European Parliament resolution on Policy Challenges and Budgetary Means of the enlarged Union 2007-2013 (2004/2209(INI))

P6_TA(2005)0224 A6-0153/2005

The European Parliament,

–   having regard to the EC Treaty and in particular Articles 268 to 276 thereof,

–   having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 6 May 1999 between the European Parliament, the Council, and the Commission on budgetary discipline and improvement of the budgetary procedure(1),

–   having regard to the communications from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament of 10 February 2004 - Building our common Future: Policy challenges and Budgetary means of the Enlarged Union (COM(2004)0101) and of 14 July 2004 on Financial Perspectives 2007-2013 (COM(2004)0487), the Commission's working document of 14 July 2004 "Proposal for renewal of the Interinstitutional Agreement on budgetary discipline and improvement of the budgetary procedure" (COM(2004)0498), the Commission's proposal of 14 July 2004 for a Council decision on the system of the European Communities' own resources (COM(2004)0501) and the Commission's report of 14 July 2004 on the operation of the own resources system (COM(2004)0505),

–   having regard to the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe(2),

–   having regard to Council Decision 2000/597/EC, Euratom of 29 September 2000 on the system of the European Communities' own resources(3);

–   having regard to its resolution of 22 April 2004 on building our common future: policy challenges and budgetary means of the enlarged Union 2007-2013(4),

–   having regard to its decision of 15 September 2004 on setting up a Temporary Committee on Policy Challenges and Budgetary Means of the Enlarged Union 2007-2013(5),

–   having regard to its question for oral answer O-0067/2004 (B6-0130/2004) to the Council and its resolution on the Financial Perspective with a view to the European Council meeting in December 2004(6) to the Council,

–   having regard to its question for oral answer O-0068/2004 (B6-0131/2004) to the Commission,

–   having regard to Rule 175 of its Rules of Procedure,

–   having regard to the report of Temporary Committee on Policy Challenges and Budgetary Means of the enlarged Union 2007-2013 and the opinions of the Committee on Budgetary Control, the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs, the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety, the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy, the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection, the Committee on Transport and Tourism, the Committee on Regional Development, the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development, the Committee on Fisheries, the Committee on Culture and Education, the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs, the Committee on Constitutional Affairs, the Committee on Women's Rights and Gender Equality, the Committee on Foreign Affairs, the Committee on Development, and the Committee on International Trade (A6-0153/2005),

A.   whereas the current Financial Perspective and the Interinstitutional Agreement of 6 May 1999 on budgetary discipline and improvement of the budgetary procedure will in principle end in 2006;

B.   whereas most Community legislation with financial implications will terminate in 2006;

C.   whereas the preparation of the next Financial Perspective is one of the major challenges to be faced by the Union over the coming months, as it will shape the new enlarged Europe, having regard to new internal and global challenges and tasks;

D.   whereas the European Parliament decided to set up a Temporary Committee with the following mandate:

E.   whereas the Temporary Committee should present its final report before the European Council establishes its common position;

F.   whereas in accordance with paragraph 26 of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 6 May 1999, the Commission has initiated the process of the preparation of the new Financial Perspective and the new Interinstitutional Agreement by presenting proposals on 10 February and 14 July 2004 respectively;

G.   whereas the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe (the Constitution) strengthens the role of the European Parliament in many legislative areas, widens the scope of the Parliament's budgetary authority, and, in Article I-55 and in Article III-402(5), provides for the multi-annual financial framework to become a European law of the Council, adopted by unanimity after conciliation with and the consent of the European Parliament, to be given by a majority of its component members;

H.   whereas paragraph 26 of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 6 May 1999 provides for a prolongation of the current Financial Perspective, unless it is expressly denounced by one of the parties to this agreement;

I.   whereas, in the absence of an interinstitutional agreement, the EC Treaty allows for the adoption of annual budgets under the provisions of Articles 272 and 273 if the budget has not been adopted by the beginning of the financial year;

J.   whereas the new Commission officially endorsed the proposals of the former Commission regarding the structure, the duration and the level of financial resources per year and per heading of expenditure of the new Financial Perspective and all the legislative proposals known collectively as the "Prodi Package";

K.   whereas, in its above-mentioned resolution of 22 April 2004, the European Parliament stressed that "there will be no financial perspective without an agreement between the European Parliament and the Council on the financial package, as the existing Treaty foresees no obligation to have a financial perspective and only provides for annual budgets";

L.   whereas the VAT and GDP resources (which were intended at the time when they were established as revenues complementary to traditional EU own resources) have gradually become the principal source of financing for the Community budget; whereas, together with the derogation regimes which have been added to the current own-resources system, they have only made it more complex, more opaque for citizens and increasingly less equitable and have led to a financing system which has resulted in unacceptable inequalities between Member States;

M.   whereas the conclusions of the December 2004 European Council confirmed the "Prodi Package" as the working basis for the Council, which agreed on institutional dialogue through regular contacts with the European Parliament;

N.   whereas in the conclusions of the December 2004 European Council, the link between the Financial Perspective and the issue of own resources and the correction mechanism is clearly established;

O.   whereas, over the last six months, the Temporary Committee:

P.   whereas the Constitution provides for the possibility of introducing new categories of EU own resources and of abolishing an existing category,

General context

1.  Insists that the enlarging European Union should have appropriate financial resources to match the scale of its rising political ambitions and to meet its growing responsibilities at home and abroad; insists further that all expenditure from the EU budget should be designed to add European value to the public expenditure of Member States, and that the principle of subsidiarity should be strictly respected with regard to spending decisions in the field of non-exclusive competence - in particular the criterion that EU action does, by reason of its scale or effects, better achieve the objectives of the Union;

2.  In the interests of sound financial management, simplification and democratic accountability, demands improvements in and simplification of the mechanisms of financial control both at the level of the institutions and within the Member States, so as to ensure real public accountability for all EU spending;

3.  Recalls that the Financial Perspective is a financial framework aiming to secure the development of EU priorities in a context of budgetary discipline, and is not a multi-annual budget set for seven years; points out that the Financial Perspective remains a reference and therefore must provide the necessary flexibility to reflect medium-term political ambitions and provide the financial resources needed in order to enable future challenges to be met effectively and fairly, as laid down in the EC Treaty; is determined to make full use of the powers granted to it under Article 272 of the Treaty, pursuant to which an annual budgetary procedure is established for the purpose of approving the expenditure of the European Union;

4.  Notes that the new Barroso Commission has fully endorsed the proposals presented by the Prodi Commission over the last months of its mandate; however, rejects a system which binds the elected and executive bodies of the European Union over three consecutive mandates;

5.  Is aware of the difficult political, economic and social context in several Member States, but recalls that the EU budget has increased by 8.2% between 1996 and 2002, while the average increase in national budgets (EU-15) has been 22.9%; notes that the MacDougall report(7) considers that the European budget should amount to 2% to 2.5% of Member States' GDP; takes the opportunity to point out that the ceiling of own resources decided in 1993 for 15 Member States has remained unchanged since then, i.e. 1.31% of EU GNI for commitment appropriations and 1.24% of EU GNI for payment appropriations; recalls that the level of the EU budget currently accounts for under 2.5% of aggregate public spending in the Union compared to an average of 47% of EU GNI for total public spending;

6.  Considers that the costs of enlargement, which must be tackled in a fair and equitable way, can be perfectly assumed by the 15 old Member States and that they must be considered as a minimum, taking into account the political, social and economic benefits that the reunification of Europe represents for the whole Union;

7.  Is convinced that the Financial Perspective can allow for balanced development of the financial resources allocated to the Union provided that:

8.  Stresses that the debate on the Financial Perspective is closely linked to the issue of own resources, the correction mechanism and various forms of co-financing and financial instruments and the need to adapt the existing system, as acknowledged by the European Council in its conclusions of December 2004; regrets that the Commission did not present more ambitious proposals to replace the current system in parallel with the new Financial Perspective;

9.  Will take account, in its final vote, of the way in which the Council acknowledges the need for a thorough reform of the current own resources system on the basis of which new expenditure can be shared out fairly among the Member States and, subsequently, a return can be made to the original principle of the funding of common policies with genuine own resources using a transparent, equitable and democratic system which should enter into force at the latest at the beginning of the following Financial Perspective;

10.  Notes that the entry into force of the Constitution will modify the legislative procedure for a number of proposals, introducing co-decision; is aware that it would be impossible to anticipate the Constitution in legal terms before the end of the ratification procedure; urges the Council to agree on a gentleman's agreement to safeguard the legislative powers of the European Parliament and to introduce a revision clause for legislative acts whose procedure will change after the Constitution comes into force;

