European Parliament legislative resolution of 4 October 2017 on the draft Council decision on the conclusion, on behalf of the European Union, of the Agreement establishing the EU-LAC International Foundation (11342/2016 – C8-0458/2016 – 2016/0217(NLE))

P8_TA(2017)0368 A8-0279/2017

(Consent)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the draft Council decision (11342/2016),

–  having regard to the draft Agreement establishing the EU-LAC International Foundation (11356/2016),

–  having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Article 209(2), Article 212(1), Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a), and Article 218(8), second subparagraph, of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C8-0458/2016),

–  having regard to Rule 99(1) and (4) and Rule 108(7) of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on Foreign Affairs (A8-0279/2017),

1.  Gives its consent to 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 and of the member countries of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC).

European Parliament legislative resolution of 4 October 2017 on the draft Council decision on the putting into effect of certain provisions of the Schengen acquis relating to the Visa Information System in the Republic of Bulgaria and Romania (10161/2017 – C8-0224/2017 – 2017/0808(CNS))

P8_TA(2017)0369 A8-0286/2017

(Consultation)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Council draft (10161/2017),

–  having regard to Article 4(2) of the Act of Accession of the Republic of Bulgaria and Romania, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C8‑0224/2017),

–  having regard to Rule 78c of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (A8-0286/2017),

1.  Approves the Council draft;

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 and the Commission.

European Parliament legislative resolution of 4 October 2017 on the draft Council implementing decision on the launch of automated data exchange with regard to vehicle registration data in the Czech Republic (09893/2017 – C8-0197/2017 – 2017/0806(CNS))

P8_TA(2017)0370 A8-0288/2017

(Consultation)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Council draft (09893/2017),

–  having regard to Article 39(1) of the Treaty on European Union, as amended by the Treaty of Amsterdam, and Article 9 of Protocol No 36 on transitional provisions, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C8‑0197/2017),

–  having regard to Council Decision 2008/615/JHA of 23 June 2008 on the stepping up of cross-border cooperation, particularly in combating terrorism and cross-border crime(1), and in particular Article 33 thereof,

–  having regard to Rule 78c of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (A8-0288/2017),

1.  Approves the Council draft;

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 and the Commission.

(1) OJ L 210, 6.8.2008, p. 1.

European Parliament legislative resolution of 4 October 2017 on the draft Council implementing decision on the launch of automated data exchange with regard to dactyloscopic data in Portugal (09898/2017 – C8-0213/2017 – 2017/0807(CNS))

P8_TA(2017)0371 A8-0289/2017

(Consultation)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Council draft (09898/2017),

–  having regard to Article 39(1) of the Treaty on European Union, as amended by the Treaty of Amsterdam, and Article 9 of Protocol No 36 on transitional provisions, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C8‑0213/2017),

–  having regard to Council Decision 2008/615/JHA of 23 June 2008 on the stepping up of cross-border cooperation, particularly in combating terrorism and cross-border crime(1), and in particular Article 33 thereof,

–  having regard to Rule 78c of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (A8-0289/2017),

1.  Approves the Council draft;

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 and the Commission.

(1) OJ L 210, 6.8.2008, p. 1.

European Parliament legislative resolution of 4 October 2017 on the draft Council implementing decision on the launch of automated data exchange with regard to dactyloscopic data in Greece (10476/2017 – C8-0230/2017 – 2017/0809(CNS))

P8_TA(2017)0372 A8-0287/2017

(Consultation)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Council draft (10476/2017),

–  having regard to Article 39(1) of the Treaty on European Union, as amended by the Treaty of Amsterdam, and Article 9 of Protocol No 36 on transitional provisions, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C8‑0230/2017),

–  having regard to Council Decision 2008/615/JHA of 23 June 2008 on the stepping up of cross-border cooperation, particularly in combating terrorism and cross-border crime(1), and in particular Article 33 thereof,

–  having regard to Rule 78c of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (A8-0287/2017),

1.  Approves the Council draft;

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 and the Commission.

(1) OJ L 210, 6.8.2008, p. 1.

European Parliament legislative resolution of 4 October 2017 on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2009/45/EC on safety rules and standards for passenger ships (COM(2016)0369 – C8-0208/2016 – 2016/0170(COD))

P8_TA(2017)0373 A8-0167/2017

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2016)0369),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 100(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C8‑0208/2016),

–  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 19 October 2016(1),

–  after consulting the Committee of the Regions,

–  having regard to the provisional agreement approved by the committee responsible under Rule 69f(4) of its Rules of Procedure and the undertaking given by the Council representative by letter of 21 June 2017 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 Transport and Tourism and the opinion of the Committee on Legal Affairs (A8-0167/2017),

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

2.  Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it replaces, substantially amends or intends to substantially amend its proposal;

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 4 October 2017 with a view to the adoption of Directive (EU) 2017/… of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2009/45/EC on safety rules and standards for passenger ships

(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Directive (EU) 2017/2108.)

(1) OJ C 34, 2.2.2017, p. 167.

European Parliament legislative resolution of 4 October 2017 on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Directive 98/41/EC on the registration of persons sailing on board passenger ships operating to or from ports of the Member States of the Community and amending Directive 2010/65/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council on reporting formalities for ships arriving in and/or departing from ports of the Member States (COM(2016)0370 – C8-0209/2016 – 2016/0171(COD))

P8_TA(2017)0374 A8-0168/2017

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2016)0370),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 100(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C8-0209/2016),

–  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 19 October 2016(1),

–  after consulting the Committee of the Regions,

–  having regard to the provisional agreement approved by the committee responsible under Rule 69f(4) of its Rules of Procedure and the undertaking given by the Council representative by letter of 21 June 2017 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 Transport and Tourism and the opinion of the Committee of Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (A8-0168/2017),

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

2.  Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it replaces, substantially amends or intends to substantially amend its proposal;

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 4 October 2017 with a view to the adoption of Directive (EU) 2017/… of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Directive 98/41/EC on the registration of persons sailing on board passenger ships operating to or from ports of the Member States of the Community and Directive 2010/65/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council on reporting formalities for ships arriving in and/or departing from ports of the Member States

(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Directive (EU) 2017/2109.)

(1) OJ C 34, 2.2.2017, p. 172.

European Parliament legislative resolution of 4 October 2017 on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on a system of inspections for the safe operation of ro-ro ferry and high-speed passenger craft in regular service and amending Directive 2009/16/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on port State control and repealing Council Directive 1999/35/EC (COM(2016)0371 – C8-0210/2016 – 2016/0172(COD))

P8_TA(2017)0375 A8-0165/2017

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2016)0371),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 100(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C8-0210/2016),

–  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 19 October 2016(1),

–  after consulting the Committee of the Regions,

–  having regard to the provisional agreement approved by the committee responsible under Rule 69f(4) of its Rules of Procedure and the undertaking given by the Council representative by letter of 21 June 2017 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 Transport and Tourism (A8-0165/2017),

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

2.  Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it replaces, substantially amends or intends to substantially amend its proposal;

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 4 October 2017 with a view to the adoption of Directive (EU) 2017/… of the European Parliament and of the Council on a system of inspections for the safe operation of ro-ro passenger ships and high-speed passenger craft in regular service and amending Directive 2009/16/EC and repealing Council Directive 1999/35/EC

(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Directive (EU) 2017/2110.)

(1) OJ C 34, 2.2.2017, p. 176.

European Parliament resolution of 4 October 2017 on the draft Commission regulation amending Annex II to Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 by setting out scientific criteria for the determination of endocrine disrupting properties (D048947/06 – 2017/2801(RPS))

P8_TA(2017)0376 B8-0542/2017

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the draft Commission regulation amending Annex II to Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 by setting out scientific criteria for the determination of endocrine disrupting properties (D048947/06) (‘draft regulation’),

–  having regard to Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market and repealing Council Directives 79/117/EEC and 91/414/EEC(1), in particular Articles 4(1) and 78(1)(a) thereof and the second paragraph of point 3.6.5. and point 3.8.2. of Annex II thereto,

–  having regard to the judgment of the General Court of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 16 December 2015(2), and in particular paragraphs 71 and 72 thereof,

–  having regard to its resolution of 8 June 2016 on endocrine disruptors: state of play following the judgment of the General Court of the European Union of 16 December 2015(3),

–  having regard to the Commission communication of 15 June 2016 on endocrine disruptors and the draft Commission acts setting out scientific criteria for their determination in the context of the EU legislation on plant protection products and biocidal products (COM(2016)0350),

–  having regard to the summary report of the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed held in Brussels on 28 February 2017,

–  having regard to its resolution of 14 March 2013 on the protection of public health from endocrine disrupters(4),

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

–  having regard to the motion for a resolution of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety,

–  having regard to Rule 106(2), (3) and (4)(c) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.  whereas, in accordance with point 3.8.2. of Annex II to Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009, an active substance is only to be approved if it is not considered to have endocrine disrupting properties that may cause adverse effects on non-target organisms, unless the exposure of non-target organisms to that active substance under realistic proposed conditions of use is negligible (cut-off criterion for the environment);

B.  whereas, in accordance with the second paragraph of point 3.6.5. of Annex II to Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009, the Commission is to present to the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health a draft of the measures concerning specific scientific criteria for the determination of endocrine disrupting properties by 14 December 2013;

C.  whereas the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed delivered a positive opinion on the draft regulation on 4 July 2017, with three Member States voting against, and four Member States abstaining;

D.  whereas the last paragraph of the draft regulation stipulates that ‘if the intended plant protection mode of action of the active substance being assessed, consists of controlling target organisms other than vertebrates via their endocrine systems, the effects on organisms of the same taxonomic phylum as the targeted one, shall not be considered for the identification of the substance as having endocrine disrupting properties with respect to non-target organisms’;

E.  whereas the General Court in its judgment in case T-521/14 clearly stated that ‘la spécification des critères scientifiques pour la détermination des propriétés perturbant le système endocrinien ne peut se faire que de manière objective, au regard de données scientifiques relatives audit système, indépendamment de toute autre considération, en particulier économique’(6) (paragraph 71);

F.  whereas it is not scientific to exclude a substance with an intended endocrine mode of action from being identified as an endocrine disrupter for non-target organisms;

G.  whereas the draft regulation can therefore not be considered to be based on objective scientific data related to the endocrine system, as required by the Court; whereas the Commission thereby exceeds its implementing powers;

