as the flexibility instrument; recalls Parliament’s decisive role in shaping those instruments during the MFF negotiations; highlights, however, that if the crises continue to worsen even the full activation of the existing flexibility provisions will be insufficient to address the problem; urges the Council, in this context, to reconsider its position on the question of budgeting the MFF special instruments so as to alleviate the constraints weighing on the Union budget; reiterates in this connection its longstanding position that the payment appropriations for the special instruments (the flexibility instrument, the EU Solidarity Fund, the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund and the Emergency Aid Reserve) should be calculated over and above the MFF ceilings, as is the case for commitments; expects this issue to be resolved in the context of the mid-term revision of the MFF;

Budgeting taking into account economic forecasts and consistent with the European Semester for economic policy coordination

3.  Notes the Commission’s European Economic Forecast (Autumn 2015), which indicates a modest recovery, although one still below the EU’s growth potential; stresses, however, that this recovery has to be built upon by enhancing the growth fundamentals in order to boost job creation and return to full employment, notes that long-term and very long-term unemployment, notably in the Union's poorest regions and among young people, are still at worrying levels, and the EU is having difficulties with industrial restructuring; notes that disparities in terms of economic development between European regions and Member States persist, and points to the gap between the poorest and the richest of Europeans; notes, furthermore, the appearance of new challenges, such as the risk of slowdown in emerging market economies and global trade, with particular pressure arising from volatility on Chinese markets, the need to tackle the migrant and refugee crisis, and persisting geopolitical tensions;

4.  Notes, additionally, the Commission’s Annual Growth Survey for 2016; strongly believes that boosting investment, including through a better coordinated increase in public and private investment with a focus on the Europe 2020 targets, is a proper policy response with a view to a more balanced economic policy; believes that those two elements should be taken into consideration in the preparation of the draft budget for 2017 insofar as this should help identify priorities within an economic context; calls, consequently, for more synergies between the Union dimension of the European Semester for economic policy coordination and the Union budget, which is also the cornerstone for a stable euro area;

5.  Welcomes, in this context, the Commission’s efforts to enhance the use of the European Structural and Investment Funds in support of key priorities highlighted in the country-specific recommendations; takes note of the Commission’s proposal on the establishment of the Structural Reform Support Programme, and urges the Commission to guarantee that funding will be deployed with a view to strengthening economic, social and territorial cohesion in line with Article 174 TFEU;

6.  Regrets that the Union budget has in recent years been a collateral victim of Member States’ duplicitous behaviour, which has led them to consider their contribution to the Union budget as a burden and to treat it as an adjustment variable; underlines that the EU budget, as an investment budget, can bring particularly strong added value by boosting growth, competitiveness and job creation in the Member States; draws attention to the need for Member States’ contributions to the Union budget not to be treated as an adjustment variable subject to macroeconomic conditions; reiterates also the added value of the Union budget in terms of synergies and economies of scale; emphasises the special situation of isolated and peripheral regions;

7.  Notes and regrets the fact that corporate tax avoidance has caused huge losses of tax income for Member States, and therefore a reduction in their contributions to the EU budget; considers moreover that such unfair tax competition in some cases means GDP transfer from one Member State to another and GNI transfer to non-EU tax havens, thus reducing aggregate Member State contributions to the EU budget;

Overcoming crises

8.  Highlights the fact that the Union has had to face numerous crises in recent years to which a holistic solution should be found; points out that the refugee crisis, in the Union as well as in neighbouring countries, arising from the Syrian conflict has not been solved yet; notes that this crisis escalated in 2015 and has continued in 2016, with a sudden and massive increase in the numbers of refugees and migrants fleeing to the Union to seek asylum; stresses that this has further impacted on the internal crisis; underlines that the Union budget provided immediate response to the crisis and should be strongly revised upwards in order to effectively finance the implementation of EU policies to deal with this crisis, and should serve as part of a European solution to overcome this emergency in the future;

9.  Underlines that the 2017 budget will be impacted by internal and external security challenges, which may also take the form of terrorist threats or extremism, and by the implementation of the shared agenda between the Union and the Member States aimed at securing an EU area of freedom, security and justice; stresses in this context the importance of the EU budgetary instruments, such as the Internal Security Fund (ISF), in order to address the most crucial challenges, including through the strengthening of preventive measures as well as cross-border operational cooperation;

10.  Welcomes the adoption of the EFSI, which will serve as one of the main tools for enhancing investments at EU level and will contribute to stimulating the creation of jobs; notes with satisfaction that a significant number of projects and EIF operations have already been approved and synergies between the EFSI and Horizon 2020 could be detected; calls on the Commission to actively facilitate synergies between different EU funds and set up a tracking system to identify cases of combination of EU funding; insists on the need to properly apply the scoreboard; encourages Member States and private entities to make full use of the financial resources available through the EFSI; recalls that the Union budget provides the backbone of the investment plan by making available the EUR 8 billion required in commitment and payment appropriations for the provisioning of the EFSI guarantee fund, out of which a total of EUR 3,38 billion has already been mobilised in the 2015 and 2016 budgets; recalls that the Global Margin for Commitments was fully utilised for this purpose in 2016, and notes that, according to the EFSI legislative financial statement, the Commission foresees a similar scenario for the draft budget for 2017; reiterates its commitment to reinforce Horizon 2020 and the Connecting Europe Facility through the annual budgetary procedure, in order to compensate the cuts agreed during the EFSI negotiations as much as possible;