11.  Considers that,

12.  Recalls that under the current Treaties a Financial Perspective does not have a formal status and can only be established with the approval of the European Parliament on a voluntary basis; recalls further that, if no agreement is reached, the EC Treaty will be applied for the purpose of regulating the adoption of annual budgets; stresses that it will not agree on the next Financial Perspective if its priorities are not taken into consideration by the Council;

13.  Welcomes to some extent the Commission's proposals on the next financial framework 2007-2013 and the related legislative proposals, which form part of the "Prodi Package" and are intended to replace most of the current legislation ending in 2006, as an opportunity for the enlarged Union to further develop a new political agenda; after an in-depth analysis by its Temporary Committee and by the 17 committees which delivered opinions to it, considers that the Commission proposals have received qualified support and, as such, are an acceptable basis for analysis and future negotiations; nevertheless draws the Council's attention to certain political priorities where European added value for the Union and its citizens is of the utmost importance;

14.  Regards it as essential, moreover, that the Financial Perspective be approved promptly so that it can be fully operational from 1 January 2007, thereby preventing any hiatus in the work of the EU, in particular as regards the Commission's legislative proposals;

Part I Policy challenges
A more competitive and cohesive Europe
Cohesion

15.  Welcomes the proposed reform of cohesion policy with a view to placing it at the service of the objectives of growth, employment and sustainable development; considers that European regional policy is an indispensable tool for promoting social, economic and territorial cohesion, permitting the Union to undertake actions to reduce regional disparities, with a view to fostering the harmonious development of the Union as a whole and addressing structural shortcomings (difficult access, depopulation and low population density, remote location etc.), so as to stimulate the sustainable development of the regions, their growth, competitiveness and employment; underlines the importance of cohesion policy in achieving the Lisbon goals and helping to bridge the gap between the different territories of the European Union; insists that all resources allocated to cohesion policy should be spent for this purpose; is convinced that joint action at European level is cost-effective since it allows for economies of scale, the rationalisation of procedures and the pooling of resources, particularly in the context of cross-border co-operation; considers that the existence of a strong, well-financed European regional policy is a condition sine qua non of the Union's ability to deal with successive enlargements and reduce regional disparities and that, in the process, the basic structure of the system of assistance programmes, with three pillars, must be maintained in terms of the comparative relationship between them; considers, therefore, the amount of 0.41% of the Union's GNI and 4% of national GNI of the new Member States as adequate, provided the Member States can ensure that the actions take place in addition to national and regional measures and that the corresponding co-financing (using public and private funds) is made available; is determined to monitor the strict application by the Commission of the N+2 rule in the Structural Funds and insists, therefore, that the present rules regarding the Cohesion Fund should be further applied;

Research

16.  Stresses that scientific research, technological development and innovation are at the heart of the knowledge-based economy and are key factors for growth and sustainable development, the competitiveness of companies, employment, and attainment of the objectives of the Lisbon Strategy; considers that research efforts should be boosted and consolidated at EU level, developing centres of excellence, bringing added value to industry, SMEs and the citizens of Europe, and promoting cooperation between private and public actors, especially regarding research infrastructure and the encouragement of public-private partnerships; stresses that this Financial Perspective must make a substantial contribution towards reaching the target established at the 2002 Barcelona European Council for an increase in R&D expenditure to 3% of EU GNI by 2010, and that this must be factored into future Financial Perspectives; considers that provision should be made for appropriate resources for the implementation of the Space Programme within the envelope for research, and that legislative instruments and financial resources should benefit from a revision clause once the Constitution enters into force; insists that the European Research Area should effectively include all 25 Member States; regards it as vital both for European competitivity and for social cohesion that the digital gap between regions and social groups should be bridged and that no EU citizen must be excluded from the information society;

Trans-European Networks

17.  Welcomes the Commission proposal on TEN-T priority projects; notes however that the resources allocated for 30 transport priority projects as well as for the Marco Polo programme constitute a minimum amount which must be regarded as subject to upward revision; underlines the strategic importance of transport networks for final consolidation of the EU single market and for closer EU relations with candidate, pre-candidate and 'ring of friends' countries; notes that the interconnection of transport networks can underpin the development of trade and investment, thereby promoting sustainability and stability as well as social, economic and geographical cohesion; calls for adequate funding for the development of transport interconnections and common infrastructure shared by the countries; insists that this funding should be conditional on guarantees by the Member States of adequate counterpart funding and adequate access to the network for the regions concerned, and is willing to examine innovative financing instruments such as loan guarantees, European concessions, European loans and an interest relief fund, to cover public and private-sector investment only in research, innovation, space and major physical and non-physical networks, or EIB facilities;

18.  Notes that the new regulation would also allow financing infrastructure in the TEN-E programme, which was not the case in the previous framework 2000-2006; is of the opinion that studies should be the main focus of support under this programme;

The Social Policy Agenda

19.  Considers that the modest financial means earmarked for the implementation of the Social Policy Agenda constitute the minimum needed to enable a contribution to be made to the Lisbon strategy for sustainable growth with more and better jobs; considers that an adequate level of Community expenditure in the social policy area remains crucial, in particular in terms of employment and social protection; stresses however that primary responsibility and competence in social policy matters lies with the Member States; believes that an increase of EUR 200 million is necessary in order to attain the goals of the Social Policy Agenda;

Education and training

20.  Considers lifelong learning, including education and training, to be one of the highest priorities for the next Financial Perspective and a key factor for growth, social inclusion and competitiveness; regards the proposed increase in its financial envelope as the absolute minimum necessary for the attainment of EU objectives in this area; considers that the effectiveness of European programmes in the field of lifelong learning, including education and training, are self-evident as they provide added value and are an instrument for spreading innovation and good practice that would otherwise remain locked within national borders; stresses that mobility throughout the Union for students and workers must be strengthened so as to enable them to benefit from new opportunities; stresses that more students should be involved in joint educational activities; welcomes the consolidation into a single instrument; believes that an increase of EUR 670 million is necessary in order to attain its goals;

A better quality of life
Rural development

21.  Considers that the restructuring of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) needs to be accompanied by a substantial increase in rural development funds to address the problems of employment and competitiveness in rural areas, in particular in the new Member States; considers that investment in rural development also requires support for enterprises which promote diversification of the countryside; is of the opinion that the Commission's proposal for the budget of the new Rural Development Fund is extremely tight and therefore constitutes an absolute minimum;

Environment

22.  Welcomes the Commission's proposal that Natura 2000 be integrated into the Rural Development Fund and the structural funds which should be the main sources of financial resources alongside a significantly strengthened Life+ programme; insists in this context on a legally binding mechanism which guarantees proper implementation and EU funding for Natura 2000 at the level of the EU's estimated contribution to the envisaged overall amount, which is approximately EUR 6.1 billion for the EU-25 per year; insists that an amount of EUR 21 billion for Natura 2000 should therefore be earmarked ("ring-fenced") in the Financial Perspective within the respective areas; calls for the funding of measures to implement Natura 2000 under Heading 2 of the Financial Perspective; calls for the funding of Natura 2000 activities and management which cannot be financed by other instruments within the Life+ programme; calls on the Commission in this context to examine the possible integration of Natura 2000 in other funds;

An Area of Freedom, Security and Justice

23.  Singles out the completion of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice as one of its political priorities for the period of the next financial framework and notes that the Commission has proposed a substantial increase in the funds allocated to it; considers that the proposed allocation to this area of around two thirds of the funds provided for in the proposed Heading 3 may not be sufficient to cover the needs and the ambitions of the European Union in this area as defined by the European Parliament and the Council; believes that an increase of EUR 1 billion is necessary in order to attain its goals; moreover, believes that a sufficient margin must be left under Heading 3 to allow for unforeseen needs and new developments;

24.  In the light of the priority given to the fight against organised crime, including terrorism, and the strengthening of judicial cooperation, calls for a consolidation of the budgetary resources made available to Europol and Eurojust; calls, further, for that measure to be accompanied by a strengthening of the democratic scrutiny of Europol;

A Europe closer to the citizen
Fostering European citizenship, culture and diversity

25.  Considers the Youth in Action Programme a priority; believes that the current Youth programme has clearly demonstrated the added European value of Community action in organising multilateral youth exchanges, a European voluntary service, the networking of projects, and European training for youth workers; welcomes the proposed rationalisation of Community instruments in this field; believes that an increase from EUR 811 million to EUR 1 000 million is necessary in order to attain its goals;

26.  Welcomes the rationalisation of Community instruments in the field of culture envisaged in the Commission's proposal for a Culture 2007 programme (COM(2004)0469); deplores the fact that, at present, only 7 cents per head out of the EU budget is spent on the arts; believes that an increase from EUR 360 million to EUR 500 million is necessary to improve the financing of the Commission proposal;