H.  whereas the actual intention of this last paragraph is clearly spelled out in the summary report of the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed held in Brussels on 28 February 2017, which states that ‘furthermore, the rationale behind the provision on active substances with intended endocrine mode of action (below called growth regulators (GR)) was explained. [...] The provision on GR allows that the cut-off criteria will not be applied to substances with an intended endocrine mode of action [...]’;

I.  whereas this last paragraph effectively creates a derogation from the cut-off criterion laid down in point 3.8.2. of Annex II to Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009;

J.  whereas it is apparent from recitals 6 to 10 and Article 1(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 that, when addressing the complex issue of setting the rules on approving active substances, the legislature had to strike a delicate balance between the different and potentially conflicting objectives, namely agricultural production and the internal market, on the one hand, and the protection of health and the environment, on the other;

K.  whereas the General Court stated the following in the judgment referred to above: ‘Dans ce contexte, il importe de relever que, en adoptant le règlement n° 528/2012, le législateur a procédé à une mise en balance de l’objectif d’amélioration du marché intérieur et de celui de la préservation de la santé humaine, de la santé animale et de l’environnement, que la Commission se doit de respecter et ne saurait remettre en cause [...]. Or, dans le cadre de la mise en œuvre des pouvoirs qui lui sont délégués par le législateur, la Commission ne saurait remettre en cause cet équilibre, ce que cette institution a d’ailleurs en substance admis lors de l’audience’(7) (paragraph 72);

L.  whereas this was echoed by Parliament in its resolution of 8 June 2016, which stresses that ‘the General Court ruled that the specification of scientific criteria can only be carried out in an objective manner on the basis of scientific data related to the endocrine system, independently of any other consideration, in particular economic ones, and that the Commission is not entitled to change the regulatory balance laid down in a basic act via the application of powers delegated to it pursuant to Article 290 [of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU)]’;

M.  whereas the same limitations of power apply to the Commission in the context of an implementing act under the regulatory procedure with scrutiny;

N.  whereas, according to the Commission communication of 15 June 2016, ‘the issue faced by the Commission in this exercise is to establish criteria to determine what is or is not an endocrine disruptor for the purposes of plant protection products and biocidal products – not to decide how to regulate these substances. The regulatory consequences have already been set by the legislator in the legislation on plant protection products (2009) and biocidal products (2012)’;

O.  whereas the cut-off criterion laid down in point 3.8.2. of Annex II to Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 constitutes an essential element of the regulation;

P.  whereas, in accordance with long-standing case law, the adoption of regulatory elements that are essential to a given matter is reserved to the EU legislature and may not be delegated to the Commission;

Q.  whereas the Commission has exceeded its implementing powers by modifying an essential regulatory element of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009, contrary to the recognition of its limits of power in the Court hearing in case T-521/14, contrary to its assertions in the Commission communication of 15 June 2016 and contrary to the fundamental Union principle of the rule of law;

R.  whereas, even if the developments in scientific and technical knowledge were to provide valid grounds for introducing a derogation as regards the approval conditions of substances with an intended endocrine mode of action, such a derogation could only be introduced through a legislative procedure to amend Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 in accordance with Article 294 TFEU;

1.  Opposes adoption of the draft Commission regulation;

2.  Considers that the draft Commission regulation exceeds the implementing powers provided for in Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009;

3.  Calls on the Commission to withdraw the draft regulation and submit a new one to the committee without delay;

4.  Calls on the Commission to modify the draft regulation by deleting its last paragraph;

5.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission, and to the governments and parliaments of the Member States.

(1) OJ L 309, 24.11.2009, p. 1. (2) Judgment of the Court of Justice of 16 December 2015, Sweden v Commission, T-521/14, ECLI:EU:T:2015:976. (3) Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0270. (4) OJ C 36, 29.1.2016, p. 85. (5) OJ L 184, 17.7.1999, p. 23. (6) Given that the judgment in case T-521/14 is only available in French and Swedish, the English version of the text has been provided by Parliament’s translation services: ‘the specification of scientific criteria for the determination of endocrine-disrupting properties may only be performed objectively, in the light of scientific data relating to that system, independently of all other considerations, in particular economic ones’. (7) Given that case T-521/14 is only available in French and Swedish, the English version of the text has been provided by Parliament’s translation services: ‘In this context, it is important to note that, when adopting Regulation (EU) No 528/2012, the legislature weighed up the objective of improving the internal market and that of protecting human health, animal health and the environment, arriving at conclusions which the Commission must respect and cannot call into question [...]. In the context of the exercise of the powers delegated to it by the legislator, the Commission cannot call that balance into question, a fact which, moreover, that institution has in essence accepted during the hearing’.

European Parliament resolution of 4 October 2017 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified soybean FG72 × A5547-127 pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council on genetically modified food and feed (D051972 – 2017/2879(RSP))

P8_TA(2017)0377 B8-0540/2017

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified soybean FG72 × A5547-127 pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council on genetically modified food and feed (D051972),

–  having regard to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 2003 on genetically modified food and feed(1), and in particular Articles 7(3), 9(2), 19(3) and 21(2) thereof,

–  having regard to the vote of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health referred to in Article 35 of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003, on 17 July 2017, where no opinion was delivered,

–  having regard to Articles 11 and 13 of 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 control by Member States of the Commission’s exercise of implementing powers(2),

–  having regard to the opinion adopted by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) on 1 March 2017, and published on 6 April 2017(3),

–  having regard to the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member States of the Commission’s exercise of implementing powers (COM(2017)0085, COD(2017)0035),

–  having regard to its previous resolutions objecting to the authorisation of genetically modified organisms(4),

–  having regard to the motion for a resolution of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety,

–  having regard to Rule 106(2) and (3) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.  whereas on 10 December 2013 Bayer Crop Science LP and M.S. Technologies LLC submitted an application for the placing on the market of foods, food ingredients and feed containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified soybean FG72 × A5547-127 to the national competent authority of the Netherlands, in accordance with Articles 5 and 17 of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003; whereas that application also covered the placing on the market of genetically modified soybean FG72 × A5547-127 in products consisting of it or containing it for uses other than food and feed in the same way as any other soybean, with the exception of cultivation;

B.  whereas on 1 March 2017 the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) adopted a favourable opinion in accordance with Articles 6 and 18 of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003, which was published on 6 April 2017(5);

C.  whereas Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 states that genetically modified food or feed must not have adverse effects on human health, animal health or the environment, and requires the Commission to take into account any relevant provisions of Union law and other legitimate factors relevant to the matter under consideration when drafting its decision;

D.  whereas soybean FG72 × A5547-127 was developed to confer tolerance to isoxaflutole- (5-cyclopropylisoxazol-4-yl 2-mesyl-4-trifluoromethylphenyl ketone), glyphosate- (N-(phosphonomethyl) glycine) and glufosinate (l-phosphinothricin) ammonium-based herbicides; whereas tolerance to those herbicides is achieved by expression of the HPPD W336 (4-hydroxyl phenyl-pyruvate-dioxygenase), 2mEPSPS (5-enolpyruvylshikimate-3-phosphate synthase) and PAT (phosphinothricin acetyl-transferase) proteins, respectively;

E.  whereas many critical comments were submitted by Member States during the three-month consultation period(6); whereas the most critical comments include the observation that, in the absence of a 90-day sub-chronic toxicity test, no conclusion on the risks relating to the use of this GMO in human and animal feed can be drawn, that information provided on composition, phenotypic evaluation and toxicology is insufficient, that conclusions reached on equivalence between the GMO and the conventional soybean, and on food and feed safety, based on this information are premature, and that this GMO soybean has not been tested with the scientific vigour needed to establish its safety;

F.  whereas an independent study concludes that the risk assessment by EFSA is not acceptable in its present form since it does not identify knowledge gaps and uncertainties and fails to assess toxicity or the impact on the immune system and the reproductive system(7);

G.  whereas glyphosate’s current authorisation expires on 31 December 2017 at the latest; whereas questions on the carcinogenicity of glyphosate remain; whereas EFSA concluded in November 2015 that glyphosate is unlikely to be carcinogenic and the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) concluded in March 2017 that no classification was warranted; whereas, on the contrary, in 2015 the WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified glyphosate as a probable carcinogen for humans;

H.  whereas glufosinate is classified as toxic to reproduction and thus falls under the ‘cut-off criteria’ set out in Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market(8); whereas the approval of glufosinate expires on 31 July 2018(9);

I.  whereas isoxaflutole is likely to be carcinogenic to humans(10), is toxic to some aquatic organisms and to non-target plants, and it and its degradation products and metabolites contaminate water easily; whereas such concerns have resulted in restrictions on its use(11);

J.  whereas the application of the complementary herbicides is part of regular agricultural practice in the cultivation of herbicide-resistant plants and it can therefore be expected that residues from spraying will always be present in the harvest and are inevitable constituents; whereas it has been shown that herbicide-tolerant genetically modified crops result in higher use of complementary herbicides than their conventional counterparts(12);

K.  whereas the residues from spraying with the complementary herbicides were not assessed by EFSA; whereas it, therefore, cannot be concluded that genetically engineered soybeans sprayed with isoxaflutole, glyphosate and glufosinate are safe for use in food and feed;

L.  whereas the development of genetically modified crops that are tolerant to several selective herbicides is mainly due to the rapid evolution of weed resistance to glyphosate in countries that have relied heavily on genetically modified crops; whereas more than 20 different varieties of glyphosate-resistant weeds have been documented in scientific publications(13); whereas glufosinate resistant weeds have been observed since 2009;

M.  whereas the vote of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health, referred to in Article 35 of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003, on 17 July 2017 delivered a ‘no opinion’; whereas 15 Member States voted against, only 10 Member States, representing only 38,43 % of the Union population, voted in favour, and three Member States abstained;

N.  whereas the vote of the appeal committee on 14 September 2017 delivered a ‘no opinion’; whereas 15 Member States voted against, only 11 Member States, representing 38,69 % of the Union population, voted in favour, and two Member States abstained;

O.  whereas on several occasions the Commission has deplored the fact that, since the entry into force of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003, authorisation decisions have been adopted by the Commission without the support of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health and that the return of the dossier to the Commission for final decision, which is very much the exception for the procedure as a whole, has become the norm for decision-making on genetically modified food and feed authorisations; whereas that practice has also been deplored by Commission President Juncker as not being democratic(14);