11.  Stresses the importance of Horizon 2020, COSME, programmes funding SMEs, Erasmus+, and programmes and policies that support the development of an innovation-friendly environment and contribute to the success of Europe 2020; notes with satisfaction the high absorption rates of Horizon 2020 programmes, but is concerned at the worryingly low average success rate of project financing, which leaves many excellent projects unfinanced; calls on the Member States to explore possibilities of taking over those Horizon 2020 projects that received a positive evaluation but cannot be cofinanced owing to unavailability of budget funds; recalls the important role of small and medium-sized enterprises as the backbone of the European economy; underlines that the EU budget should further facilitate SMEs’ access to markets and funding through existing programmes such as COSME; reiterates that the Union's future is connected to its power to innovate in key strategic sectors in order to achieve European competitiveness in the global economy;

12.  Considers the Youth Employment Initiative (YEI), in particular, to be a fundamental contribution to the Union’s priority objective for jobs and growth; reiterates its commitment to continued funding for this programme with a view to scaling it up and thereby offering a greater number of young people, including young migrants entering the EU, the prospect of effectively entering the labour market by receiving a good quality offer of employment, continued education or apprenticeship; regrets that during the negotiations on the EU budget for 2016 no new commitments were allocated to further finance the YEI, while youth unemployment remains at its highest rates in the EU; recalls that this objective must be considered together with the need to promote mobility among young people, as supported by the Erasmus+ programme; highlights the importance of the joint statement of the three institutions (Parliament, the Council and the Commission) on the budget for 2016 that states that 'reducing youth unemployment remains a high and shared political priority’, and that to this end the three institutions ‘reaffirm their determination to make the best possible use of budgetary resources available to tackle it, and in particular the Youth Employment Initiative’; notes that despite the initial delays in the implementation of this initiative and the continuing procrastination in designating authorities for YEI operational programmes in many Member States, the current implementation figures indicate a full absorption capacity; calls on the Commission to present its evaluation of the YEI at the latest by the end of April 2016, and at all events in time for the inclusion of a prolongation of the programme in the EU budget for 2017; stresses that a permanent solution for the funding of YEI through new commitment appropriations up to 2020 will be part of the mid-term revision of the MFF; underlines, in this context, the importance of the provision of the European Global Adjustment Fund (EGF) concerning support for young people aged up to 25 who are not in employment, education or training (NEETs), in equal numbers to workers receiving support in regions with high youth unemployment;

13.  Highlights that according to the recent report by Save the Children, 27 million children are currently at risk of poverty in the EU; recalls Parliament’s resolution of 24 November 2015(10) advocating the establishment of a child guarantee in order to lift children out of poverty, provide for an environment suitable for their personal development, and avoid their being exploited and socially excluded; welcomes the efforts of those Member States which have recently adopted child poverty reduction strategies with a view to reducing overall poverty levels, including for children and young people; calls on the Commission to ensure that Member States respect the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and the principles of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union; considers education, childcare, health services, housing and security to be basic needs to which every European child has the right, including those travelling to Europe among refugees and migrants;

14.  Recalls the importance of European agencies in ensuring the implementation of European legislation and thereby accomplishing EU policy objectives related to competitiveness, growth and employment on the one hand, and in managing the current migration and refugee crisis on the other; insists, therefore, that adequate financial and human resources will be provided for both administrative and operational expenditure to allow the agencies to fulfil their assigned tasks and deliver the best possible results; recalls, with regard to the migration and refugee crisis, the increases in staff and appropriations for the Justice and Home Affairs Agencies in the 2015 and 2016 budgets; underlines, however, that further increases will be necessary in the 2017 budget to enable those agencies to cope with their increased workload and additional tasks; calls, furthermore, on the Commission to provide updated and consolidated information and a medium and long-term strategy regarding those agencies;

15.  Is concerned at the persistence of socio-economic inequalities and the difficulties in reaching the EU's goal of socio-economic convergence; highlights that the Union budget should promote policies of convergence, integration and cohesion, based on safeguarding and promoting entrepreneurship, the creation of decent, quality and stable jobs, sustainable use of natural resources and the protection of the environment by pursuing its objectives under the Europe 2020 strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth; is particularly concerned at the lower than expected implementation of payment appropriations for the Fund for European Aid for the Most Deprived (FEAD);

16.  Recognises the importance of the school milk and school fruit programmes, and suggests analysing to what extent an increase in their funding would be possible; recalls the numerous crises in recent years, among them the agricultural crisis in particular due to the effects of the Russian embargo; urges further work to make EU agriculture climate-proof while overall reducing agricultural GHG emissions and ensuring the economic viability of the sector;

17.  Acknowledges that in spite of the mobilisation of significant budgetary means spread over 2015 and 2016 to address the migration and refugee crisis, a solution has still not been found, be it internally within the Union or externally in refugees’ countries of origin; stresses, however, that the budgetary means are insufficient and that substantial additional financial means are required to address this crisis, as the increase in numbers of refugees and migrants cannot be considered a temporary phenomenon; highlights that longer-term solutions should be sought, not only in the annual budgetary procedure, but also in the upcoming interim revision of the MFF; urges the Commission to present a medium- and long-term political and financial plan to deal with the migration crisis and its impact on the 2017 budget; notes that all EU-funded measures should be regarded as investments to tackle the refugee and migration challenges; highlights the need to address the root causes of the migration phenomenon by improving living conditions, particularly through better education and medical services as well as enhanced support for investments in infrastructure in migrants’ countries of origin or countries where they first seek shelter; stresses that the financing of the migration and refugee crisis should not undermine or hinder the implementation of other important EU policies; underlines in this light that solidarity is an underlying principle of the EU budget; is concerned that in the refugee crisis solidarity is being manifested unevenly across the Member States; reiterates the call for the Commission to come up with a proposal as to how the EU budget can prompt Member States towards a more balanced approach to solidarity;