27.  Is concerned that a large majority of European citizens say that they know little or nothing about the European Union, its institutions, its policies, or its achievements; stresses that the Union must make available the means necessary to support an effective information and communication strategy to explain to citizens how the institutions which exist to serve them work and why they pursue the policy goals they do; calls for increased coherence between the financial perspectives and the new provisions of the Constitution, also with regard to participatory democracy and, in particular, to the development of civil dialogue and the implementation of citizens' initiatives; welcomes the submission of a legislative proposal for the successor programme to the Civic Participation Programme that remains a priority in order to promote an active and vibrant civil society and bring Europe closer to its citizens through a bottom-up process;

A stronger Europe in a safer world of greater solidarity

28.  Insists on a level of funding for external actions sufficient to enable the EU to become a real "global partner" in the world and to provide it with the means for its political ambitions and its international commitments; stresses its unwillingness to perpetuate a situation of constant pressure under Heading 4 as occurred under the current Financial Perspective and points particularly to the need for a high level of flexibility and sufficient margin to allow for unforeseen events; points out the need to provide sufficient funding to ensure the implementation of the approach indicated by the Constitution in this area, in particular the new Neighbourhood Policy on the basis of the special partnership provided for in Article I-57 thereof;

29.  Underlines the need to further diversify the European Neighbourhood strategy providing also an attractive alternative for those countries which potentially could become Member States of the European Union but which will ultimately remain close partners of the Union; insists that the European Parliament, being part of the budgetary authority, must in the future be involved as an equal partner, as it is today, in any decision concerning the transition of a potential candidate to a pre-accession candidate, owing to the significant budgetary implications; is of the strong opinion that an increase of funds is necessary in order to deepen relations with its neighbouring countries and to provide an adequate level of funds for potential candidate and candidate countries that guarantees them fair and equal treatment; draws attention, in particular, to the fact that the resources available to fund EU relations with the developing countries must be considered as a minimum with a view to honouring the European commitment to help those countries achieve the Millennium Development Goals by 2015;

30.  Calls for coherence between the provisions of proposed legislative instruments and the likely forthcoming provisions of the Constitution, enhancing in all cases effective democratic participation of the European Parliament in decision-making, including the adoption and revision of multi-annual strategic frameworks; points to the particular need for greater participation of the European Parliament in decisions on CFSP actions, especially where these have budgetary implications; in this regard, considers it indispensable to develop further the current practices for information and consultation of Parliament in the context of CFSP; considers that allocation of funding should fall under the "normal" EU budget and thus under the discharge authority of the EP;

31.  Welcomes the impending creation of the European External Action Service and insists that its administrative costs will fall in their entirety to the EU budget;

32.  Welcomes the renewed determination of the EU and the US leaderships with a view to shaping a common agenda, including joint actions on foreign policy issues; notes that this approach is not reflected in the Commission proposals and insists that the European Parliament should participate in decisions on these matters if they have budgetary implications;

Part II Organisation and structure of the financial framework
Duration

33.  Notes that the Commission has proposed a financial framework of 7 years' duration; reiterates, for reasons of democratic responsibility and accountability, its position in favour of a parallelism between the duration of the Financial Perspective and the five-year mandates of the European Parliament and of the Commission, and recalls that the Constitution provides for a duration for the future MFF of a minimum of five years, which would allow for co-ordination with the terms of office of the Commission and of the European Parliament; points out that the duration of the legislative proposals could remain independent from the timeframe of the Financial Perspective; therefore requests its delegation negotiating the Interinstitutional Agreement to insist that the future Interinstitutional Agreement include provisions guaranteeing a longer (up to 7 years) duration for multi-annual programmes, compared to the duration of the future Financial Perspective, in particular for major policies such as agricultural policy, structural and cohesion policy and research;

34.  Supports the Commission's proposal for a financial framework of 7 years' duration; considers that a shorter time framework would be technically and politically impractical, and that a longer financial perspective will contribute to the stability of the system and facilitate the programming of the cohesion policy and of other financial instruments of the common budget;

Structure

35.  Takes note of the Commission's proposal to restructure the next financial framework, with the aim of better reflecting the broad policy goals, strengthening social and economic cohesion and making the EU's multi-annual spending more visible to its citizens, but considers that in some cases this introduces unnecessary rigidity;

36.  Considers that the relevance of Heading 3 (Citizenship, Freedom, Security and Justice) may be questioned in terms of the volume of appropriations compared with all the other headings, but that it is nevertheless acceptable in political terms; is in favour of the creation of an autonomous sub-heading for the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice within this heading, in order to ensure greater visibility for this important political priority of the EU, and at the same time wishes to ensure that funding of the other parts of the heading is not reduced;

37.  Recalls that once the Constitution is in force and the distinction between compulsory and non-compulsory expenditure is abolished, the ring-fencing of resources for market-related expenditure and direct payments under Heading 2 will no longer exist;

Administrative expenditure

38.  Is willing to maintain a structure which facilitates control by the budgetary authority over the Commission's administrative expenditure and is therefore against the proposal to remove this expenditure from Heading 5; considers nevertheless that the Activity-Based Budgeting (ABB) system introduced for the budgetary nomenclature should be preserved and further developed; is therefore in favour of leaving the Commission's administrative expenditure within each policy area but of establishing a binding ceiling outside the Financial Perspective table, with the possibility for this ceiling to be increased only by a decision of the budgetary authority, using any means offered by the future Interinstitutional Agreement; stresses that budgetary rigour should be upheld by all the EU institutions;

Agencies

39.  Is concerned about the constant increase of all types of agencies (decentralised, executive and regulatory agencies) and deplores the fact that the Commission has not been able to provide details of multi-annual programming for agencies over the next financial framework; calls on the legislative authorities to take budgetary impacts into account when establishing new agencies; emphasises, in the same context, that the increase in the working tasks of individual agencies also has massive budgetary impacts on the EU budget; calls on the Member States, in connection with the establishment of new agencies, to take the necessary responsibility for their future financing;

40.  Stresses that the development of agencies should in future be continuously examined by both the budgetary and legislative authorities, not only because of the administrative burden decentralised bodies create for the budget (2 735 staff on top of the Commission's establishment plans in the 2005 budget), but also because of the risk of intergovernmental influence on common policies through the presence of Member States' representatives on their management boards and the lack of democratic accountability to the European Parliament;

41.  Calls for an approach similar to that requested for the Commission's administrative expenditure, based on the establishment of a binding ceiling for the agencies, outside the Financial Perspective table, which can be increased only by a decision of the budgetary authority using all means offered by the future Interinstitutional Agreement; intends by these means to improve control and transparency over the agencies without adverse effects on the programmes;

Revision, flexibility and reserves

42.  Recalls that during the current Financial Perspective all the various instruments provided for to increase the ceiling of the Financial Perspective, such as revision, adjustment, flexibility and the Solidarity Fund, were mobilised following a joint agreement to respond to permanent and structural needs or to finance unforeseen needs; stresses that flexibility is an indispensable tool in a multi-annual context; recalls that until 1999 the Financial Perspective was revised on a number of occasions and that, over recent years, and especially during the current Financial Perspective (2000-2006), the Flexibility Instrument has been mobilised six years out of seven, which clearly shows that some headings were underfinanced; calls, in future, for the flexibility mechanisms not to be used to finance permanent annual needs;

43.  Emphasises that flexibility will play a crucial part in the European Parliament's negotiating position; will reject any attempt by the Council to agree on a financial framework without appropriate mechanisms to adapt it to future needs and considers that it is a major responsibility of the budgetary authority to provide for such mechanisms; believes that the volume and the instruments of flexibility are closely linked to the decision on the overall figures and the final structure and duration of the financial framework;

44.  Therefore proposes:

45.  Stresses that the principle of creating reserves for flexibility is a non-negotiable part of the overall agreement on the financial framework; considers that the level of flexibility should be closely linked to the global ceiling of the financial framework and that the amounts allocated to unforeseen needs should:

Part III Budgetary means and alternatives

47.  Considers that the Commission proposal is globally acceptable; is of the opinion that, whilst some headings have been overestimated, others do not reflect the ambitions that an enlarged Union of 490 million inhabitants may expect in political, economic and solidarity terms over the coming years;

48.  Is of the opinion that options and alternatives need to be explored to find a compromise between the ambition to deepen European integration, budgetary rigour, the legitimate expectations of the new Member States and the Commission's proposals; is also willing to rebalance the global volume of expenditure in accordance with its own political priorities for the future;

49.  States, in consequence, as options for alternatives with respect to the Commission proposal and, as shown in the table annexed, that it:

50.  Believes that the negotiations should not only focus on percentages and figures but should also introduce other elements such as the principles of equity and gradualness which are fundamental to the EU, with a view to striking a balance which can meet the expectations of both Member States and citizens; calls on the Commission and the Council to consider these elements as sine qua non conditions for reaching an agreement with the European Parliament; states in this regard that it:

Part IV Recommendations for the standing committees on legislative aspects

51.  Considers that the following recommendations should constitute an indicative orientation for the specialised committees, without prejudice to future legislative decisions;

Competitiveness and innovation

52.  Remains concerned that previous innovation and competitiveness programmes have failed to deliver the necessary link between fundamental and applied research and industrial innovation partly due to the fact that the financial resources were rather limited; believes that the support of the European public is indispensable for realising the Lisbon goals; considers that the Commission should propose a simplification of its financial procedures with a view to facilitating the implementation of research policy; considers that financial instruments need to be rethought in a more fine-tuned, targeted way and that the establishment of an ambitious programme for competitiveness and innovation endowed with adequate financial resources is vital for supporting a "prosperity" oriented industrial policy, notably for SMEs, that would successfully capitalise on research through industrial applications, such as technology transfer from universities and research centres into industrial application; considers that further steps should be taken to foster development of the information society as proposed by the Commission, developing and promoting international standards for ICT and mobile telecommunication technology, monitoring the implementation of the electronic communications legislative framework, supporting EU benchmarking activities in the field of eEurope action plan initiatives and further enhancing EU security research; regards such a programme as essential in order to achieve the objectives of the Lisbon Strategy in the sphere of new technologies and ecotechnologies; considers that adequate funding must be secured through the 7th EU Research Programme (FP7) and the Competitiveness and Innovation Framework Programme (CIP) for the EU Action Plan for Environmental Technologies (ETAP); calls for adequate funding for the support of innovative SMEs and initiatives aimed at helping the commercialisation of research and the transfer of technology, notably through the European Investment Fund;

Space Programme

53.  Notes that the European space policy is now a part of the Research Framework Programme; points out that, in anticipation of the entry into force of the relevant provisions of the Constitution, where the Space Programme has its own legal base (Article III-254), this should be treated as a separate policy area with its own clearly defined legal basis and be endowed with adequate financial resources and appropriate financial instruments to support space-related research activities as well as the development and operation of infrastructures of Galileo and GMES, and EU access to space; believes that particular rules must be introduced into the Framework Programme to enable the implementation of these specific activities;

Trans-European Networks

54.  Notes that, due to the size of projects and their financial envelopes, there is no real substitute for national or Community funding; observes that the often-embraced hope of seeing growth in the participation of private investors remains for the moment, with a few rare exceptions, unrealised; takes note of the adoption of the new Regulation (EC) No 807/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 April 2004 amending Council Regulation (EC) No 2236/95 laying down general rules for the granting of Community financial aid in the field of trans-European networks(8), which allows aid to be concentrated on projects which have the greatest need (priority cross-frontier projects, or those crossing natural obstacles), and increases the maximum rate of support for priority projects to 20%-30% and to 50% in exceptional cases;

The Social Policy Agenda

55.  Takes note of the legislative proposal for the new PROGRESS programme and stresses the importance of, and the need for, a coherent European programme including adequate funding in this area, which stimulates action at national level; considers therefore that the financial framework of PROGRESS must be increased if the European Union is really serious about implementing the Lisbon Strategy and the Social Policy Agenda;

Cohesion

56.  Calls on the Commission to establish "development targets" and measurable, concrete and precise indicators with an economic, social and environmental dimension along the lines of the conclusions of the Lisbon and Gothenburg European Councils, to simplify current administrative procedures, in such a way as to ease the administrative burden on Member States, by means of a revision of the relevant provisions of the Financial Regulation if necessary; stresses that the cap of 4% of GNI on Structural Funds payments is based on previous experience but should be treated in a more elastic way; believes that a temporary further differentiation in EU co-financing rates of EU programmes could be considered; calls on the Member States to solve the problems with shared management and to improve the reliability of the controls they perform as well as their forecasting methods; calls further for a clear commitment and a precise timetable for the implementation of the principle of disclosure statements by Member States' highest political and managing authority (Finance Minister);

57.  Points out that regional policy cannot be seen in isolation from regional aid law and calls for proposals to be coherent and for excessive disparity in assistance between neighbouring regions to be avoided, since this can lead to glaring distortions of competition; highlights the particular situation of the outermost regions (Article 299(2) of the EC Treaty), which require differential treatment vis-à-vis the cohesion policy parameters; proposes a transitional mechanism to allow the regions affected by the statistical effect to continue to require adequate support from the EU, since no region should feel that it has suffered as a result of enlargement; points out, furthermore, that the interaction between regional policy and competition policy in the regions affected by the statistical effect must be acknowledged and must be included in the analysis of the effects which current and future rules on state aid have (or will have) on such regions, and also that regions in transition, especially those technically falling under objective 1 but also those covered by objective 2, should receive adequate support and be given preferential treatment in the application of State aid rules;

58.  Welcomes the publication by the Commission of a draft text which seeks to introduce an EU loan guarantee instrument for TEN projects in the transport sphere; takes the view that such an arrangement could be extended to cover other areas with the aim of fostering the investment required to achieve the Lisbon objectives;

Agriculture

59.  Considers that a major objective of the CAP is to guarantee the model of multifunctionality of the European agricultural sector, to secure the functioning of the internal market in agricultural products and appropriate incomes for farmers, to guarantee the availability of home-produced, high quality agricultural products, including high standards of animal health and welfare, to provide further support for rural areas which lag far behind urban areas in terms of income, infrastructure and access to services, to promote sustainable and environmentally friendly farming practices in order to preserve the environment and, against the background of the Lisbon Strategy, to strengthen the competitiveness of the European farming industry, so that it can make a contribution to securing jobs in the agricultural sector;

60.  Notes the significant reforms of the CAP and the common market organisations which the European Union has carried out since 1999; on that basis, calls on the Commission to make clear to the EU's partners the major sacrifices which have already been made by Community producers as a result of those reforms and to defend, in the Doha development agenda trade negotiations, the multifunctional model for European agriculture; emphasises, further, the need to safeguard the Community preference, in particular by striking a fair and equitable balance between requests from the developing countries for market access and the stability and viability of Community markets, so that those markets can be effectively managed and crises which would impose additional financial burdens on the European Union, and thus create fresh budgetary problems, can be avoided;

61.  Recalls that the fundamental agricultural policy reform in 2003, including the reform of nearly all common market organisations, was based on the validity of the financial framework laid down in the decision of the European Council in October 2002; recalls furthermore that the European Parliament has agreed to the Treaty and Act concerning the conditions of the accession of the 10 new Member States, which based its financial aspects concerning agriculture on the European Council's agreement;

Fisheries

62.  Considers the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) an essential element, amongst others, of the European Union's environmental efforts to rebalance the marine ecosystem, some species of which are being over-exploited; considers that the funding provided for by the Commission is the essential minimum required for conservation of stocks and for the purposes of achieving the objectives based on sustainable development which were agreed when the CFP was reformed in 2002; considers that the CFP must take better account of the situation of fishermen and pay particular attention to the specific case of the extremely remote regions;

Environment

63.  Is of the opinion that the European Union's environmental policy has proven to be an essential instrument in contributing to mitigating the effects of climate change, halting the decline in natural habitats and bio-diversity, protecting water resources, improving the environment, health and the quality of life, promoting the sustainable use and management of natural resources and waste and developing strategic approaches to policy development, implementation and information/awareness raising as well as sustainable economic growth and employment and ecological cohesion;

64.  Points out that environmental policy areas contribute to the attainment of the Lisbon and Gothenburg objectives; is strongly in favour of mainstreaming environmental policy areas into other policy areas; emphasises that environmental aspects and impacts such as environmental technologies, environmental research and nature protection have to be fully taken into account in financing policies under Heading 1 and under Heading 2;

An area of Freedom, Security and Justice

65.  Welcomes the efforts to simplify and rationalise the current situation in this area through the definition of three framework programmes ("Solidarity", "Security" and "Justice"), which will also allow for greater flexibility in the allocation of priorities among the different actions, but stresses that this approach should not diminish the political and budgetary control by the European Parliament; warns that the introduction of the notion of "shared management with Member States" for implementing the programmes in this area needs to be accompanied by adequate control mechanisms;

66.  Reserves, until after the Commission presents legislative proposals, its final opinion on the specific content of the programmes and particularly whether the proportion of the global funds proposed by the Commission for each programme is adequate to give the necessary visibility to the European Parliament's main priorities in this area: the promotion of fundamental rights, reinforcement of the security of citizens and effective implementation of common immigration and asylum policies (particularly with regard to the Refugee Fund);