P.  whereas Parliament rejected the legislative proposal of 22 April 2015 amending Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 on 28 October 2015 at first reading(15) and called on the Commission to withdraw it and submit a new one;

Q.  whereas recital 14 of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 states that the Commission will, as far as possible, act in such a way as to avoid going against any predominant position which might emerge within the appeal committee against the appropriateness of an implementing act, especially on sensitive issues such as consumer health, food safety and the environment;

1.  Considers that the draft Commission implementing decision exceeds the implementing powers provided for in Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003;

2.  Considers that the draft Commission implementing decision is not consistent with Union law in that it is not compatible with the aim of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003, which is, in accordance with the general principles laid down in Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council(16), to provide the basis for ensuring a high level of protection of human life and health, animal health and welfare, the environment and consumer interests in relation to genetically modified food and feed, while ensuring the effective functioning of the internal market;

3.  Calls on the Commission to withdraw its draft implementing decision;

4.  Calls on the Commission to suspend any implementing decision regarding applications for authorisation of genetically modified organisms until the authorisation procedure has been revised in such a way as to address the shortcomings of the current procedure, which has proven to be inadequate;

5.  Calls on the Commission not to authorise any herbicide-tolerant genetically modified plants (HT GMP) without full assessment of the residues from spraying with the complementary herbicides and with their commercial formulations as applied in the countries of cultivation;

6.  Calls on the Commission not to authorise any HT GMP made resistant to a combination of herbicides, as is the case with soybean FG72 × A5547-127, without full assessment of the specific cumulative effects of the residues from spraying with the combination of the complementary herbicides and its commercial formulations as applied in the countries of cultivation;

7.  Calls on the Commission to request much more detailed testing of the health risks relating to stacked events such as soybean FG72 × A5547-127;

8.  Calls on the Commission to develop strategies for health risk assessment and toxicology, as well as post-market monitoring, that target the whole food and feed chain;

9.  Calls on the Commission to fully integrate the risk assessment of the application of the complementary herbicides and their residues into the risk assessment of HT GMPs, regardless of whether the genetically modified plant is for cultivation in the Union or for import for food and feed;

10.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission, and to the governments and parliaments of the Member States.

(1) OJ L 268, 18.10.2003, p. 1. (2) OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13. (3) https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/pub/4744 (4) ––––––––––––––– – Resolution of 16 January 2014 on the proposal for a Council decision concerning the placing on the market for cultivation, in accordance with Directive 2001/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, of a maize product (Zea mays L., line 1507) genetically modified for resistance to certain lepidopteran pests (OJ C 482, 23.12.2016, p. 110).Resolution of 16 December 2015 on Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2015/2279 of 4 December 2015 authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified maize NK603 × T25 (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2015)0456).Resolution of 3 February 2016 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified soybean MON 87705 × MON 89788 (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0040).Resolution of 3 February 2016 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified soybean MON 87708 × MON 89788 (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0039).Resolution of 3 February 2016 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified soybean FG72 (MST-FGØ72-2) (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0038).Resolution of 8 June 2016 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified maize Bt11 × MIR162 × MIR604 × GA21, and genetically modified maizes combining two or three of those events (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0271).Resolution of 8 June 2016 on the draft Commission implementing decision as regards the placing on the market of a genetically modified carnation (Dianthus caryophyllus L., line SHD-27531-4)) (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0272).Resolution of 6 October 2016 on the draft Commission implementing decision renewing the authorisation for the placing on the market for cultivation of genetically modified maize MON 810 seeds (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0388).Resolution of 6 October 2016 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of genetically modified maize MON 810 products (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0389).Resolution of 6 October 2016 on the draft Commission implementing decision concerning the placing on the market for cultivation of genetically modified maize Bt11 seeds (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0386).Resolution of 6 October 2016 on the draft Commission implementing decision concerning the placing on the market for cultivation of genetically modified maize 1507 seeds (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0387).Resolution of 6 October 2016 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified cotton 281-24-236 × 3006-210-23 × MON 88913 (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0390).Resolution of 5 April 2017 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified maize Bt11 × 59122 × MIR604 × 1507 × GA21, and genetically modified maizes combining two, three or four of the events Bt11, 59122, MIR604, 1507 and GA21 pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council on genetically modified food and feed (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2017)0123).Resolution of 17 May 2017 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified maize DAS-40278-9, pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council on genetically modified food and feed (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2017)0215).Resolution of 17 May 2017 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified cotton GHB119 (BCS-GHØØ5-8) pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2017)0214). Resolution of 13 September 2017 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified soybean DAS-68416-4, pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council on genetically modified food and feed (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2017)0341). (5) https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/pub/4744 (6) Annex G – Member States’ comments and GMO Panel responses http://registerofquestions.efsa.europa.eu/roqFrontend/questionLoader?question=EFSA-Q-2013-01032 (7) http://www.testbiotech.org/en/node/1975 (8) OJ L 309, 24.11.2009, p. 1. (9) Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/404 of 11 March 2015 amending Implementing Regulation (EU) No 540/2011 as regards the extension of the approval periods of the active substances beflubutamid, captan, dimethoate, dimethomorph, ethoprophos, fipronil, folpet, formetanate, glufosinate, methiocarb, metribuzin, phosmet, pirimiphos-methyl and propamocarb (OJ L 67, 12.3.2015, p. 6). (10) https://a816-healthpsi.nyc.gov/ll37/pdf/carcclassJuly2004_1.pdf (11) Annex G – Member States’ comments and GMO Panel responses, p. 27. http://registerofquestions.efsa.europa.eu/roqFrontend/questionLoader?question=EFSA-Q-2013-01032 (12) https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs00267-015-0589-7 (13) https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-94-007-7796-5_12 (14) For example, in the opening statement at Parliament’s plenary session included in the political guidelines for the next Commission (Strasbourg, 15 July 2014) or in the 2016 State of the Union address (Strasbourg, 14 September 2016). (15) Texts adopted, P8_TA(2015)0379. (16) OJ L 31, 1.2.2002, p. 1.

European Parliament resolution of 4 October 2017 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified soybean DAS-44406-6, pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council on genetically modified food and feed (D051971 – 2017/2878(RSP))

P8_TA(2017)0378 B8-0541/2017

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified soybean DAS-44406-6, pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council on genetically modified food and feed (D051971),

–  having regard to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 2003 on genetically modified food and feed(1), and in particular Articles 7(3), 9(2), 19(3) and 21(2) thereof,

–  having regard to the vote of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health referred to in Article 35 of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003, of 17 July 2017, where no opinion was delivered,

–  having regard to Articles 11 and 13 of 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 control by Member States of the Commission’s exercise of implementing powers(2),

–  having regard to the opinion adopted by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) on 17 February 2017, and published on 21 March 2017(3),

–  having regard to the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member States of the Commission’s exercise of implementing powers (COM(2017)0085, COD(2017)0035),

–  having regard to its previous resolutions objecting to the authorisation of genetically modified organisms(4),

–  having regard to the motion for a resolution of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety,

–  having regard to Rule 106(2) and (3) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.  whereas on 16 February 2012 Dow Agrosciences LLC and MS Technologies LLC submitted an application for the placing on the market of foods, food ingredients and feed containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified soybean DAS-44406-6 to the national competent authority of the Netherlands, in accordance with Articles 5 and 17 of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003; whereas that application also covered the placing on the market of genetically modified soybean DAS-44406-6 in products consisting of it or containing it for uses other than food and feed in the same way as any other soybean, with the exception of cultivation;

B.  whereas on 17 February 2017 the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) adopted a favourable opinion in accordance with Articles 6 and 18 of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003, which was published on 21 March 2017(5);

C.  whereas Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 states that genetically modified food or feed must not have adverse effects on human health, animal health or the environment, and requires the Commission to take into account any relevant provisions of Union law and other legitimate factors relevant to the matter under consideration when drafting its decision;

D.  whereas many critical comments were submitted by Member States during the three-month consultation period(6); whereas the most critical comments include the observation that ‘the current application and the presented risk assessment data do not provide sufficient information to exclude adverse effects on humans and animals unambiguously’(7), ‘information on phenotypic evaluation, composition and toxicology is insufficient’(8) and the competent authority ‘considers necessary further analysis to evaluate the concentration of glyphosate, 2,4-D, glufosinate and their degradation products in seeds and forage intended for food and feed purposes in order to exclude any potential adverse effect on human and animal health’(9);

E.  whereas an independent study concludes that ‘the risk assessment by EFSA is not acceptable in its present form since it does not identify knowledge gaps and uncertainties and fails to assess toxicity, impact on immune system and the reproductive system’; whereas the same study finds that ‘the monitoring plan should be rejected because it will not make essential data available’(10);

F.  whereas soybean DAS-44406-6 expresses 5-enolpyruvyl-shikimate-3-phosphate synthase (2mEPSPS), conferring tolerance to glyphosate-based herbicides, aryloxyalkanoate dioxygenase (AAD-12), conferring tolerance to 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D) and other related phenoxy herbicides, and phosphinothricin acetyl transferase (PAT), conferring tolerance to glufosinate ammonium-based herbicides;

G.  whereas glyphosate’s current authorisation expires on 31 December 2017 at the latest; whereas doubts on the carcinogenicity of glyphosate remain; whereas EFSA concluded in November 2015 that glyphosate is unlikely to be carcinogenic and the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) concluded in March 2017 that no classification was warranted; whereas, on the contrary, in 2015 the WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified glyphosate as a probable carcinogen for humans;

H.  whereas independent research raises concerns about the risks of the active ingredient of 2,4-D as regards embryo development, birth defects and endocrine disruption(11); whereas although the approval of the active substance 2,4-D was renewed in 2015, information from the applicant as regards the potential endocrine properties is still outstanding(12);

I.  whereas glufosinate is classified as toxic to reproduction and thus falls under the ‘cut-off criteria’ set out in Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market(13); whereas the approval of glufosinate expires on 31 July 2018(14);

J.  whereas a number of experts have voiced concerns about a breakdown product of 2,4-D, 2,4-Dichlorophenol, which may be present on imported soybean DAS-44406-6; whereas 2,4-Dichlorophenol is a known endocrine disruptor with reproductive toxicity;