18.  Expresses its deep concern at the lack of adequate protection for unaccompanied minors all along the route to a safe place and calls for a thorough investigation into the case of the 10 000 missing children reported by EUROPOL;

19.  Stresses the importance of enhanced financing for resettlement schemes, relocation procedures and return operations, notably under the Asylum, Migration and Immigration Fund (AMIF), in order to achieve an effective European asylum and migration policy while preventing and reducing irregular migration; underlines the need to create possibilities within the EU budget in order to develop resettlement areas and safe zones on the African continent and in the Middle East, in cooperation with the African Union, the Arab League and UNHCR;

20.  Notes the setting-up of the Union Regional Trust Fund in Response to the Syrian Crisis and of the Emergency Trust Fund for stability and addressing the root causes of irregular migration and displacement of people in Africa; urges the Member States to stand by their promises and match the EU contribution to these funds, which amounts to EUR 2,3 billion; is deeply concerned at the low level of financial contributions from Member States; stresses that further financial efforts will be needed to provide humanitarian assistance along the transit routes and to manage the challenges posed by increasing numbers of refugees; points out that lack of adequate funding for humanitarian aid, including for health and education measures in camps, has promoted more refugees to embark on the risky journey to the EU; recalls that the above funds were created in response to the lack of flexibility and funding in the EU budget; insists that the actions undertaken to tackle the migration and refugee problem should not come at the cost of the EU’s development policies in other areas, and that the accountability rules for all EU actions in this field have to be followed;

21.  Underlines that the Member States have reconfirmed their commitment, at the informal meeting of EU Heads of State and Government held to discuss migration on 23 September 2015, the European Council of 15 October 2015, and the Valletta summit of 11-12 November 2015; attaches utmost importance to the Council's public statements concerning the response to the unprecedented migration and refugee crisis; expects the Council to fulfil the expectations raised by its own statements and decisions, particularly related to Member States’ contributions matching the EU budget support to the Madad and the Africa Trust Funds, as well as fully implementing the Commission's proposal on the Refugee Facility for Turkey; acknowledges that some Member States additionally contribute via other humanitarian aid schemes, such as the World Food Programme and UNHCR;

22.  Welcomes the principle and objectives of the envisaged EUR 3 billion Facility for Refugees in Turkey, and urges each Member State to fulfil its political pledges and provide adequate financial support in the package of the Facility for Refugees in Turkey; is strongly determined to apply all political and institutional means of pressure in order to ensure that Member States deliver on their commitment regarding their contributions to the Regional Trust Fund for Syria, the Emergency Trust Fund for Africa and the Refugee Facility for Turkey; expects the Commission to explain how the Union contribution should be made available within the respective ceilings of the Union budget for 2016 and 2017; criticises the fact that the Council and Commission excluded Parliament from the deliberations on the setting-up of the facility and the mobilisation of the Union’s contribution, as shown by the Commission’s announcement of its intention to finance the Union contribution by redeployment from the recently adopted Union budget for 2016 and by pre-empting the margins of the 2017 budget; underlines, in addition, the need to increase the impact of EU external spending; calls on the Commission to draw up proposals as to how the synergies between the EU external funding instruments can be enhanced and their strategic approach made more coherent; considers those trust funds, as well as the Facility for Refugees, to be neither inside nor outside the EU budget, therefore lacking the necessary accountability and democratic process prescribed by the Community method, and intends therefore to closely monitor the setting up of the funds and facility and their implementation; underlines that the above actions are a clear infringement of Parliament’s rights as an arm of the budgetary authority;

23.  Draws attention to the fact that the geopolitical situation in the Eastern Neighbourhood is fragile, and calls on the EU to provide enhanced support to countries that are currently implementing Association Agreements, in order to advance reforms and ensure the deepening of the relations between the EU and the respective countries;

Payments

24.  Recalls that in the budgets for 2015 and 2016 the Commission has in many cases refrained from asking for additional payment appropriations for a number of its crisis responses (frontloading of EUR 2 billion for Greece, first initiatives in the area of migration), instead reverting to the redeployment of already existing resources; stresses that this has increased the burden on payment appropriations in 2016 and beyond, potentially re-creating a situation where appropriations may not be sufficient to meet the actual needs of financial programmes across headings, impacting project leaders and citizens directly; is concerned that this situation, added to the delay in starting the implementation of programmes under shared management, could re-create the conditions which led, at the end of the last MFF, to an unprecedented level of RALs and an unsustainable backlog of outstanding payment claims; recalls its longstanding position that unforeseen payment needs should be financed with fresh appropriations;

25.  Calls for the full implementation of the joint statements on payments agreed between Parliament, the Council and the Commission in 2015 and 2016; recalls the commitment to hold in the course of this year at least three interinstitutional meetings on payments in order to take stock of payment implementation and revised forecasts; notes that the Commission has announced a 2015 end-of-year backlog of EUR 8,2 billion, which is almost half of what it had originally anticipated; intends to raise this issue at the first interinstitutional meeting on payments in March 2016, in order to determine the causes of this divergence and the possible long-term impact on payment forecasts; expects that in its reading of the 2017 Union budget the Council will take on board and fully respect the amounts confirmed at the April 2016 meeting; urges the Commission to provide Parliament and the Council, as agreed in the joint statement adopted in the framework of the budgetary procedure for 2016, with longer-term forecasts for the expected evolution of payments up to the end of the MFF 2014-2020, in order to avoid a payment backlog in the second half of the MFF;