Consumer protection and public health

67.  Calls on the Commission to submit the legislative proposals for the new Consumer Policy and Public Health programme without any delay, in order to enable the European Parliament and the Council to begin legislative work in time to allow for the programmes to enter into force at the beginning of 2007; is still convinced that a division into a new Consumer Policy programme and a new Public Health programme will provide the best solution to meet the EU's priorities; underlines that the financial resources allocated to the new programme need to be substantially increased compared to the current situation; observes that the impact of the previous enlargement round and the future enlargement on countries with deficits in the health and consumer field as well as the proposed widening of the scope of the programme need to be taken into account;

Education and training

68.  Believes that an increase in the average Erasmus student mobility grant is necessary; believes that, over the lifetime of the programme, the Comenius sub-programme should aim to involve more pupils in joint educational activities; considers that these improvements to the programme require a substantial increase in the reference amount proposed by the Commission;

Fostering European culture and diversity

69.  Underlines the significance of the audio-visual sector with respect to technological changes and innovative economic processes and stresses its possible contribution to the creation of a knowledge-based economy as envisaged by the Lisbon process; underlines that the development of the audio-visual sector is primarily dependent on the private sector, independent media and public funding of the Member States; underlines the positive results of the current MEDIA programmes; underlines that the MEDIA programmes have proved to be very efficient and have demonstrated notable European added value in order to support the development of the sector; underlines that an adequate level of funding for the MEDIA 2007 programme is important and that the amount proposed by the Commission is the minimum necessary to attain the goals of the programme;

70.  Welcomes the integration of several activities with extremely small financial frameworks into the new CULTURE 2000 programme and emphasises that an adequate level of funding in this area remains crucial, drawing attention to the need to include the main activities of the action programme for 2004-2006 within the new multi-annual framework; calls on the Commission to promote activities under the European Pact for Youth which was adopted at the 22-23 March 2005 European Council; endorses the view expressed by the Ministers of Culture meeting in Rotterdam in July 2004 that the budget for culture should be substantially increased;

External policies

71.  Welcomes in principle the simplification of financing instruments under Heading 4 but questions whether the number and breakdown proposed by the Commission is appropriate with respect to transparency, visibility and democratic scrutiny in the use of funds; considers particularly that:

o
o   o

72.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission and the other institutions and bodies concerned, as well as to the national governments and parliaments of the Member States.

Annex

Financial Framework 2007-2013

(1) OJ C 172, 18.6.1999, p. 1. (2) 2 OJ C 310, 16.12.2004, p. 1. (3) 3 OJ L 253, 7.10.2000, p. 42. (4) 4 OJ C 104 E, 30.4.2004, p. 991. (5) 5 Texts Adopted, 15.9.2004, P6_TA(2004)0005. (6) 6 Texts Adopted, 2.12.2004, P6_TA (2004)0075. (7) Report presented in 1977 by a group of experts at the Commission's request. (8) OJ L 143, 30.4.2004, p. 46.

European Parliament legislative resolution on the Council common position with a view to the adoption of a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on controls of cash entering or leaving the Community (14843/1/2004 – C6-0038/2005 – 2002/0132(COD))

P6_TA(2005)0225 A6-0167/2005

(Codecision procedure: second reading)

The European Parliament,

–   having regard to the Council common position (14843/1/2004 – C6-0038/2005),

–   having regard to its position at first reading(1) on the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2002)0328)(2),

–   having regard to the amendments to the Commission proposal (COM(2003)0371)(3),

–   having regard to Article 251(2) of the EC Treaty,

–   having regard to Rule 62 of its Rules of Procedure,

–   having regard to the recommendation for second reading of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (A6-0167/2005),

1.  Approves the common position as amended;

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

Position of the European Parliament adopted at second reading on 8 of June 2005 with a view to the adoption of Regulation (EC) No .../2005 of the European Parliament and of the Council on controls of cash entering or leaving the Community

THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Articles 95 and 135 thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the Commission (4),

Having regard to the Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee (5),

Acting in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 251 of the Treaty (6),

Whereas:

(1)  One of the Community's tasks is to promote harmonious, balanced and sustainable development of economic activities throughout the Community by establishing a common market and an economic and monetary union. To that end the internal market comprises an area without internal frontiers in which the free movement of goods, persons, services and capital is ensured.

(2)  The introduction of the proceeds of illegal activities into the financial system and their investment after laundering are detrimental to sound and sustainable economic development. Accordingly, Council Directive 91/308/EEC of 10 June 1991 on prevention of the use of the financial system for the purpose of money laundering (7) introduced a Community mechanism to prevent money laundering by monitoring transactions through credit and financial institutions and certain types of professions. As there is a risk that the application of that mechanism will lead to an increase in cash movements for illicit purposes, Directive 91/308/EEC should be supplemented by a control system on cash entering or leaving the Community.

(3)  At present such control systems are applied by only a few Member States, acting under national legislation. The disparities in legislation are detrimental to the proper functioning of the internal market. The basic elements should therefore be harmonised at Community level to ensure an equivalent level of control on movements of cash crossing the borders of the Community. Such harmonisation should not, however, affect the possibility for Member States to apply, in accordance with the existing provisions of the Treaty, national controls on movements of cash within the Community.

(4)  Account should also be taken of complementary activities carried out in other international fora, in particular of the Financial Action Task Force on Money Laundering (FATF) which was established by the G-7 Summit held in Paris in 1989. Special Recommendation IX of 22 October 2004 of the FATF calls on governments to take measures to detect physical cash movements, including a declaration system or other disclosure obligation.

(5)  Accordingly, cash carried by any natural person entering or leaving the Community should be subject to the principle of obligatory declaration. This principle would enable the customs authorities to gather information on such cash movements and, where appropriate, transmit that information to other authorities. Customs authorities are present at the borders of the Community, where controls are most effective, and some have already built up practical experience in the matter. Use should be made of Council Regulation (EC) No 515/97 of 13 March 1997 on mutual assistance between the administrative authorities of the Member States and cooperation between the latter and the Commission to ensure the correct application of the law on customs and agricultural matters (8). This mutual assistance should ensure both the correct application of cash controls and the transmission of information that might help to achieve the objectives of Directive 91/308/EEC.

(6)  In view of its preventive purpose and deterrent character, the obligation to declare should be fulfilled upon entering or leaving the Community. However, in order to focus the authorities' action on significant movements of cash, only those movements of EUR 10 000 or more should be subject to such an obligation. Also, it should be specified that the obligation to declare applies to the natural person carrying the cash, regardless of whether that person is the owner.

(7)  Use should be made of a common standard for the information to be provided. This will enable competent authorities to exchange information more easily.

(8)  It is desirable to establish the definitions needed for a uniform interpretation of this Regulation.

(9)  Information gathered under this Regulation by the competent authorities should be passed on to the authorities referred to in Article 6(1) of Directive 91/308/EEC.

(10)  Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data(9) and Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2000 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data by the Community institutions and bodies and on the free movement of such data(10) apply to the processing of personal data by the competent authorities of the Member States pursuant to this Regulation.

(11)  Where there are indications that the sums of cash are related to any illegal activity, associated with the movement of cash, as referred to in Directive 91/308/EEC, information gathered under this Regulation by the competent authorities may be passed on to competent authorities in other Member States and/or to the Commission. Similarly, provision should be made for certain information to be transmitted whenever there are indications of cash movements involving sums lower than the threshold laid down in this Regulation.

(12)  Competent authorities should be vested with the powers needed to exercise effective control on movements of cash.

(13)  The powers of the competent authorities should be supplemented by an obligation on the Member States to lay down penalties. However, penalties should only be imposed for failure to make a declaration in accordance with this Regulation.

(14)  Since the objective of this Regulation cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States and can therefore, by reason of the transnational scale of money-laundering in the internal market, be better achieved at Community level, the Community may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Regulation does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve that objective.

(15)  This Regulation respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised in Article 6(2) of the Treaty on European Union and reflected in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, in particular in Article 8 thereof,

HAVE ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Objective

1.  This Regulation complements the provisions of Directive 91/308/EEC concerning transactions through financial and credit institutions and certain professions by laying down harmonised rules for the control, by the competent authorities, of cash entering or leaving the Community.

2.  This Regulation is without prejudice to national measures to control cash movements within the Community, where such measures are taken in accordance with Article 58 of the Treaty.

Article 2

Definitions

Article 3

Obligation to declare

1.  Any natural person entering or leaving the Community and carrying cash of a value of EUR 10 000 or more shall declare that sum to the competent authorities of the Member State through which he is entering or leaving the Community in accordance with this Regulation. The obligation to declare shall not have been fulfilled if the information provided is incorrect or incomplete.