K.  whereas toxicity of 2,4-Dichlorophenol, a direct metabolite of 2,4-D, may be higher than the herbicide itself; whereas 2,4-Dichlorophenol is classified as an IARC carcinogen type 2B and is included in the list of chemicals developed for review within the EU-strategy for endocrine disruptors(15);

L.  whereas, due to the fact that it is highly soluble in fats and oils, 2,4-Dichlorophenol is expected to accumulate in soy oil during the processing of soybeans; whereas the major soy product used by humans is soy oil, which is incorporated into, among many other products, some infant formulas(16);

M.  whereas the amount of 2,4-Dichlorophenol in a product may be higher than the amount of 2,4-D residue; whereas a Union maximum residue level (MRL) does not exist for 2,4-Dichlorophenol;

N.  whereas the residues from spraying with the complementary herbicides were not assessed; whereas it, therefore, cannot be concluded that genetically engineered soybeans sprayed with 2,4-D, glyphosate and glufosinate are safe for use in food and feed;

O.  whereas the development of genetically modified crops that are tolerant to several selective herbicides is mainly due to the rapid evolution of weed resistance to glyphosate in countries that have relied heavily on genetically modified crops; whereas more than twenty different varieties of glyphosate-resistant weeds have been documented in scientific publications(17); whereas glufosinate-resistant weeds have been observed since 2009;

P.  whereas authorising the import of soybean DAS-44406-6 into the Union will undoubtedly lead to an increase in its cultivation in third countries and to a corresponding increase in the use of glyphosate, 2,4-D and glufosinate herbicides; whereas soybean DAS-44406-6 is currently cultivated in Argentina, Brazil, the USA and Canada;

Q.  whereas the Union has signed up to the sustainable development goals (SDGs), which include a commitment to substantially reduce the number of deaths and illnesses from hazardous chemicals and air, water and soil pollution and contamination by 2030 (SDG 3, target 3.9)(18); whereas it has been shown that herbicide-tolerant genetically modified crops result in higher use of these herbicides than their conventional counterparts(19);

R.  whereas the Union is committed to policy coherence for development (PCD), which aims at minimising contradictions and building synergies between different Union policies, including in the areas of trade, environment and agriculture(20), to benefit developing countries and increase the effectiveness of development cooperation(21);

S.  whereas the vote of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health, referred to in Article 35 of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003, on 17 July 2017 delivered a ‘no opinion’; whereas 15 Member States voted against, only 10 Member States, representing only 38,43 % of the Union population voted in favour, and three Member States abstained;

T.  whereas the vote of the appeal committee on 14 September 2017 delivered a ‘no opinion’; whereas 14 Member States voted against, only 12 Member States, representing 38,78 % of the Union population, voted in favour, and two Member States abstained;

U.  whereas, on several occasions, the Commission has deplored the fact that, since the entry into force of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003, authorisation decisions have been adopted by the Commission without the support of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health and that the return of the dossier to the Commission for final decision, which is very much the exception for the procedure as a whole, has become the norm for decision-making on genetically modified food and feed authorisations; whereas that practice has also been deplored by Commission President Juncker as not being democratic(22);

V.  whereas Parliament rejected the legislative proposal of 22 April 2015 amending Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 on 28 October 2015 at first reading(23) and called on the Commission to withdraw it and submit a new one;

W.  whereas recital 14 of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 states that the Commission will, as far as possible, act in such a way as to avoid going against any predominant position which might emerge within the appeal committee against the appropriateness of an implementing act, especially on sensitive issues such as consumer health, food safety and the environment;

1.  Considers that the draft Commission implementing decision exceeds the implementing powers provided for in Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003;

2.  Considers that the draft Commission implementing decision is not consistent with Union law and that it is not compatible with the aim of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003, which is, in accordance with the general principles laid down in Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council(24), to provide the basis for ensuring a high level of protection of human life and health, animal health and welfare, the environment and consumer interests in relation to genetically modified food and feed, while ensuring the effective functioning of the internal market;

3.  Calls on the Commission to withdraw its draft implementing decision;

4.  Calls on the Commission to suspend any implementing decision regarding applications for authorisation of genetically modified organisms until the authorisation procedure has been revised in such a way as to address the shortcomings of the current procedure, which has proven to be inadequate;

5.  Calls on the Commission not to authorise any herbicide-tolerant genetically modified plants (HT GMP) without full assessment of the residues from spraying with the complementary herbicides and with their commercial formulations as applied in the countries of cultivation;

6.  Calls on the Commission not to authorise any HT GMP made resistant to a combination of herbicides, as is the case with soybean DAS-44406-6, without full assessment of the specific cumulative effects of the residues from spraying with the combination of the complementary herbicides and its commercial formulations as applied in the countries of cultivation;

7.  Calls on the Commission to develop strategies for health risk assessment and toxicology, as well as post-market monitoring, that target the whole food and feed chain;

8.  Calls on the Commission to fully integrate the risk assessment of the application of the complementary herbicides and their residues into the risk assessment of HT GMPs, regardless of whether the genetically modified plant is for cultivation in the Union or for import for food and feed;

9.  Calls on the Commission to fulfil its obligation of policy coherence for development stemming from Article 208 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;

10.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission, and to the governments and parliaments of the Member States.

(1) OJ L 268, 18.10.2003, p. 1. (2) OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13. (3) https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/pub/4738 (4) ––––––––––––––– .– Resolution of 16 January 2014 on the proposal for a Council decision concerning the placing on the market for cultivation, in accordance with Directive 2001/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, of a maize product (Zea mays L., line 1507) genetically modified for resistance to certain lepidopteran pests (OJ C 482, 23.12.2016, p. 110).Resolution of 16 December 2015 on Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2015/2279 of 4 December 2015 authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified maize NK603 × T25 (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2015)0456).Resolution of 3 February 2016 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified soybean MON 87705 × MON 89788 (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0040).Resolution of 3 February 2016 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified soybean MON 87708 × MON 89788 (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0039).Resolution of 3 February 2016 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified soybean FG72 (MST-FGØ72-2) (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0038).Resolution of 8 June 2016 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified maize Bt11 × MIR162 × MIR604 × GA21, and genetically modified maizes combining two or three of those events (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0271).Resolution of 8 June 2016 on the draft Commission implementing decision as regards the placing on the market of a genetically modified carnation (Dianthus caryophyllus L., line SHD-27531-4) (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0272).Resolution of 6 October 2016 on the draft Commission implementing decision renewing the authorisation for the placing on the market for cultivation of genetically modified maize MON 810 seeds (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0388).Resolution of 6 October 2016 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of genetically modified maize MON 810 products (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0389).Resolution of 6 October 2016 on the draft Commission implementing decision concerning the placing on the market for cultivation of genetically modified maize Bt11 seeds (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0386).Resolution of 6 October 2016 on the draft Commission implementing decision concerning the placing on the market for cultivation of genetically modified maize 1507 seeds (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0387).Resolution of 6 October 2016 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified cotton 281-24-236 × 3006-210-23 × MON 88913 (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0390).Resolution of 5 April 2017 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified maize Bt11 × 59122 × MIR604 × 1507 × GA21, and genetically modified maizes combining two, three or four of the events Bt11, 59122, MIR604, 1507 and GA21 pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council on genetically modified food and feed (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2017)0123).Resolution of 17 May 2017 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified maize DAS-40278-9, pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council on genetically modified food and feed (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2017)0215).Resolution of 17 May 2017 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified cotton GHB119 (BCS-GHØØ5-8) pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2017)0214).Resolution of 13 September 2017 on the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified soybean DAS-68416-4, pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council on genetically modified food and feed (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2017)0341). (5) https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/pub/4738 (6) Annex G – Member States’ comments and GMO Panel responses: http://registerofquestions.efsa.europa.eu/roqFrontend/questionLoader?question=EFSA-Q-2012-00368 (7) Annex G – Member States’ comments and GMO Panel responses, p. 1. (8) Annex G – Member States’ comments and GMO Panel responses, p. 52. (9) Annex G – Member States’ comments and GMO Panel responses, p. 87. (10) http://www.testbiotech.org/node/1946 (11) http://www.pan-europe.info/sites/pan-europe.info/files/public/resources/reports/pane-2014-risks-of-herbicide-2-4-d.pdf (12) Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/2033 of 13 November 2015 renewing the approval of the active substance 2,4-D in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market, and amending the Annex to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 540/2011 (OJ L 298, 14.11.2015, p. 8). (13) OJ L 309, 24.11.2009, p. 1. (14) Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/404 of 11 March 2015 amending Implementing Regulation (EU) No 540/2011 as regards the extension of the approval periods of the active substances beflubutamid, captan, dimethoate, dimethomorph, ethoprophos, fipronil, folpet, formetanate, glufosinate, methiocarb, metribuzin, phosmet, pirimiphos-methyl and propamocarb (OJ L 67, 12.3.2015, p. 6). (15) Annex G – Member States’ comments and GMO Panel responses, p. 5. http://registerofquestions.efsa.europa.eu/roqFrontend/questionLoader?question=EFSA-Q-2012-00368 (16) Member States’ comments and GMO Panel responses in relation to authorisation request for GM soybean DAS-68416-4, p. 31. http://registerofquestions.efsa.europa.eu/roqFrontend/questionLoader?question=EFSA-Q-2011-00052 (17) https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-94-007-7796-5_12 (18) https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/sdg3 (19) https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs00267-015-0589-7 (20) Commission communication of 12 April 2005 entitled ‘Policy Coherence for Development – Accelerating progress towards attaining the Millennium Development Goals’ (COM(2005)0134). (21) https://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/policies/policy-coherence-development_en (22) For example, in the opening statement at Parliament’s plenary session included in the political guidelines for the next Commission (Strasbourg, 15 July 2014) or in the 2016 State of the Union address (Strasbourg, 14 September 2016). (23) Texts adopted, P8_TA(2015)0379. (24) OJ L 31, 1.2.2002, p. 1.