26.  Highlights that the implementation of the European Structural and Investment Funds is expected to reach cruising speed in 2017, and warns against an underbudgeting of payment appropriations to match this increased absorption level; encourages the Commission to set the payments at the necessary levels in its draft budget; expresses its concern at the late adoption of the operational programmes and at the risk of build-up of a new backlog of unpaid bills over the second half of the MFF; encourages the Commission to work actively with the Member States, and urges the latter to make every effort to ensure the swift designation of programme authorities, the absence of which has been the main cause of the current delays; welcomes the Commission's availability to collaborate closely with Member States upon request, in particular regarding the adjustment, as appropriate, of the operational programmes to allow for a stronger synergy between the European Structural and Investment Funds and the domestic challenges linked to the refugee crisis;

Further issues of particular relevance

27.  Recalls the importance of gender mainstreaming, which should underpin Union policies as a horizontal principle; calls on the Commission to put the principle of gender mainstreaming into practice when preparing the draft budget for 2017, as appropriate;

28.  Welcomes the agreement reached on 12 December 2015 in Paris by the 196 parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change on a universal, binding, dynamic and differentiated agreement to face the challenge of climate change; regrets, however, the fact that there is no clarity on how donor countries will meet the yearly USD 100 billion goal to support developing countries, or in particular on how they will agree on a common methodology to account for climate finance; notes that this issue is to be resolved before COP 22 in Marrakesh, and expects the Commission to deliver a consolidated EU regulatory framework which fully complies with all the commitments made in Paris and anticipates such financing in its draft budget for 2017; recalls that the EU has agreed that at least 20 % of its budget for 2014-2020, in other words as much as EUR 180 billion, should be spent on climate-related actions and that a ‘climate fine‑tuning’ of the EU budget is needed; asks the Commission to continue supporting EU spending on sustainable efficient infrastructure and sustainable modes of transport; encourages the Commission to swiftly implement the Council conclusions of 17 November 2015 with regard to climate and cohesion policy funds;

29.  Welcomes the Commission’s efforts in developing the ‘EU Budget Focused on Results’ strategy; calls on the Commission to demonstrate progress in the field of simplification of EU funding, especially with regard to reducing the burden of implementation and management of EU-funded projects; stresses that particular attention should be paid to the performance of financial instruments which can reach out to important target groups, such as SMEs, innovative enterprises and microenterprises under the Union funding programmes; believes, furthermore, that, apart from the Union institutions, considerable responsibility also lies with the Member States, given the fact that 80 % of the budget is under ‘shared management’; calls on the Member States, therefore, to do their utmost to guarantee sound financial management and the reduction of errors, and to avoid any delays in the implementation of programmes under their responsibility; emphasises the need to focus more on developing suitable quantitative and qualitative output indicators in order to measure performance and evolve a concrete picture of the effect of EU spending in the real economy; calls on all Member States to promote and put in place concrete measures for actively fighting corruption in public procurements and tenders;

30.  Confirms its support for the international ITER research and engineering programme, and is committed to securing appropriate financing for it; is concerned, however, that further delays and additional costs may arise regarding this programme, as well as at the related potential repercussions for the Union budget; regrets, therefore, that it was unable to assess the level of the 2016 ITER appropriations against the updated payment plan and schedule; expects this revised plan to be included in the preparation of the draft budget for 2017; calls for a proper accountability mechanism that will offer a clear overview of the amount in financial resources provided for the international project and will evaluate the efficiency of their use;

31.  Recalls that the final agreement on the MFF 2014-2020, as enshrined in Article 2 of the MFF Regulation, includes a compulsory review of the MFF 2014-2020, to be accompanied by a legislative proposal for revision of the MFF by the end of 2016; stresses that the purpose of the review/revision is to assess the qualitative and quantitative functioning of the MFF and to address systemic shortcomings of the Union budget, as well as to ensure that the Union is granted sufficient resources to effectively address internal and external crises and finance evolving political priorities for the second half of the current MFF; stresses that the Council should live up to the expectations raised by the statements and decisions of the European Council; underlines in this respect that the Council should take on responsibility for ensuring that the necessary appropriations are made available to respond to the financing of new tasks and unforeseen circumstances, including through an upward revision of the MFF ceilings; intends to take a consistent approach in the negotiations on the 2017 budget and the revision of the MFF; expresses its strong doubts whether the crises in question can be funded within the constraints of the current MFF; highlights in addition that the revision of the MFF in 2016 is an opportunity to adapt its means and to extend flexibility within it;

32.  Reiterates its position in favour of the necessary in-depth reform of the system of Union own resources, and gives the highest political importance to the work of the High Level Group on Own Resources created as part of the MFF 2014-2020 agreement; expects the Commission and the Council to take on board the final outcome, which is expected by the end of 2016, including any new candidate for own resources; recalls that the leading idea behind the own resources reform is to make the revenue side of the Union budget more autonomous as well as more stable, simpler, fairer, more sustainable and more predictable, while also alleviating the burden of excessive spending from national budgets and improving transparency and visibility for the citizens without increasing the overall tax burden for citizens; believes that if there is to be a completely independent EU budget, genuine own resources have to be put in place;

o
o   o

33.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission and the European Court of Auditors.