2.  The declaration referred to in paragraph 1 shall contain details of:

3.  Information shall be provided in writing, orally or electronically, to be determined by the Member State referred to in paragraph 1. However, where the declarant so requests, he shall be entitled to provide the information in writing. Where a written declaration has been lodged, an endorsed copy shall be delivered to the declarant upon request.

Article 4

Powers of the competent authorities

1.  In order to check compliance with the obligation to declare laid down in Article 3, officials of the competent authorities shall be empowered, in accordance with the conditions laid down under national legislation, to control natural persons, their baggage and their means of transport.

2.  In the event of failure to comply with the obligation to declare laid down in Article 3, cash may be detained by administrative decision in accordance with the conditions laid down under national legislation.

Article 5

Recording and processing of information

1.  The information obtained under Article 3 and/or Article 4 shall be recorded and processed by the competent authorities of the Member State referred to in Article 3(1) and shall be made available to the authorities referred to in Article 6(1) of Directive 91/308/EEC of that Member State.

2.  Where it appears from the checks provided for in Article 4 that a natural person is entering or leaving the Community with sums of cash lower than the threshold fixed in Article 3 and where there are indications of illegal activities associated with the movement of cash, as referred to in Directive 91/308/EEC, that information, the full name, date and place of birth and nationality of that person and details of the means of transport used may also be recorded and processed by the competent authorities of the Member State referred to in Article 3(1) and be made available to the authorities referred to in Article 6(1) of Directive 91/308/EEC of that Member State.

Article 6

Exchange of information

1.  Where there are indications that the sums of cash are related to any illegal activity associated with the movement of cash, as referred to in Directive 91/308/EEC, the information obtained through the declaration provided for in Article 3 or the controls provided for in Article 4 may be transmitted to competent authorities in other Member States.

Regulation (EC) No 515/97 shall apply mutatis mutandis.

2.  Where there are indications that the sums of cash involve the proceeds of fraud or any other illegal activity adversely affecting the financial interests of the Community, the information shall also be transmitted to the Commission.

Article 7

Exchange of information with third countries

In the framework of mutual administrative assistance, the information obtained under this Regulation may be communicated by Member States or by the Commission to a third country, subject to the consent of the competent authorities which obtained the information pursuant to Article 3 and/or Article 4 and to compliance with the relevant national and Community provisions on the transfer of personal data to third countries. Member States shall notify the Commission of such exchanges of information where particularly relevant for the implementation of this Regulation.

Article 8

Duty of professional secrecy

All information which is by nature confidential or which is provided on a confidential basis shall be covered by the duty of professional secrecy. It shall not be disclosed by the competent authorities without the express permission of the person or authority providing it. The communication of information shall, however, be permitted where the competent authorities are obliged to do so pursuant to the provisions in force, particularly in connection with legal proceedings. Any disclosure or communication of information shall fully comply with prevailing data protection provisions, in particular Directive 95/46/EC and Regulation (EC) No 45/2001.

Article 9

Penalties

1.  Each Member State shall introduce penalties to apply in the event of failure to comply with the obligation to declare laid down in Article 3. Such penalties must be effective, proportionate and dissuasive.

2.  Member States shall notify the Commission, at the latest by ………. (11), of the penalties applicable in the event of failure to comply with the obligation to declare laid down in Article 3.

Article 10

Evaluation

Four years after its entry into force, the Commission shall submit to the European Parliament and the Council a report on the application of this Regulation.

Article 11

Entry into force

This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

It shall apply from ………. (12).

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels,

For the European Parliament For the Council

The President The President

(1) OJ C 67 E, 17.3.2004, p. 259. (2) OJ C 227 E, 24.9.2002, p. 574. (3) Not yet published in OJ. (4) OJ C 227 E, 24.9.2002, p. 574. (5) OJ (6) Position of the European Parliament of 15 May 2003 (OJ C 67 E, 17.3.2004, p. 259), Council Common Position of 17 February 2005 (not yet published in the Official Journal) and Position of the European Parliament of 8 June 2005. (7) OJ L 166, 28.6.1991, p. 77. Directive as amended by Directive 2001/97/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ L 344, 28.12.2001, p. 76). (8) OJ L 82, 22.3.1997, p. 1. Regulation as amended by Regulation (EC) No 807/2003 (OJ L 122, 16.5.2003, p. 36). (9) OJ L 281, 23.11.1995, p. 31. Directive as amended by Regulation (EC) No 1882/2003 (OJ L 284, 31.10.2003, p. 1). (10) OJ L 8, 12.1.2001, p. 1. (11) * 18 months after the date of entry into force of this Regulation. (12) * 18 months after the date of entry into force of this Regulation.

European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a Council directive amending Directive 92/12/EEC on the general arrangements for products subject to excise duty and on the holding, movement and monitoring of such products (COM(2004)0227 – C6-0039/2004 – 2004/0072(CNS))

P6_TA(2005)0226 A6-0138/2005

(Consultation procedure)

The European Parliament,

–   having regard to the Commission proposal to the Council (COM(2004)0227)(1),

–   having regard to Article 93 of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C6-0039/2004),

–   having regard to Article 27 of Council Directive 92/12/EEC of 25 February 1992 on the general arrangements for products subject to excise duty and on the holding, movement and monitoring of such products(2),

–   having regard to Rule 51 of its Rules of Procedure,

–   having regard to the report of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs and the opinion of the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection (A6-0138/2005),

1.  Approves the Commission proposal as amended;

2.  Calls on the Commission to alter its proposal accordingly, pursuant to Article 250(2) of the EC Treaty;

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

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

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

Text proposed by the Commission   Amendments by Parliament Amendment 1 RECITAL - 1 (new) (-1) Even though it is now thirteen years since the period referred to in Article 14 of the EC Treaty expired, the aim stated in that Article has still not been attained in the case of tobacco, alcoholic beverages and mineral oils. Further efforts should be made in order to facilitate the free movement of products subject to excise duty and to establish an internal market in those products. Amendment 2 RECITAL 2 (2)  Since then, however, although the figures for intra-Community movements of tax-paid products remain relatively low, more and more traders and private individuals are trying to interpret Articles 7 to 10 of Directive 92/12/EEC in such a way as to legitimise trade practices involving payment of excise duty in the Member State where the products are acquired. Also, the increase in the volume of commercial transactions conducted via the Internet and the abolition of duty-free sales to persons travelling within the Community have resulted in more use being made of these provisions. On the basis of the conclusions of a further survey of the national administrations and traders involved, launched in January 2002, the Commission drew up a report on the application of Articles 7 to 10 of Directive 92/12/EEC. (2)  Since then, however, although the figures for intra-Community movements of tax-paid products remain relatively low, more and more traders have tended to interpret Articles 7 to 10 of Directive 92/12/EEC in such a way as to legitimise trade practices involving payment of excise duty in the Member State where the products are acquired, and a growing number of private individuals are buying products in another Member State for their personal use and legitimately paying excise duty for them in the Member State of purchase. Also, the increase in the volume of commercial transactions conducted via the Internet and the abolition of duty-free sales to persons travelling within the Community have resulted in more use being made of these provisions. On the basis of the conclusions of a further survey of the national administrations and traders involved, launched in January 2002, the Commission drew up a report on the application of Articles 7 to 10 of Directive 92/12/EEC. Amendment 3 RECITAL 6 (6)  Article 7 distinguishes different situations in which excisable products already released for circulation in one Member State are held for commercial purposes in another, but does not clearly identify the person from whom excise duty is due in the Member State of destination in each of these situations. An unambiguous definition should therefore be given of the person from whom excise duty is due and the requirements to be met in the Member State of destination in each of the situations referred to. (6)  Article 7 distinguishes different situations in which excisable products already released for circulation in one Member State are held for commercial purposes in another, but does not clearly identify the person from whom excise duty is due in the Member State of destination in each of these situations. An unambiguous definition should therefore be given of the person from whom excise duty is due and the requirements to be met in the Member State of destination in each of the situations referred to, with a view to harmonising the relevant national laws in force in the Member States. Amendment 4 RECITAL 7 (7)  In these situations the obligations of persons not established in the Member State of holding but liable for excise duty should be simplified and at the same time provision should be made for the Member States concerned to supervise the movements more effectively. (7)  In these situations the obligations of persons not established in the Member State of holding but liable for excise duty should be simplified and at the same time provision should be made for the Member States concerned to supervise the movements more effectively, with a view to creating an internal market in products subject to excise duty. Amendment 5 RECITAL 13 (13)  The provision allowing Member States to lay down guide levels to establish whether products are held for commercial purposes or for the personal use of private individuals should be deleted. In any case an administration can never use these guide levels on their own as evidence that excisable products are being held for commercial purposes. They should therefore only be included in inspection instructions given by a national administration to its officers. (13)  The provision allowing Member States to lay down guide levels to establish whether products are held for commercial purposes or for the personal use of private individuals should be deleted. Those guide levels have too often been used as mandatory limits in some Member States and have led in practice to discrimination, which is contrary to internal market principles. They should therefore only be included in inspection instructions given by a national administration to its officers and should not be the only criterion used for classifying excisable goods as being held for the personal use of private individuals or commercial purposes. Amendment 6 RECITAL 14 (14)  Article 9(3) should be deleted since it is not appropriate to retain a tax provision allowing Member States to derogate from the principle laid down in Article 8 in respect of the transport of mineral oils for safety reasons. deleted Amendment 7 ΑRTICLE 1, POINT 3, POINT Β Article 9, paragraph 2, introductory wording (Directive 92/12/EEC) 2.  To determine whether the products referred to in Article 8 are intended for commercial purposes, Member States shall take account of the following: 2.  The products referred to in Article 8 shall be deemed to have been purchased by private individuals for personal use unless it can be proven that they are intended for commercial purposes, taking account of the following:

(1) Not yet published in OJ. (2) OJ L 76, 23.3.1992, p. 1. Directive as last amended by Directive 2004/106/EC (OJ L 359, 4.12.2004, p. 30).

European Parliament resolution on progress made in 2004 in creating an area of freedom, security and justice (AFSJ) (Articles 2 and 39 of the EU Treaty)

P6_TA(2005)0227 B6-0327/2005

The European Parliament,

–   having regard to Rule 108(5) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.   having regard to its recent resolutions of 11 March 2004(1) and 14 October 2004(2) taking stock of the implementation of the Tampere programme and formulating its initial recommendations to the European Council, which adopted, on 5 November 2004, the Hague Programme laying down the guidelines for the area of freedom, security and justice (AFSJ) for the following five years,

B.   having regard to the debate on 11 April 2005 and to the answers given by the Council and Commission to Oral Questions Nos B6-0164/2005 and B6-0165/2005,

C.   whereas last year, apart from the changeover to codecision for some planned measures on illegal immigration, the desired progress on the AFSJ did not take place in spite of significant developments in other areas of Community activity or even intergovernmental cooperation on defence and security policy,

D.   whereas matters have gradually become deadlocked in the European Council, too, which in 2004, on three occasions, was obliged to acknowledge difficulties in implementing Union decisions on, in particular, police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters and, more specifically, in combating terrorism and international crime,

E.   concerned that, in spite of repeated calls to do so, nine old Member States and six new Member States still have to ratify the Convention of 29 May 2000 on mutual assistance in criminal matters between the Member States of the European Union and that 11 countries have still not ratified the Protocol of 27 November 2003 to the Europol Convention,

F.   alarmed at the delays, and the difficulties cited by Member States, in putting the European arrest warrant into practice, and at the timidity exhibited in initiatives on judicial assistance or mediation in civil matters, which some prefer to confine to cross-border cases only, all of which demonstrates the lack of trust characterising relations between Member States,

G.   whereas, in order to end this deadlock, some Member States have developed forms of cooperation outside the framework of the treaties, such as the "G5" and "quasi decision-making" bodies such as the FATF on money laundering, the Dublin Group in relation to combating drugs and the Berne Group in relation to exchanges of information, which are all bodies over which there is no democratic scrutiny; convinced that, while progress is to be desired and would be appropriate, it must take the form of "closer cooperation" (such as the "Schengen+" arrangements),

H.   convinced that all these factors are affecting the political credibility of the Union, and the legitimacy of its actions, at a time when it faces major challenges in connection with policies on migration, border controls, promoting freedoms and combating transnational crime and terrorism, and that, at all costs, there must be urgent action to relaunch the process of building a common area and boost mutual confidence between the 25 Member States and prepare for the accession and candidate countries' accession,

Doing away with the democratic deficit as a matter of urgency and promoting a uniform legal framework within the AFSJ

1.  Repeats its call on the Council to establish a uniform legal framework for AFSJ-related policies, to move judicial and police cooperation into the Community sphere, pursuant to Article 42 of the EU Treaty, as a matter of urgency, and, in accordance with Article 67 of the EC Treaty, to use, as a matter of course, qualified-majority voting within the Council plus the codecision procedure for all AFSJ-related policies;

2.  Draws the Council's attention to the fact that maintaining the status quo pending ratification of the Constitutional Treaty not only is worsening the democratic deficit, but also will make it impossible for the 25 to take decisions and virtually impossible for the implementation of those decisions to be verified (as the European Council's own assessments show);

3.  Calls therefore on the Commission to draw up before September 2005 a proposal for a decision, on the basis of Article 42 of the EU Treaty, providing that action in areas referred to in Article 29 is to fall under Title IV of the Treaty establishing the European Community and, at the same time, requiring such action to be decided on by qualified majority; calls on the Council to adopt a fresh decision, based on Article 67 of the EC Treaty, laying down a changeover to codecision for the Community measures provided for by Title IV and the removal of the limits on the Court's powers;

4.  Calls on the Council to amend its rules of procedure as soon as possible so as to disclose all preparatory legislative acts including legal opinions drafted in this context, as repeatedly requested by Parliament and in Cases C-52/05 P and C-39/05 P, and the positions taken by Member States, and to conduct its discussions and deliberations in public, particularly on AFSJ matters; asks its competent committee to check whether it would be appropriate to intervene in these cases so as to ensure transparency in the adoption of measures affecting European citizens;

5.  Draws the Council's attention to the need to ensure that any progress in creating an area of freedom, security and justice is made in the context of sincere cooperation with the European Parliament and in compliance with the principle of democracy, according to which the European Parliament must be involved in the elaboration of European legislation from the outset and not merely once a political agreement has already been reached;

6.  Proposes that the Commission establish a procedure for regular notification of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs about external aspects of the AFSJ, in particular negotiations on agreements plus political dialogue with non-member countries and international organisations; calls on the Commission to finalise the "TRANS-JHA" pilot project, which should make it possible to monitor events and documents relating to AFSJ legislative procedures on a day-to-day basis, provided that such information and documents are accessible on the institutions" registers; calls on the national parliaments to take part in this pilot project by making available on-line the preparatory work for each legislative procedure concerning the adoption or transposition of EU measures relating to the AFSJ;

7.  Calls on the Member States not to prejudice the powers of the European Community and the European Union in relation to international agreements and to seek to introduce in international conventions "connection clauses" enabling the Union and the Community to accede to such conventions or, at the very least, "disconnection clauses" to safeguard the EU acquis in relations between Member States within the areas covered by the conventions;

8.  Encourages all the Union's institutions to maintain an open, transparent and regular dialogue with representative associations and civil society and to promote and facilitate citizens' participation in public life; asks the Commission to table as soon as possible a proposal aiming to take concrete steps in this direction;

Freedom, security, justice and solidarity

9.  Considers that AFSJ development measures should be incorporated into the Community sphere, not only from a legal point of view but also in terms of the political objectives to be realised in a spirit of solidarity between Member States and citizens; takes the view that, to that end, the JHA Council ought to open up its proceedings and deliberate with, in particular, the:

Incorporating action to promote fundamental rights

10.  Restates its firmly held view that establishment of the AFSJ demands an even greater commitment on the part of European and national institutions to promote the highest level of protection of fundamental rights, both in the interests of individuals and in order to prevent any subsequent delay in transposing measures adopted or any refusal to transpose them; proposes to that end that:

11.  Regards, in order to protect fundamental rights, the following action as urgent:

Defining the specific objectives of the EU and its Member States

12.  Calls on the Commission to submit to the next European Council meeting a programme for the implementation of the Hague Programme which will:

Justice

13.  Recalls that judicial cooperation in criminal matters rests on the principles of mutual trust between judicial authorities and citizens and between the judicial authorities themselves and mutual recognition; considers that these objectives will be achieved through the establishment of joint rules, more effective exchange of information between the parties concerned and the provision of training for magistrates on European issues; in this connection, it is essential to strengthen Eurojust, with the aim of establishing a European Prosecutor's Office;

14.  Expresses the wish that further progress be made in the field of judicial cooperation in civil matters, in particular with regard to family law and commercial law;

Policies on migration, asylum and cross-border movement

15.  Requests the Commission to bring forward the proposal for a supervisory mechanism supplementing the existing Schengen evaluation mechanism by the end of 2006;

16.  Calls for a genuine European asylum and immigration policy that is fair, equitable and respectful of migrants" fundamental rights;

17.  Rejects the outsourcing of asylum and immigration policies and the establishment of immigration camps or portals outside the European Union;