European Parliament resolution of 4 October 2017 on ending child marriage (2017/2663(RSP))

P8_TA(2017)0379 B8-0535/2017

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and in particular Article 16 thereof, and all other United Nations (UN) treaties and instruments concerning human rights,

–  having regard to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child adopted by the UN General Assembly on 20 November 1989,

–  having regard to its resolution of 27 November 2014 on the 25th anniversary of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child(1),

–  having regard to Article 16 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women,

–  having regard to Article 23 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,

–  having regard to Article 10(1) of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights,

–  having regard to Article 3 of the Treaty on European Union,

–  having regard to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, and in particular Article 9 thereof,

–  having regard to the Joint Staff Working Document entitled ‘Gender Equality and Women’s Empowerment: Transforming the Lives of Girls and Women through EU External Relations 2016-2020’,

–  having regard to the Council Conclusions of 26 October 2015 on the Gender Action Plan 2016-2020,

–  having regard to the EU Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy 2015-2019,

–  having regard to the EU Guidelines for the Promotion and Protection of the Rights of the Child (2017) – ‘Leave no child behind’,

–  having regard to the European Consensus on Development which underscores the EU’s commitment to mainstreaming human rights and gender equality in line with the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development,

–  having regard to Articles 32, 37, and 59(4) of the Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence (Istanbul Convention),

–  having regard to the UN Population Fund (UNFPA) Report of 2012 entitled ‘Marrying Too Young – End Child Marriage’,

–  having regard to Rules 128(5) and 123(2) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.  whereas the EU is committed to promoting the rights of the child, and whereas child, early, and forced marriage (CEFM) is a violation of these rights; whereas the EU is committed to comprehensively protecting and promoting the rights of the child in its external policy, in line with the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and its Optional Protocols and other relevant international standards and treaties;

B.  whereas CEFM has been recognised under international human rights law as a harmful practice and is often associated with serious forms of violence against women and girls, including intimate partner violence;

C.  whereas child, early and forced marriage has a devastating impact on the overall realisation and enjoyment of girls’ and women’s rights, and on girls’ health, including serious risks of complications in pregnancy and HIV infections; whereas it exposes girls to sexual abuse, domestic violence and even honour killing;

D.  whereas reinstating and extending the so-called global gag rule, cutting funds to organisations, such as UNFPA, that provide girl victims of child marriage with family planning and sexual and reproductive health services to help reduce the risk of contracting HIV and complications in early pregnancies, is of serious concern;

E.  whereas CEFM is a fundamental denial of their right to and autonomy over their own bodies and their bodily integrity;

F.  whereas child marriage is a form of forced marriage, since children – given their age – inherently lack the ability to give their full, free and informed consent to their marriage or its timing;

G.  whereas one in every three girls in developing countries is married before turning 18, and one in nine before 15; whereas girls are most at risk, representing 82 % of the children affected;

H.  whereas child brides are under intense social pressure to prove their fertility, which makes them more likely to experience early and frequent pregnancies; whereas complications in pregnancy and childbirth are the leading cause of death in girls aged 15-19 in low- and middle-income countries;

I.  whereas CEFM is linked to high rates of maternal mortality, lower use of family planning and unwanted pregnancies, and usually signals the end of a girl’s education; whereas ending CEFM is firmly rooted in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development under Sustainable Development Goal 5 and Target 5.3, and whereas these marriages have been clearly enunciated as barriers to achieving gender equality and women’s empowerment;

J.  whereas ending CEFM is included as one of the priorities for the EU’s external action in the field of promoting women’s rights and human rights;

K.  whereas over 60 % of child brides in developing countries have had no formal education, which is a form of gender discrimination, and whereas child marriage denies children of school age the right to the education they need for their personal development, their preparation for adulthood and their ability to contribute to their community;

L.  whereas the problem is present not only in third countries, but also in EU Member States;

M.  whereas the EU recently decided to sign the Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence (Istanbul Convention);

N.  whereas the Istanbul Convention classifies forced marriage as a type of violence against women, and asks that the act of forcing a child to enter into a marriage and that of luring a child abroad with the purpose of forcing her or him to enter into a marriage be criminalised;

O.  whereas very few statistics are available at national, EU and international level to demonstrate the magnitude of the problem of CEFM in the EU Member States(2);

P.  whereas with the recent migration crisis, new cases of child marriages concluded abroad have emerged, sometimes involving children less than 14 years old;

Q.  whereas children who enter marriage before the age of 18 are more likely to drop out of school or to live in poverty;

R.  whereas situations of armed conflict and instability significantly increase the incidence of CEFM;

1.  Recalls the link between a rights-based approach encompassing all human rights and gender equality, and that the EU remains committed to the promotion, protection and fulfilment of all human rights and to the full and effective implementation of the Beijing Platform for Action, the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), the Istanbul Convention, and the EU Plan of Action on Gender Equality and Women’s Empowerment;

2.  Emphasises that child marriage is a violation of the rights of the child and a form of violence against women and girls; stresses that as such it should be condemned;

3.  Calls for the EU and the Member States to meet the objectives of the 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda to combat harmful practices more effectively and to hold those responsible to account; calls for the EU and the Member States to work together with UN Women, the United Nations Children’s Fund, UNFPA and other partners to bring attention to the issue of CEFM by focusing on women’s empowerment, including through education, economic empowerment and enhanced participation in decision-making, as well as on the protection and promotion of the human rights of all women and girls, including sexual and reproductive health;

4.  Calls for the EU and the Members States to increase access to health services, including sexual and reproductive health and rights services, for women and child brides;

5.  Calls on the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy to make use of all the instruments available, by developing policies, programmes and legislation, including political dialogues, human rights dialogues, bilateral and multilateral cooperation, the ‘Trade for All’ strategy, GSP+ and other instruments, to address and curtail the practice of CEFM;

6.  Calls for the EU and the Members States to apply unified legal standards with regard to the procedure for dealing with child marriages, also in view of the ratification of the Istanbul Convention;

7.  Calls for the EU and the Member States to work with law enforcement authorities and judicial systems in third countries, and to provide training and technical assistance to help with the adoption and enforcement of legislation prohibiting early and forced marriages, including a minimum age for marriage;

8.  Stresses the need for special rehabilitation and assistance measures to be created for child brides to enable them to return to education or training and to evade the familial and societal pressures connected with early marriage;

9.  Stresses the need for budgetary allocations for child marriage prevention programmes that aim to create an environment where girls can achieve their full potential, including by means of education, social and economic programmes for out-of-school girls, child protection schemes, girls’ and women’s shelters, legal counselling, and psychological support;

10.  Welcomes projects developed under the Daphne programme, focusing on assistance to victims and prevention of child, early and forced marriage; considers that such projects should be strengthened and receive adequate further funding;

11.  Calls for special attention to be paid to children from disadvantaged communities, and highlights the need to focus on awareness raising, education and economic empowerment as ways to address the problem;

12.  Emphasises that specific procedures must be developed and put in place to ensure the protection of children among refugees and asylum seekers in line with the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child; calls on host countries to ensure that refugee children are given full access to education and to promote as far as possible their integration and inclusion in national education systems;

13.  Calls for special procedures to be put in place in refugee and asylum seeker reception centres, in order to identify cases of CEFM and help the victims;

14.  Stresses the need for proper and harmonised monitoring of cases of child marriage in EU Member States, and for the collection of gender disaggregated data, in order to be able to better assess the magnitude of the problem;

15.  Highlights the big discrepancy between officially registered cases and cases of potential victims asking for assistance, indicating that many cases of child marriage might be going unnoticed by authorities; calls for social workers, teachers and other personnel in contact with potential victims to be given special training and manuals on how to identify victims and how to launch the procedures to assist them;

16.  Calls for the strengthening of special projects and campaigns forming part of the EU’s external action targeting CEFM; emphasises that special attention should be paid to awareness raising campaigns and campaigns focusing on the education and empowerment of women and girls in the enlargement countries and in the European Neighbourhood;

17.  Stresses that the EU should support and encourage third countries to ensure that civil society can play a role and ensure independent access for child victims of CEFM and their representatives to justice in a child-friendly way;

18.  Stresses the need to fund, as part of humanitarian assistance, projects focusing on the prevention of gender-based violence and on education in emergencies, in order to ease the pressure on victims of CEFM;

19.  Stresses the need to identify the risk factors for child marriage in humanitarian crises by involving adolescent girls, and to integrate support to married girls in any humanitarian response from the early onset of crises;

20.  Strongly condemns the reinstatement and expansion of the so-called global gag rule and its impact on women’s and girls’ global healthcare and rights; reiterates its call for the EU and its Member States to fill the financing gap left by the US in the area of sexual and reproductive health and rights, using both national and EU development funding;

21.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States.

(1) OJ C 289, 9.8.2016, p. 57. (2) http://fileserver.wave-network.org/home/ForceEarlyMarriageRoadmap.pdf

European Parliament resolution of 4 October 2017 on the 2017 UN Climate Change Conference in Bonn, Germany (COP23) (2017/2620(RSP))

P8_TA(2017)0380 B8-0534/2017

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Kyoto Protocol thereto,

–  having regard to the Paris Agreement, Decision 1/CP.21 and the 21st Conference of the Parties (COP21) to the UNFCCC, and the 11th Conference of the Parties serving as the Meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol (CMP11) held in Paris from 30 November to 11 December 2015,

–  having regard to the 18th Conference of the Parties (COP18) to the UNFCCC and the 8th Conference of the Parties serving as the Meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol (CMP8) held in Doha, Qatar, from 26 November to 8 December 2012 and to the adoption of an amendment to the Protocol establishing a second commitment period thereunder starting on 1 January 2013 and ending on 31 December 2020,

–  having regard to the opening for signature of the Paris Agreement at the UN Headquarters in New York on 22 April 2016, and to the fact that it remained open until 21 April 2017, that 195 states have signed the Paris Agreement, and that 160 states have deposited instruments for its ratification,

–  having regard to the 22nd Conference of the Parties (COP22) to the UNFCCC and the 1st Conference of the Parties serving as the Meeting of the Parties to the Paris Agreement (CMA1), held in Marrakech, Morocco, from 15 November to 18 November 2016,

–  having regard to its resolution of 6 October 2016 on the implementation of the Paris Agreement and the 2016 UN Climate Change Conference in Marrakech, Morocco (COP22)(1),

–  having regard to the Commission communication of 20 July 2016 entitled ‘Accelerating Europe’s transition to a low-carbon economy’ (COM(2016)0500),

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

–  having regard to the European Council conclusions of 15 February 2016, 30 September 2016 and 23 June 2017,