(1) OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 884. (2) OJ C 373, 20.12.2013, p. 1. (3) OJ L 298, 26.10.2012, p. 1. (4) Texts adopted, P8_TA(2015)0407. (5) OJ L 48, 24.2.2016. (6) See Annex to Parliament’s legislative resolution of 25 November 2015 (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2015)0407). (7) See Annex II to Parliament’s resolution of 8 July 2015 (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2015)0263). (8) http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/eeip/pdf/ip011_en.pdf (9) http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/pdf/2016/ags2016_annual_growth_survey.pdf (10) Texts adopted, P8_TA(2015)0401.

European Parliament decision of 9 March 2016 on the conclusion of an Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making between the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission (2016/2005(ACI))

P8_TA(2016)0081 A8-0039/2016

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the decision of the Conference of Presidents of 16 December 2015,

–   having regard to the draft Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making between the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission,

–  having regard to Article 17(1) of the Treaty on European Union,

–   having regard to Article 295 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal for an Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Regulation (COM(2015)0216 and the annexes thereto),

–  having regard to the Framework Agreement of 20 October 2010 on relations between the European Parliament and the European Commission(1) ("the 2010 Framework Agreement"),

–  having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 16 December 2003 on Better Law-making between the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the Commission of the European Communities(2) ('the 2003 Interinstitutional Agreement'),

–  having regard to its resolution of 4 February 2014 on EU Regulatory Fitness and Subsidiarity and Proportionality – 19th report on Better Lawmaking covering the year 2011(3),

–  having regard to its resolution of 16 September 2015 on the Commission Work Programme 2016(4),

–  having regard to the conclusions of the European Council of 18 and 19 February 2016,

–  having regard to Rule 140(1) of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs (A8-0039/2016),

A.  whereas Parliament has repeatedly called for the 2003 Interinstitutional Agreement to be renegotiated in order to take into account the new legislative environment created by the Treaty of Lisbon, consolidate current best practices, and bring that agreement up to date in line with the ‘better law-making’ agenda;

B.  whereas the Committee of the Regions, the European Economic and Social Committee and various national parliaments have expressed their views on the Commission's Communication of 19 May 2015 on Better regulation for better results – An EU agenda (COM(2015)0215), the above-mentioned Commission proposal for an Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Regulation or the consensus reached between the institutions on a new Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making;

C.  whereas, in its above-mentioned resolution of 16 September 2015, Parliament welcomed the opening of negotiations for a new interinstitutional agreement on better law-making and set out a number of priorities, notably as regards the quality of the Commission’s legislative drafting, multiannual and annual programming, the strengthening of impact assessment of draft laws, equal treatment of the two branches of the legislative authority throughout the legislative process in terms of access to information, proper interinstitutional consultations, the Commission's follow-up to Parliament’s proposals and recommendations and the provision of detailed justifications for each envisaged withdrawal;

D.  whereas interinstitutional negotiations were formally opened on 25 June 2015;

E.  whereas, on 16 December 2015, the Conference of President endorsed, by a majority vote, the provisional agreement that had been reached between negotiators of the three institutions on 8 December 2015 on the wording of a new Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making ("the new IIA");

F.  whereas the new IIA aims to replace the 2003 Interinstitutional Agreement and the Interinstitutional Common Approach to Impact Assessment of November 2005, and whereas the Annex to the new IIA is intended to replace the 2011 Common Understanding on Delegated Acts;

G.  whereas, in accordance with the declaration of the European Parliament and the Commission set out in Annex II to this decision, the new IIA is without prejudice to the 2010 Framework Agreement;

H.  whereas, nevertheless, certain provisions of the 2010 Framework Agreement may become obsolete or may need to be brought up to date as a result of the new IIA;

I.  whereas the new IIA envisages further interinstitutional negotiations, notably on practical arrangements for cooperation and information-sharing in the context of the conclusion of international agreements and on criteria for the application of Articles 290 and 291 of the TFEU on delegated and implementing acts respectively;

J.  whereas certain provisions of Parliament's Rules of Procedure will need to be adapted as a consequence of the new IIA, such as those relating to the Commission Work Programme and verification of the legal basis of acts;

K.  whereas the new IIA addresses, in one way or another, the main concerns expressed by Parliament's Committee on Constitutional Affairs in its “Contribution of AFCO to the position of the European Parliament for the negotiations on the revision of the Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making" of 22 April 2015;

1.  Welcomes the agreement reached between the institutions and considers this a good basis for establishing and developing a new, more open and transparent relationship between them with a view to delivering better law-making in the interest of the Union's citizens;

2.  Deeply regrets, in the context of better law-making, that negotiations on the IIA failed to follow established practice in terms of a committee procedure in the European Parliament;

3.  Welcomes, in particular, the results of the negotiations as regards multiannual and annual interinstitutional programming, the Commission's follow-up to Parliament's legislative initiatives, and the provision of justifications for and consultations on envisaged withdrawals of legislative proposals; stresses that the agreed strong focus on the Commission's work programme cannot be understood as justifying any restriction of Parliament's own legislative powers or right of initiative; welcomes the agreed interinstitutional exchange of views in the event that a modification of the legal basis of an act is envisaged, and expresses its strong determination to resist any attempt to undermine the legislative powers of the European Parliament by means of a modification of the legal basis;

4.  Underlines the importance of the new IIA’s provisions on better law-making tools (impact assessments, public and stakeholder consultations, evaluations, etc.) for a well-informed, inclusive and transparent decision-making process and for the correct application of legislation, whilst noting that those provisions safeguard the prerogatives of the legislators; believes that impact assessments must be comprehensive and balanced and should assess, inter alia, the cost to producers, consumers, workers, administrators and to the environment of not adopting the necessary legislation; is concerned that the wording in relation to impact assessments does not sufficiently commit the three institutions to include small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and competitiveness tests in their impact assessments; stresses the importance of taking into account, and paying attention to, the needs of SMEs at all stages of the legislative cycle; underlines that, in accordance with the Commission Staff Working Document of 19 May 2015 on Better Regulation guidelines (SWD(2015)0111), the assessment of the impact on SME shall be included in impact assessment reports and calls on the Commission to provide supplementary information on this practice; welcomes the aim of improving the implementation and application of Union legislation, inter alia through better identification of national measures that are not required by the Union legislation that is to be transposed ("gold-plating"), and, whilst bearing in mind that Member States are free to apply higher standards if only minimum standards are defined by Union law, expects Member States to clearly indicate and document such measures;

5.  Notes that the cumulative cost of legislation can result in significant difficulties for businesses and individuals affected by Union rules;

6.  Takes note of the letter of 15 December 2015 from the First Vice President of the Commission on the functioning of the new Regulatory Scrutiny Board, which is to oversee the quality of the Commission's impact assessments (but without giving it a power of veto over legislative proposals, which is a matter for the elected authorities); recalls that, in its resolution of 27 November 2014 on the revision of the Commission’s impact assessment guidelines and the role of the SME test(5), it requested that the independence of the Regulatory Scrutiny Board (formerly 'Impact Assessment Board') be strengthened including, in particular, that members of the Board should not be subject to political control; believes, in this respect, that the establishment of the Regulatory Scrutiny Board is a welcome first step in achieving independence thereof; points out that the legislators may also carry out their own impact assessments where they consider this necessary; notes that impact assessments do not replace the political decision-making process; underlines, furthermore, that the new IIA provides for exchanges of information between the institutions on best practice and methodologies relating to impact assessments, thereby providing an opportunity to review in due time the functioning of the Regulatory Scrutiny Board with a view to achieving a common methodology;

7.  Welcomes the agreement between the institutions to cooperate in order to update and simplify legislation and to exchange views thereon, prior to the finalisation of the Commission Work Programme; underlines the importance of the agreed "Annual Burden Survey" as a tool to identify and monitor, in a clear and transparent manner, the results of the Union's efforts, in order to avoid and reduce any overregulation and administrative burdens, which should include a list relating specifically to SME's and should distinguish between burdens that individual Commission proposals seek to impose and acts by individual Member States; points out that the feasibility and desirability of establishing objectives for the reduction of burdens in specific sectors must be carefully evaluated on a case-by-case basis in close cooperation between the institutions, while focusing on the quality of legislation, and without undermining relevant Union standards; expects the Commission to propose, on a regular basis, the repeal of legal acts where such repeal is deemed to be necessary; welcomes in this respect the fact that the three institutions have agreed that impact assessments should also address the impact of proposals on administrative burdens, particularly as regards SMEs; recognises that appropriate Union legislation can cut administrative burdens for SME's by replacing 28 divergent sets of rules with a single set of rules for the internal market;

8.  Believes that, in principle, a balanced solution has been found with regard to delegated and implementing acts, ensuring transparency and parity between legislators, but points to the need for a swift agreement on appropriate criteria for delineating delegated and implementing acts and a prompt alignment of all basic acts to the legal framework introduced by the Treaty of Lisbon;

9.  Acknowledges that the agreed measures to improve the mutual exchange of views and information between Parliament and the Council in their capacity as legislators constitute a step forward; considers, however, that those measures should be developed further, particularly in terms of mutual access to information and meetings, so as to ensure a truly equal balance and equal treatment between the legislators throughout the legislative procedure, and to guarantee that the principle of mutual sincere cooperation among institutions is complied with; warns that the agreed informal exchanges of views should not develop into a new arena of non-transparent interinstitutional negotiations;

10.  Recalls that the TFEU establishes an ordinary legislative procedure with three readings; points out that, where Parliament and the Council fully exercise their prerogatives in the legislative procedure, second-reading agreements should be the standard procedure whereas first reading agreements should be used only where a considered and explicit decision has been taken to do so;

11.  Welcomes the commitment to ensure transparency of legislative procedures, but underlines the need for more concrete provisions and tools to achieve this, in particular as regards the use of first-reading agreements;

12.  Believes, also, that better use should be made of the arrangements for political dialogue with national parliaments; highlights, in this connection, the important role given to national parliaments by the Lisbon Treaty and stresses that, alongside the role which they play in monitoring respect for the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality, they can and do make positive contributions in the framework of the political dialogue; encourages better use of the existing subsidiarity and proportionality mechanisms as laid down in the Treaties; emphasises the need for greater flexibility in the enforcement of the eight week deadline for national parliaments to issue a reasoned opinion on non-compliance with the principle of subsidiarity;

13.  Calls for a comprehensive evaluation of the impact that the new IIA will have on the 2010 Framework Agreement and other related existing interinstitutional agreements, bearing in mind the need to safeguard the European Parliament's position and prerogatives and to simplify the architecture of the numerous arrangements regulating interinstitutional relations;

14.  Considers that such simplification should be carried through once all practical arrangements to implement the new IIA in its entirety are in place, at which point the institutions could also evaluate whether adjustments to the new IIA may be necessary in light of experience gained up until that point in time with the implementation of the new IIA;