–  having regard to the Council conclusions of 19 June 2017,

–  having regard to the submission on 6 March 2015 by Latvia and the European Commission on behalf of the European Union and its Member States to the UNFCCC of the intended nationally determined contribution (INDC) of the EU and its Member States,

–  having regard to the 5th Assessment Report (AR5) of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and to its Synthesis Report,

–  having regard to the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) Synthesis Report of November 2016 entitled ‘The Emissions Gap Report 2016’ and to its Adaptation Gap Report 2016,

–  having regard to the Leaders’ Declaration adopted at the G7 Summit held at Schloss Elmau, Germany, from 7 to 8 June 2015, entitled ‘Think ahead. Act together’, in which the G7 leaders reiterated their intention to adhere to the commitment to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 40-70 % by 2050 compared with 2010 levels, with it being necessary to ensure that the reduction is closer to 70 % than 40 %,

–  having regard to the 2017 G7 Leaders’ Communiqué, and in particular the G7 Bologna Environment Ministers’ Communiqué,

–  having regard to the decision to withdraw from the Paris Agreement announced by the President of the United States,

–  having regard to Pope Francis’ encyclical Laudato Si’,

–  having regard to the questions to the Council and the Commission on the 2017 UN Climate Change Conference in Bonn, Germany (COP23) (O‑000068/2017 – B8‑0329/2017 and O‑000069/2017 – B8-0330/2017),

–  having regard to Rules 128(5) and 123(2) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.  whereas the Paris Agreement entered into force on 4 November 2016, with 160 of the 197 Parties to the Convention having deposited their instruments of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession with the UN (as of 8 September 2017);

B.  whereas the July 2015 reform proposal for the emissions trading scheme (ETS) and the July 2016 climate package (covering effort sharing, land use, land use change and forestry (LULUCF) proposals and a European strategy for low-emission mobility) are the key instruments to deliver on these commitments and to reaffirm the EU’s position as a global leader in the fight against climate change;

C.  whereas the efforts to mitigate global warming should not be seen as an obstacle to striving for economic growth but should, on the contrary, be seen as a driving force for the realisation of new and sustainable growth and employment;

D.  whereas the most serious effects of climate change will be felt in developing countries, particularly in those least developed countries and developing small island states that have insufficient resources to prepare for and adjust to the changes occurring; whereas, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Africa is especially vulnerable to the challenge this poses and is particularly exposed to water stress, extremely violent weather events and food insecurity caused by drought and desertification;

E.  whereas climate change can increase competition for resources such as food, water and grazing land and exacerbate economic hardship and political instability, and could become the biggest driver of population displacements, both inside and across national borders, within the not too distant future; whereas the issue of climate migration should therefore be placed high on the international agenda;

F.  whereas on 6 March 2015 the EU submitted the INDC of the EU and its Member States to the UNFCCC, thus committing itself to a binding target of at least a 40 % domestic reduction in GHG emissions by 2030 compared with 1990 levels;

G.  whereas an ambitious climate mitigation policy can create growth and jobs; whereas, however, some specific sectors with a high carbon intensity and high trade intensity can suffer from carbon leakage if the ambition is not comparable in other markets; whereas appropriate protection against carbon leakage is therefore necessary to protect jobs in these specific sectors;

1.  Recalls that climate change is one of the most important challenges for humankind and that all states and all players worldwide need to do their utmost to limit the associated problems; underlines that the Paris Agreement is a major step in that direction, although much more still needs to be done;

Scientific basis for climate action

2.  Recalls that, according to the scientific evidence presented at the 2014 IPCC AR5, warming of the climate system is unequivocal, climate change is occurring, and human activities have been the dominant cause of the warming observed since the middle of the 20th century; is concerned that widespread and substantial climate change impacts are already evident in natural and human systems on all continents and across the oceans;

3.  Takes note of the global carbon budgets as presented by the IPCC in its 5th Assessment Report, and concludes that continuing with current levels of global GHG emissions will consume the remaining carbon budget consistent with limiting the rise in global average temperature to 1,5 °C within the next four years; stresses that all countries should accelerate the transition to zero GHG emissions and climate resilience, in accordance with the Paris Agreement, in order to avoid the worst impacts of global warming;

4.  Reiterates the importance of basing global climate action on best available science, and welcomes the 2018 Facilitative Dialogue preceding the UNFCCC 2020 deadline for resubmitting the 2030 nationally determined contributions (NDCs), as well as the first global stocktake in 2023, as offering the first opportunities to put this principle into action;

5.  Encourages dialogue between IPCC experts and parties while the results of the sixth assessment cycle are being prepared and published; welcomes, to this end, the decision to publish a special IPCC report in 2018 on the impacts of global warming of 1,5 ºC above pre-industrial levels and the related global GHG emission pathways;

Paris Agreement – ratification and implementation of commitments

6.  Welcomes the unprecedented pace of ratifications and the rapid entry into force of the Paris Agreement, as well as the global resolve to ensure its full and swift implementation, as expressed in the Marrakech Action Proclamation; urges all parties to ratify the agreement as soon as possible;

7.  Expresses its satisfaction at the fact that at COP22 in Marrakech all parties committed to ongoing engagement on the basis of the Paris commitments, independently of changes in political circumstances;

8.  Expresses its disappointment with the announcement made by US President Donald Trump of his intention to withdraw the United States from the Paris Agreement; regrets this decision as representing a step backwards; points out that the formal withdrawal can take effect at the earliest only after the next US presidential election in 2020; welcomes the strong responses from governments around the world and their continued and strengthened support for the full implementation of the Paris Agreement; notes with satisfaction the pledges made by some US states, cities and businesses to continue to uphold the US commitments under the Paris Agreement;

9.  Expresses its satisfaction that all major parties have confirmed their commitment to the Paris Agreement since President Trump’s announcement;

10.  Stresses that Europe must now take the lead in defending the Paris Agreement in order to secure the future of both our environment and our industries; welcomes the fact that the EU will strengthen existing partnerships and seek new alliances;

11.  Points to the swift progress made so far in translating the EU’s international commitment into EU legislation establishing a robust 2030 climate and energy policy framework, and underlines its intention to conclude this legislative process by the end of 2017;

12.  Insists that, in particular after President Trump’s announcement, it is important to have appropriate provisions in place against carbon leakage and to ensure that companies that are among the best performers and that have a high carbon intensity and a high trade intensity will obtain the allowances they need for free; asks the Commission to examine the effectiveness and legality of additional measures to protect industries at risk of carbon leakage, for example a carbon border tax adjustment and consumption charge, in particular in respect of products coming from countries that do not fulfil their commitments under the Paris Agreement;

13.  Stresses that the commitments made under the Paris Agreement to limit the increase in global average temperature to well below 2 ºC above pre-industrial levels and to further pursue limiting the temperature increase to 1,5 ºC, as well as the aim of achieving a balance between anthropogenic emissions by sources and removals by sinks of GHG (‘net zero emissions’) in the second half of this century, on the basis of equity, constitute a decisive breakthrough in the collective global effort towards a transition to a climate-resilient, climate-neutral global economy;

14.  Recalls that limiting the rise in global average temperature to well below 2 °C does not guarantee that significant adverse climate impacts will be avoided; acknowledges that current pledges are not yet sufficient to reach the goals of the Paris Agreement; stresses, therefore, that global GHG emissions should reach their peak as soon as possible and that all parties, especially all G20 nations, should step up their efforts and update their NDCs by 2020, following the 2018 Facilitative Dialogue; recalls that global carbon emissions need to be phased out by 2050; considers that putting in place policies and measures to fulfil and eventually exceed the NDCs should be a key domestic priority for all countries and that these should be reappraised every five years in line with the ambition mechanism in the Paris Agreement; recognises, nevertheless, that the stringency and level of ambition of domestic emission reduction strategies are not contingent on the submission of an updated NDC;

15.  Calls on all parties to ensure that their NDCs are consistent with long-term targets in line with the long-term temperature goal of the Paris Agreement; stresses that work in the context of the IPCC Special Report on the 1,5 ºC impact and pathways, as well as the conclusions of the 2018 Facilitative Dialogue, should be taken into account; in this context, recalls the G7’s commitment to present mid-century, low GHG emission development strategies well ahead of the agreed 2020 deadline; expresses its readiness to participate fully in the development of the EU’s strategy on the basis of on the Commission’s analysis as announced in its ‘Road from Paris’ communication of 2 March 2016 (COM(2016)0110);

16.  Underlines the particular responsibility of all the major economies which together account for three quarters of the world’s emissions, and considers that climate action should continue to be a key topic in the G7 and G20, in particular in areas such as NDC implementation, mid-century strategies, fossil fuel subsidy reform, carbon disclosure, clean energy and others; underlines the need to continue ministerial engagement of major economies in fora such as the Clean Energy Ministerial;

17.  Calls for the EU to commit to further emission reductions in its NDC for 2030 following the 2018 Facilitative Dialogue;

18.  Stresses the importance of demonstrating the EU’s adherence to the Paris Agreement, inter alia by implementing the agreement through EU legislation, including swift adoption by the co-legislators of the EU Climate Action Regulation and the revision of the EU ETS Directive, as well as of ratcheting up the EU’s goals and policy instruments in a timely manner; recalls that all parties are invited to communicate to the UNFCCC secretariat, by 2020, mid-century, long-term, low GHG emission development strategies; urges the Commission, therefore, in order to adhere to the agreement’s obligation, to prepare by COP24 a mid-century zero emissions strategy for the EU, providing a cost-efficient pathway towards reaching the net zero emissions goal adopted in the Paris Agreement with a view to keeping the global average temperature rise well below 2 °C and pursuing efforts to limit it to 1,5 °C; considers that this process should be initiated as early as possible in order to enable a comprehensive debate, in which the European Parliament should play a crucial role, in partnership with representatives of national, regional and local authorities, as well as civil society and the business sector; recalls, however, that to act at EU level alone will not be satisfactory, and therefore calls on the Commission and the Council to step up their activities to encourage other partners to do the same;

19.  Welcomes the Paris Agreement commitment to reduce global emissions to net zero during the second half of the century; recognises that this means that most sectors in the EU need to achieve zero emissions considerably earlier;