15.  Underlines the importance of proper implementation and of ensuring that the commitments given and the deadlines set out in the new IIA are honoured;

16.  Points out that the following issues in particular need further follow-up at technical and/or political level, with the active involvement, and drawing on the expertise, of all parliamentary committees having the relevant experience:

17.  Approves the draft agreement contained in Annex I to this decision;

18.  Approves the statement by Parliament and the Commission contained in Annex II to this decision;

19.  Asks its competent committee to examine the extent to which amendments or interpretation of the Rules of Procedure or changes to Parliament's practices, administration and channels of contact with other institutions are necessary for the implementation of the new IIA;

20.  Instructs its President to sign the new IIA with the President of the Council and the President of the Commission and to arrange for its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union;

21.  Instructs its President to forward this decision, including its annexes, to the Council and the Commission for information.

ANNEX I

Interinstitutional Agreement between the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission on Better Law-Making

(The text of this annex is not reproduced here since it corresponds to the interinstitutional agreement as published in OJ L 123, 12.5.2016, p. 1.)

ANNEX II

STATEMENT OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COMMISSION ON THE OCCASION OF THE ADOPTION OF THE INTERINSTITUTIONAL AGREEMENT ON BETTER LAW-MAKING

The European Parliament and the Commission consider that this Agreement reflects the balance between, and respective competences of, the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission as set out in the Treaties.

It is without prejudice to the Framework Agreement of 20 October 2010 on relations between the European Parliament and the European Commission(7).

(1) OJ L 304, 20.11.2010, p. 47. (2) OJ C 321, 31.12.2003, p. 1. (3) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2014)0061. (4) Texts adopted, P8_TA(2015)0323. (5) Texts adopted, P8_TA(2014)0069. (6) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2014)0127. (7) OJ L 304, 20.11.2010, p. 47.

European Parliament resolution of 9 March 2016 on the tobacco agreement (PMI agreement) (2016/2555(RSP))

P8_TA(2016)0082 RC-B8-0312/2016

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Anti-Contraband and Anti-Counterfeit Agreement and General Release of 9 July 2004 among Philip Morris International (PMI) and affiliates, the Union and its Member States,

–  having regard to Directive 2014/40/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 3 April 2014 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning the manufacture, presentation and sale of tobacco and related products and repealing Directive 2001/37/EC(1),

–  having regard to the World Health Organisation Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (the ‘WHO FCTC’) and to the Protocol to Eliminate Illicit Trade in Tobacco Products, adopted during the fifth session of the Conference of the Parties to the WHO FCTC by Decision FCTC/COP5(1) of 12 November 2012,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal of 4 May 2015 for a Council decision on the conclusion, on behalf of the European Union, of the Protocol to Eliminate Illicit Trade in Tobacco Products to the World Health Organisation’s Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, in so far as the provisions of the Protocol which fall under Title V of Part III of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union are concerned (COM(2015)0193),

–  having regard to the Commission staff working document of 24 February 2016 entitled ‘Technical assessment of the experience made with the Anti-Contraband and Anti‑Counterfeit Agreement and General Release of 9 July 2004 among Philip Morris International and affiliates, the Union and its Member States’ (SWD(2016)0044),

–  having regard to its resolution of 11 October 2007 on the implications of the agreement between the Community, Member States and Philip Morris on intensifying the fight against fraud and cigarette smuggling and progress made in implementing the recommendations of Parliament’s Committee of Inquiry into the Community Transit System(2),

–  having regard to the question to the Commission on the tobacco agreement (PMI agreement) (O-000010/2016 – B8-0109/2016),

–  having regard to Rules 128(5) and 123(4) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.  whereas protection of the EU’s financial interests is one of the Commission’s key priorities, and whereas illicit trade in tobacco products, in particular smuggling of contraband and counterfeit cigarettes, costs national and EU budgets, at a conservative estimate, more than EUR 10 billion in lost public revenue per year;

B.  whereas illicit trade is a serious crime that contributes to the funding of other international organised criminal activities, including human, drugs and arms trafficking, and, in some cases, terrorist groups;

C.  whereas the core aim of the PMI agreement is to reduce the prevalence of PMI contraband on the illicit EU tobacco market;

D.  whereas the PMI agreement is set to expire on 9 July 2016;

E.  whereas the Commission’s technical assessment of the PMI agreement concludes that this core objective has been met effectively, but questions the causality of this result and points out that the reduction in PMI contraband has not led to an overall reduction in the number of illicit products on the EU market;

F.  whereas the PMI agreement has provided financial benefits to public revenue of approximately USD 1 billion in annual payments and EUR 68,2 million in seizure payments, divided between the Commission (approximately 10 %) and the Member States (approximately 90 %); whereas there are no data on how the Member States have spent the revenue received under the agreement;

G.  whereas both the legal framework and the market environment of the illicit tobacco trade have changed substantially since the signing of the agreement, in particular as regards the increased presence of non-branded cigarettes, often referred to as ‘cheap whites’, and the development of the new area of liquid nicotine sales for e-cigarettes;

H.  whereas Cases C-358/14 Poland v Parliament and Council, C-477/14 Pillbox 38 (UK) Limited and C-547/14 Philip Morris Brands SARL and Others, which challenge Directive 2014/40/EU, are currently before the Court of Justice and should be withdrawn by the tobacco manufacturers in question at the earliest opportunity;