20.  Believes that negotiations should advance on the key elements of the Paris Agreement, including an enhanced transparency framework, details of the global stocktake, further guidance on INDCs, an understanding of differentiation, loss and damage, climate finance and capacity support, inclusive multi-level governance, and a mechanism to facilitate implementation and promote compliance; urges the Commission and the Member States to uphold the commitments agreed within the framework of the Paris Agreement, especially regarding the EU’s contribution to mitigation and adaptation, as well as its support in the areas of finance, technology transfer and capacity-building;

21.  Stresses that time is of the essence in the joint efforts to combat climate change and honour the Paris Agreement; underlines that the EU has both the capacity and the responsibility to lead by example and to start work immediately on aligning its climate and energy targets with the agreed international goal of limiting the increase in global average temperature to below 2 °C, while pursuing efforts to limit that increase to 1,5 °C;

22.  Recalls that early decarbonisation is necessary if this global average temperature target is to be met and that global GHG emissions must reach their peak as soon as possible; recalls that global emissions should be phased out by 2050 or shortly thereafter so as to keep the world on a cost-effective emission trajectory compatible with the temperature targets set out in the Paris Agreement; calls on all parties in a position to do so to pursue their national decarbonisation targets and strategies by prioritising the phasing out of emissions from coal, which is the most polluting source of energy, and calls for the EU to work with its international partners to that end, providing examples of good practice;

23.  Welcomes the inclusiveness of the UNFCCC’s process; considers that ensuring effective participation requires that the issue of vested or conflicting interests be addressed; in this context, calls for all participants in the process to put in place guidelines or procedures that enhance openness, transparency and inclusiveness without compromising the aims and objectives of the UNFCCC and the Paris Agreement;

24.  Calls on all the Member States to ratify the Doha Amendment to the Kyoto Protocol;

COP23 in Bonn

25.  Welcomes the commitment made in Marrakech to completing the work programme with a view to drawing up detailed implementing rules for the Paris Agreement by 2018; considers COP23 a key milestone in this technical work;

26.  Looks forward to clarification of the structure of the 2018 Facilitative Dialogue during COP23, which will be a key opportunity to take stock of the progress made towards the agreement’s mitigation goal and to inform the preparation and revision of the parties’ 2030 NDCs by 2020, in order to reach the goals of the agreement; believes that the EU should play a proactive role in this first facilitative dialogue so as to take stock of the collective ambition and progress in fulfilling the commitments; calls on the Commission and the Member States to submit, well in advance of the facilitative dialogue, further GHG reduction commitments that go beyond current commitments under the Paris Agreement and contribute suitably to closing the mitigation gap in line with EU capabilities;

27.  Recalls that increasing mitigation action in the pre-2020 period is an absolute prerequisite for achieving the long-term goals of the Paris Agreement, and calls for the EU to ensure that near-term action remains on the COP23 agenda;

Climate finance and other means of implementation

28.  Welcomes the ‘Roadmap to US$100 Billion’ for achieving the goal of mobilising USD 100 billion by 2020 for climate action in developing countries; underlines that the mobilisation goal has been continued until 2025 as agreed at COP21;

29.  Welcomes the commitment of the parties to the Paris Agreement to making all financial flows consistent with a pathway towards low GHG emissions and climate-resilient development; considers, therefore, that the EU must tackle financial flows to fossil fuels and high-carbon infrastructure as a matter of urgency;

30.  Recognises the importance of addressing the loss and damage mechanism inserted in the Paris Agreement and strongly supports discussion of the mechanism at COP23 in Bonn;

31.  Stresses the importance of keeping human rights at the core of climate action, and insists that the Commission and the Member States ensure that the negotiations on adaptation measures recognise the need to respect, protect and promote human rights, encompassing inter alia gender equality, the full and equal participation of women, and the active promotion of a fair workforce transition that creates decent work and quality jobs for all;

32.  Welcomes the steadily increasing level of EU climate finance, but stresses that further efforts are needed; stresses the importance of ensuring that other developed parties meet their target contributions to the USD 100 billion goal; calls for concrete EU and international commitments to delivering additional sources of finance;

33.  Calls on governments and public and private financial institutions, including banks, pension funds and insurance firms, to make an ambitious commitment to aligning lending and investment practices with the global average temperature target of well below 2 °C, in line with Article 2(1)(c) of the Paris Agreement, and divesting from fossil fuels, including by phasing out export credits for fossil fuel investments; calls for specific public guarantees to promote green investment and labels and offer fiscal advantages for green investment funds and the issuing of green bonds;

34.  Acknowledges that changes to national and international tax systems, including shifting the tax burden from labour to capital, applying the ‘polluter pays’ principle, divesting from fossil fuels and setting an appropriate carbon price, are essential in order to create an economic environment conducive to encouraging the public and private investment that will enable the realisation of sustainable development objectives under industrial policies;

35.  Encourages enhanced cooperation between developed and developing countries, including within the NDC Partnership, so that countries have more effective access to the technical knowledge and financial support necessary to put in place policies to fulfil and exceed their NDCs;

36.  Calls on the Commission to undertake a full evaluation of the possible consequences of the Paris Agreement for the EU budget and to develop a dedicated, automatic EU financing mechanism providing additional and adequate funding in order to ensure that the EU contributes its fair share of the USD 100 billion international climate finance goal;

37.  Calls for concrete commitments to delivering additional sources of climate finance, including by introducing a financial transaction tax, setting aside some EU ETS emission allowances in the period 2021-2030, and allocating revenue from EU and international measures on aviation and shipping emissions to international climate finance and the Green Climate Fund;

Role of non-state actors

38.  Highlights the efforts of an ever broader range of non-state actors to decarbonise and become more resilient to climate change; emphasises the importance, therefore, of a structured and constructive dialogue between governments, the business community, cities, regions, international organisations, civil society, and academic institutions, and of ensuring their involvement in planning and implementing scalable climate actions in order to promote robust and global action for the creation of low-carbon and resilient societies and demonstrate progress towards achieving the goals of the Paris Agreement;

39.  Calls for the EU and its Member States, together with other parties to the UNFCCC, to promote a process that actively involves non-state actors in negotiations for the implementation of the Paris Agreement, supports their efforts to contribute to fulfilling a state’s NDC despite national political transformations, and enables them to explore new forms of participation and association within the framework of the UNFCCC;

40.  Emphasises the important role of the Non-State Actors Zone for Climate Action (NAZCA) to promote and track action by non-state actors, such as the Global Covenant of Mayors, Mission Innovation, InsuResilience, Sustainable Energy for All and the NDC Partnership;

41.  Welcomes the efforts of the Climate Champions under the Marrakech Partnership for Climate Action;

42.  Calls for the EU and its Member States to work with all civil society actors (institutions, the private sector, NGOs and local communities) to develop reduction initiatives in key sectors (energy, technology, cities, transport), and adaptation and resilience initiatives in response to adaptation issues, particularly as regards access to water, food security and risk prevention; calls on all governments and civil society actors to support and strengthen this agenda for action;

43.  Reminds the UN and the parties to the UNFCCC that individual action is as important as the action of governments and institutions; calls, therefore, for a greater drive to organise campaigns and activities to raise awareness and inform the public about acts, whether small or large, that can contribute to combating climate change in developed and developing countries;

Comprehensive effort of all sectors

44.  Welcomes the development of emissions trading systems worldwide, including 18 emissions trading systems in operation across four continents, accounting for 40 % of global GDP; encourages the Commission to promote links between the EU ETS and other emissions trading systems, with the aim of creating international carbon market mechanisms so as to increase climate ambition while helping to reduce the risk of carbon leakage by levelling the playing field; calls on the Commission to establish safeguards to ensure that linking the EU ETS delivers permanent mitigation contributions and does not undermine the EU’s domestic GHG emissions target;

45.  Emphasises the need for more ambition and action in order to maintain sufficient incentives to achieve the GHG emission reductions required to reach the EU’s 2050 climate and energy targets; underlines that insufficient progress has been made in GHG emission reductions in the transport and agriculture sectors with respect to the 2020 targets, and that efforts need to be scaled up if these sectors are to meet their emission reduction contribution targets up to 2030;

46.  Stresses the importance of ensuring the environmental integrity of any future market approaches, both within and beyond the Paris Agreement, by considering risks such as loopholes enabling double counting, problems with regard to the permanence and additionality of emission reductions, potential negative effects for sustainable development, and perverse incentives for lowering ambition for the level of NDCs;

47.  Stresses that the 20-20-20 targets for GHG emissions, renewable energy and energy savings have played a key role in driving this progress and sustaining the employment of more than 4,2 million people in various eco-industries, with continuous growth recorded during the economic crisis;

48.  Takes note of the 2016 ICAO Assembly decision on the establishment of a Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation (CORSIA);

49.  Expresses its disappointment, however, at the fact that ICAO did not agree on emission reductions with the introduction of CORSIA, instead focusing mainly on offsets; regrets that the quality of the offsets is not at all guaranteed, that the application of CORSIA is only legally binding from 2027 onward, and that major members of ICAO have not yet committed to participating in the voluntary phase, while other major emitters have not committed to carbon neutral growth, which raises a large number of questions as to the real effect on the climate, since the result falls far short of the expectations the EU held when it decided to stop the clock on the EU ETS; calls for the swift finalisation of a robust set of rules for the operationalisation of CORSIA, for its timely implementation at national and regional level, and for its proper enforcement by all parties; calls, furthermore, for the enhancement of all technological innovation related to engine performance and fuel quality;

50.  Recalls that while intra-European flights will continue to be covered by the EU ETS, any changes to the existing legislation and the scheduled operationalisation of CORSIA can only be considered in the light of the system’s level of ambition and the implementing measures yet to be developed;

51.  Takes note of the roadmap for developing a ‘Comprehensive IMO strategy on the reduction of GHG emissions from ships’ adopted at the 70th session of the Marine Environment Protection Committee of the International Maritime Organisation (IMO); urges the IMO to develop a global mechanism in line with the goals of the Paris Agreement by setting an ambitious emission reduction target and drawing up a concrete timetable, as part of the initial IMO GHG strategy to be adopted in spring 2018;

52.  Welcomes the Kigali amendment on a global phase-down of climate-warming hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs); considers that it represents a concrete step in delivering the Paris Agreement, which could avoid emissions of well over 70 billion tonnes of CO2 equivalent by 2050, which equals 11 times the annual emissions of the US, and hence encourages all parties to the Montreal Protocol to take all necessary steps towards its swift ratification; recalls that the EU has adopted ambitious legislation to phase down HFCs by 79 % by 2030, as climate-friendly alternatives are widely available and their potential should be fully exploited;

Climate resilience through adaptation

53.  Notes that the priorities of the Fiji Presidency for COP23 include areas where adaptation and resilience actions feature prominently; recalls that adaptation action is an inevitable necessity for all countries if they are to minimise negative effects and make full use of the opportunities for climate-resilient growth and sustainable development;

54.  Calls for long-term adaptation objectives to be set accordingly; recalls that developing countries, in particular LDCs and small island developing states, which have contributed least to climate change, are the most vulnerable to its adverse effects and have the least capacity to adapt;

55.  Emphasises the need to truly integrate climate change adaptation into national development strategies, including financial planning, while improving coordination channels between different levels of governance and stakeholders; considers that coherence with disaster risk reduction strategies and plans is also important;

56.  Stresses the importance of assessing specifically the impacts of climate change on cities and their unique adaptation and mitigation challenges and opportunities; considers that reinforcing cities’ and local authorities’ ability to engage and work towards the resilience of their community is key to addressing the local dimension of climate change impacts;

57.  Considers that climate policies can enjoy sufficient support provided they are accompanied by social measures, including a fair transition fund to link the existing challenges presented by the fight against climate change with efforts to combat unemployment and precarious employment;

58.  Calls on the Commission to reassess the 2013 EU Adaptation Strategy in order to bring more focus and added value to the adaptation work at the overall EU level by strengthening the linkages with the Paris Agreement and supporting the further development of an effective sharing of good practices, examples and information on adaptation work; stresses the need to develop systems and tools to keep track of the progress and effectiveness of national adaptation plans and actions;

59.  Recalls that farmlands, wetlands and forest, which cover more than 90 % of the EU’s land surface, will be harshly affected by climate change; stresses that this sector – known as land use, land use change and forestry (LULUCF) – is both a sink and a source of emissions and is crucial for mitigation and enhancing resilience;

60.  Recalls that, pursuant to Article 2 thereof, the Paris Agreement of 4 November 2016 has the aim, inter alia, of increasing the ability to adapt to the adverse impacts of climate change and foster climate resilience and low greenhouse gas emissions development, in a manner that does not threaten food production, and calls on the Commission and the Member States to make finance flows consistent with this aim;

61.  Underlines the serious negative, and often irreversible, consequences of inaction, recalling that climate change affects all regions around the world in different but highly damaging ways, resulting in migration flows and loss of lives, as well as economic, ecological and social losses; stresses that a concerted global political and financial push for innovation in clean and renewable energy is crucial to meeting our climate goals and to facilitating growth;

62.  Acknowledges the many difficulties involved in establishing an accepted universal definition of ‘climate refugee’, but calls for serious recognition of the nature and extent of climate-induced displacement and migration resulting from disasters caused by global warming; notes with concern that between 2008 and 2013 some 166 million people were forced to leave their homes because of natural disasters, rising sea levels, extreme weather phenomena, desertification, water shortages, and the spread of tropical and vector-borne diseases; recalls in particular that climate-related developments in parts of Africa and the Middle East could contribute to political instability, economic hardship and an escalation of the refugee crisis in the Mediterranean;

63.  Notes that deforestation and forest degradation are responsible for 20 % of global GHG emissions, and emphasises the role of forests and active sustainable forest management in climate change mitigation and the need to enhance the adaptive capacities and resilience of forests to climate change; emphasises the need for mitigation efforts focused on the tropical forest sector (REDD+); stresses that the goal of limiting global warming to below 2 °C is likely to prove impossible without these mitigation efforts; calls furthermore for the EU to scale up international financing for reducing deforestation in developing countries;

Support for developing countries

64.  Emphasises the importance of the role developing countries also play in attaining the objectives of the Paris Agreement and the need to help those countries implement their climate plans, fully exploiting the synergies with the relevant Sustainable Development Goals of the climate measures implemented, the Addis Ababa Action Plan and Agenda 2030;

65.  Stresses the need to promote universal access to sustainable energy in developing countries, in particular in Africa, through the enhanced deployment of renewable energy; points out that Africa has huge natural resources that can safeguard its energy security; stresses that, ultimately, if electricity interconnections were successfully established, part of Europe’s energy could come from Africa;

66.  Stresses that the EU has the experience, capacity and global reach to be the leader in building the smarter, cleaner and more resilient infrastructure needed to deliver the global transition set in motion by the Paris Agreement; calls for the EU to support developing countries’ efforts in the transition towards low-carbon societies which are more inclusive, socially and environmentally sustainable, prosperous and safer;

Industry and competitiveness

67.  Welcomes the continued efforts of and the progress made by European industry in meeting its obligations and taking full advantage of the opportunities arising from the Paris Agreement, which can result in successful and cost-effective climate action;

68.  Underlines that combating climate change is a global priority and should be pursued as a truly worldwide effort while ensuring energy security and a sustainable economy;

69.  Stresses that a stable and predictable legal framework and clear policy signals at both EU and global level would facilitate and enhance climate-related investment;

70.  Underlines that continued commitment, especially on the part of key global emitters, is crucial for climate action and the Paris Agreement; deeply regrets the announcement by the US administration regarding its stance on the Paris Agreement; strongly welcomes, however, the continued support of major US industries that clearly understand the risks of climate change and the opportunities arising from climate action;

71.  Considers that, should other major economies fail to make commitments comparable with those of the EU on GHG emissions reductions, it will be necessary to maintain carbon leakage provisions, particularly those aimed at sectors exposed to both a high trade intensity and a high share of carbon costs in production, in order to ensure the global competitiveness of European industry;

72.  Welcomes the fact that China and other major competitors of the EU’s energy-intensive industries are introducing carbon trading or other pricing mechanisms; considers that, until a level playing field is achieved, the EU should maintain adequate and proportionate measures to ensure the competitiveness of its industry and prevent carbon leakage where needed, taking into consideration that energy, industry and climate policies go hand in hand;

73.  Underlines the importance of increasing the numbers of skilled workers in industry and promoting knowledge and best practices for stimulating the creation of quality jobs, while supporting a fair transition for the workforce where necessary;

Energy policy

74.  Calls for the EU to push the international community to adopt without delay concrete measures, including a timetable, for progressively phasing out environmentally harmful subsidies, including for fossil fuels, which distort competition, discourage international cooperation and hinder innovation;

75.  Stresses the importance of energy savings, energy efficiency and renewable energy for reducing emissions, as well as for financial savings, energy security and preventing and alleviating energy poverty in order to protect and help vulnerable and poor households; calls for the global promotion of energy efficiency and savings measures and the development of renewables (e.g. by stimulating self-production and consumption of renewable energy sources) as well as their effective deployment; recalls that prioritisation of energy efficiency and global leadership in renewables are two of the main goals of the EU’s Energy Union;

76.  Underlines the importance of developing energy storage technologies, smart grids and demand response that will contribute to strengthening the effective deployment of renewable energy in power generation and the household heating and cooling sectors;

Research, innovation and digital technologies

77.  Underlines the fact that continued and reinforced research and innovation in the areas of climate change mitigation, adaptation policies, resource efficiency, low-emission technologies and sustainable use of secondary raw material (‘circular economy’) hold the key to fighting climate change in a cost-effective way, as well as reducing dependence on fossil fuels; calls, therefore, for global commitments to boost and focus investment in this area;

78.  Stresses that advances in the technologies necessary for decarbonisation will call for clear policy signals, including the reduction of market and regulatory barriers to new technologies and business models, as well as well-targeted public expenditure;

79.  Recalls that research, innovation and competitiveness are among the five pillars of the EU’s Energy Union strategy; notes that the EU is determined to remain a global leader in these fields, while at the same time developing close scientific cooperation with international partners; stresses the importance of building and maintaining a strong innovation capacity in both developed and emerging countries for the deployment of clean and sustainable energy technologies;

80.  Recalls the fundamental role of digital technologies in facilitating the energy transition, creating new sustainable business models and improving energy efficiency and savings; stresses the environmental benefits that the digitalisation of European industry can bring through the efficient use of resources and the reduction of material intensity;

81.  Underlines the importance of making full use of existing EU programmes and instruments such as Horizon 2020 which are open to third-country participation, especially in the fields of energy, climate change and sustainable development;

82.  Calls for better use of technologies such as space satellites for accurate collection of data on emissions, temperature and climate change; points in particular to the contribution of the Copernicus programme; also calls for transparent cooperation and information-sharing between countries and openness of data for the scientific community;

Climate diplomacy

83.  Strongly supports the continued focus of the EU on climate diplomacy, which is essential for raising the profile of climate action in partner countries and global public opinion; stresses the need to maintain climate change as a strategic priority in diplomatic dialogues, taking into account the latest developments and the changing geopolitical landscape; underlines the fact that the European External Action Service (EEAS) and the Member States have an enormous foreign policy capacity and must show leadership in climate fora; stresses that ambitious and urgent climate action, together with the implementation of COP21 commitments, must remain one of the EU’s priorities in high-level bilateral and bi-regional dialogues with partner countries, the G7, the G20, the UN and other international fora;

84.  Reiterates its view that climate policy objectives be placed at the centre of the EU’s foreign policy efforts and global agenda; urges the EU and the Member States to demonstrate leadership in global climate action by continuous commitment to the Paris Agreement and by actively reaching out to strategic partners, at both national and subnational level, in order to form or strengthen climate alliances so as to maintain the momentum towards an ambitious climate protection regime;

85.  Urges the EU and the Member States to work towards achieving a broader awareness, analysis and management of climate risks, and to support the EU’s partners around the world in their efforts to better understand, integrate, anticipate and manage the impacts of climate change on domestic stability, international security and the displacement of people;

86.  Commits itself to using its international role and membership of international parliamentary networks to consistently seek progress towards the swift implementation of the Paris Agreement;

Role of the European Parliament

87.  Believes, since Parliament must give its consent to international agreements and plays a central role in the domestic implementation of the Paris Agreement as co-legislator, it needs to be well integrated into the EU delegation; expects, therefore, that it be allowed to attend EU coordination meetings in Bonn and be guaranteed access to all preparatory documents from the moment negotiations begin;

o
o   o

88.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission, the governments and parliaments of the Member States and the Secretariat of the UNFCCC, with the request that it be circulated to all non-EU parties.

(1) Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0383.