I.  whereas the Commission has committed to ratification of the WHO FCTC Protocol to Eliminate Illicit Trade in Tobacco Products, which is a major step towards strengthening the legal framework for the fight against illicit trade in tobacco products; whereas the Commission has undertaken to invite third countries to ratify the Protocol;

J.  whereas tobacco smuggling undermines EU public health policies and means that illicit tobacco products are available – including to young people – at a substantial illegal discount in many places; whereas not only are counterfeit cigarettes illegally manufactured and imported, but they contain unknown ingredients, thus constituting a serious health risk;

1.  Welcomes the WHO FCTC Protocol to Eliminate Illicit Trade in Tobacco Products, and calls for the ratification process to be completed as soon as possible;

2.  Welcomes the Commission’s proposal to ratify the Protocol, and its undertaking to invite Member States and third countries to ratify it; notes that 15 countries have ratified the Protocol so far, including five EU Member States, and that the EU is currently preparing to ratify it;

3.  Urges the Commission to pursue prompt ratification of the Protocol; believes, however, that renewal of the agreement would send a damaging and counterproductive message to third countries that the EU engages in inappropriate interactions with the tobacco industry even though the Protocol clearly prohibits such interactions;

4.  Expresses its belief that renewal of the PMI agreement may not be compatible with the EU’s obligations under Article 5.3 of the WHO FCTC, which could damage the EU’s reputation as a global leader on tobacco control;

5.  Points out that the Guidelines for implementation of Article 5.3 of the WHO FCTC state that ‘[t]here is a fundamental and irreconcilable conflict between the tobacco industry’s interests and public health policy interests’;

6.  Welcomes the adoption of Directive 2014/40/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 3 April 2014 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning the manufacture, presentation and sale of tobacco and related products and repealing Directive 2001/37/EC (the Tobacco Products Directive); stresses that the Tobacco Products Directive already provides for a legal requirement for tobacco companies to introduce and maintain a track-and-trace system which must be operational for cigarettes and roll-your-own tobacco products from 20 May 2019, and for other tobacco products from 20 May 2024;

7.  Emphasises that the Commission must take immediate steps to ensure the full transposition of the Tobacco Products Directive in all Member States; notes that several Member States have informally indicated to the Commission that the transposition process for the directive has been completed; calls on the Commission to provide full information on the state of play of transposition following the expiry of the deadline of 20 May 2016;

8.  Recalls that in May 2015 the Commission promised to deliver its assessment of the agreement with PMI as soon as possible; stresses that the Commission postponed the publication of the assessment several times and that it was finally published on 24 February 2016, one day before a plenary debate on the issue in Parliament; firmly considers such delayed publication to constitute a serious failure on the part of the Commission to meet its obligations of transparency, both to Parliament and to citizens, thus undermining Parliament’s capacity to express its view in a timely manner on this complex and delicate matter;

9.  Takes note of the Commission’s assessment that the PMI agreement has met effectively its objective of reducing the prevalence of PMI contraband on the illicit EU tobacco market, as shown by a drop of around 85 % in the volume of genuine PMI cigarettes seized by Member States between 2006 and 2014; notes, however, that the Commission questions the causality of this result, and also highlights the fact that the reduction in PMI contraband has not led to an overall reduction in the number of illicit products on the EU market; notes that contraband consisting of smuggled products from the large manufacturers has been increasingly replaced by other products, including non-branded cigarettes (‘cheap whites’) typically produced in third countries;

10.  Is deeply concerned that the budget of the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) is partly financed by yearly payments from the tobacco industry, as mentioned in the tobacco agreements, since this could lead to a certain conflict of interest;

11.  Emphasises that, when first concluded in 2004, the PMI agreement was an innovative instrument in tackling the illicit tobacco trade, but stresses that the market and regulatory environment have experienced substantial changes since then; stresses that the agreement does not address important characteristics of the illicit tobacco trade today, in particular the high proportion of the trade that is now made up of ‘cheap whites’; is therefore of the opinion that all the elements covered in the agreement with PMI will be covered by the new legal framework made up of the Tobacco Products Directive and the WHO FCTC Protocol;

12.  Concludes, therefore, that the agreement with PMI should not be renewed, extended or renegotiated; asks the Commission not to renew, extend or renegotiate it beyond its current date of expiry;

13.  Urges the Commission to put in place, at EU level and by the date of expiry of the PMI agreement, all the necessary measures to track and trace PMI tobacco products, and to bring legal action for any illegal seizures of this manufacturer’s products until all provisions of the Tobacco Products Directive are fully enforceable, so that there is no regulatory gap between the expiry of the PMI agreement and the entry into force of the TPD and FCTC;

14.  Calls on PMI to continue to apply the track-and-trace and due diligence (‘know your customer’) provisions contained in the current agreement, regardless of whether or not it is extended;

15.  Expresses concern that the four agreements with tobacco manufacturers do not deal with the issue of ‘cheap whites’; calls on the Commission, therefore, to come forward with an action plan setting out new measures to tackle this problem as a matter of urgency;

16.  Calls on the Commission to bring forward a new, additional regulation establishing an independent track-and-trace system and applying due diligence (‘know your customer’) provisions to raw cut tobacco, filters and papers used by the tobacco industry, as an additional tool to combat contraband and counterfeit products;

17.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States, and the Secretariat of the World Health Organisation Framework Convention on Tobacco Control.

(1) OJ L 127, 29.4.2014, p. 1. (2) OJ C 227 E, 4.9.2008, p. 147.