18.  Calls on the Commission and the Council to ensure that the enhanced cooperation agreement on immigration, recently approved by the JHA Council, between the EU and Libya does not provide for collective expulsions or administrative detention in places where fundamental rights are flagrantly violated and that it also recognises the rights of asylum seekers in Libya, in accordance with the Geneva Convention;

19.  Recalls the need for a common immigration policy that is not confined to combating illegal immigration; urges that a legal immigration policy be implemented;

20.  Recalls that a European migration policy should be accompanied by a European integration policy providing, among other things, for proper integration on the labour market, the right to education and training, access to social and health services, and immigrants" participation in social, cultural and political life;

21.  Notes the Commission's Green Paper on an EU approach to managing economic migration (COM(2004)0811); recalls that economic immigration in Europe should not be confined to the needs of the European labour market but should take account of all forms of migration, including family reunification; urgently wishes European economic immigration to be supported by strong harmonisation of rules on the admission of migrants to the European Union and to constitute a means of combating discrimination on the labour market;

22.  Calls on the European Union and its Member States to ratify the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of all Migrant Workers and Members of their Families, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 18 December 1990, and ILO Conventions 97 and 143 on migrant workers; calls on the Commission to include in decisions and framework decisions all the provisions contained in the UN Convention;

23.  Is extremely concerned by the European Union's return policy, in particular joint flights for the removal of immigrants; recalls that readmission agreements with third countries should be based on genuine dialogue and take account of the needs of such countries; this dialogue should allow political cooperation and codevelopment in order to tackle the causes of migration;

24.  Urges the Commission to ensure that those in need of protection may gain safe access to the Union and have their claims properly processed, and to ensure strict adherence to standards of international human rights and refugee law and in particular to the principle of non-refoulement;

25.  Reminds the Commission, as the guardian of the Treaties, of its duty to ensure that the right of asylum is respected in the European Union, in accordance with Article 6 of the EU Treaty and Article 63 of the EC Treaty, given that recent cases of collective expulsions from certain Member States have cast a shadow over compliance by these countries with their obligations under EU law;

26.  Draws attention to the need for a Community immigration and asylum policy based on opening legal immigration channels and defining common standards for the protection of immigrants" and asylum seekers" fundamental rights throughout the European Union, as laid down by the Tampere European Council in 1999 and confirmed by the Hague Programme;

27.  Reiterates its deep reservations about the lowest common denominator approach in the draft Council directive on asylum procedures and calls on Member States to ensure prompt transposition of Directive 2004/83/EC(7);

Combating organised crime and terrorism

28.  Restates its firmly held view that any policy on security within the Union requires not only mutual trust, but also the setting of shared objectives and an appropriate level of resources, plus a legal framework and guarantees for citizens; considers it regrettable in this connection that:

29.  Resolves, given the lack of relevant information from the Council on this issue, to instruct its competent committee to check what strategic and operational measures are being taken at present at European level to counter terrorism and organised crime; takes the view that the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs ought therefore, by the end of 2005, to hear:

30.  Calls on the Commission:

A policy of blanket surveillance, proportionality imperatives and data protection

31.  Shares the European Council's approach seeking rational management of the information available to the Union and Member States; points out, however, all the IT systems processing information potentially relevant to the Union's security policy were designed for specific purposes and with due regard for the proportionality principle, which in democratic societies, on data protection grounds, may justify placing constraints on their use;

32.  Points out that those constraints cannot be brushed aside by simply invoking the new imperatives of the fight against terrorism and organised crime, but, rather, that there must be prior agreement on the objectives to be pursued and, consequently, the information which is essential to achieve what is sought must be defined and placed at the disposal of the competent authorities for an appropriate period; repeats its call to switch from a 'pull' system to a 'push' system for the transmission of data to the US authorities, and harbours the utmost reservations as to the establishment of a European PNR system to be placed under the responsibility of EUROPOL, as envisaged in the Commission communication on transfer of air passenger name record (PNR) data: a global EU approach (COM(2003)0826); calls on the Commission and the Council to take into consideration its resolution of 31 March 2004(8) on PNR during all negotiations with third countries or international organisations, in particular the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO);

33.  Alerts the Council to the risks posed by the interoperability of information systems;

34.  Repeats its call for common criteria for data protection in the security domain to be laid down on the basis of the principles identified by the European Council and by the European Conference of Data Protection Authorities(9) and repeats its call for the establishment of a joint authority for data protection as part of judicial and police cooperation, involving national and European authorities in connection with EUROPOL, EUROJUST, SIS and SID; takes the view that that authority should be responsible for checking whether European authorities comply with protection rules and for assisting those authorities with legislative work;

35.  Draws attention to the need to strengthen the security of travel documents; however, the technical solution chosen is of prime importance since it will be the sole means of guaranteeing the effective use of biometrics and the physical protection of data, in particular against unauthorised access; it is essential that technical specifications be safeguarded at the same time by means of cost-effective solutions, and that these be secure as regards the collection, processing, storage and use of data; points out that it would be useless for the European Union to over-hastily adopt a solution which would prove inadequate;

36.  Recalls that the Article 29 Working Group and the European Data Protection Supervisor consider that the national initiatives of April 2004 dealing with data retention do not fully comply with the ECHR and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union;

37.  Stresses that the costs of analysing the data collected should be borne by the body requesting the data so as to avoid a disproportionate number of queries;

38.  Takes issue once again with the lack of transparency and public debate as to the choice of this type of technology and negotiations both at ICAO technical group level and with the US Administration; restates its opposition to the use of RFID chips on European citizens' passports, and calls on the Commission to examine these technologies in detail before making them mandatory for hundreds of millions of passports;

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

(1) OJ C 102 E, 28.4.2004, p. 819. (2) Texts Adopted, P6_TA(2004)0022. (3) Texts Adopted, P6_TA(2005)0208. (4) Texts Adopted, P6_TA(2005)0030. (5) European Code of Police Ethics, Recommendation REC (2001) 10 adopted by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on 19 September 2001. (6) Council of the European Union, Draft Conclusions of the Council regarding police professional standards concerning international police cooperation, Brussels, 28 October 2004, 11977/2/04. (7) OJ L 304, 30.9.2004, p. 12. (8) 1 OJ C 103 E, 29.4.2004, p. 665. (9) Texts Adopted, 7.6.2005, P6_TA(2005)0223.

European Parliament resolution on the protection of minorities and anti-discrimination policies in an enlarged Europe (2005/2008(INI))

P6_TA(2005)0228 A6-0140/2005

The European Parliament,

–   having regard to the objectives of developing the Union as an area of freedom, security and justice and giving effect to the principles of liberty, democracy, the protection of fundamental rights and the rule of law laid down in Articles 6 and 7 of the EU Treaty,

–   having regard, in particular, to Article 13 of the EC Treaty, which sets out the task of the Community to combat discrimination based on sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age, or sexual orientation, to Article 63 of the EC Treaty, which establishes the framework of asylum and immigration policy within which the integration of third-country nationals is promoted and to the other legal bases for Union action in this domain,

–   having regard to the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe, which further develops the current acquis, especially through the inclusion of the Charter for Fundamental Rights, thereby bringing the concept of fundamental rights to even greater prominence(1),

–   having regard to Article I-14 of the Constitutional Treaty, which lays down the areas of shared competence and which thus confers on the EU responsibilities in the area of freedom, security and justice, including human rights, and bearing in mind that minority rights are a key element in general human rights,

–   having regard to Council Directive 2000/43/EC of 29 June 2000 implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin(2), Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation(3) and Directive 2002/73/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 September 2002 amending Council Directive 76/207/EEC on the implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women as regards access to employment, vocational training and promotion, and working conditions(4),

–   having regard to the Commission Green Paper on equality and non-discrimination in an enlarged European Union (COM(2004)0379) and to the annual and thematic reports adopted by the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia (EUMC),

–   having regard to Rule 45 of its Rules of Procedure,

–   having regard to the report of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs and the opinions of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, the Committee on Culture, Youth, Education, the Media and Sport and the Committee on Women's Rights and Equal Opportunities (A6-0140/2005),

A.   bearing in mind that there is a difference between the protection of minorities and anti-discrimination policies; noting that equal treatment is a basic right, not a privilege, of all citizens, and tolerance should be a general attitude in life, not a favour granted to some and not to others; considering, therefore, that all forms of discrimination must be fought with equal intensity; recalling that national minorities contribute to the richness of Europe,

B.   whereas every individual in the European Union has an equal right and duty to be a full, active and integrated member of society, equal before the law; whereas each person is first and foremost an individual and unique person, and being part of a minority will never justify or explain either exclusion or discrimination, or a decision to withdraw from the community,

The political dimension and the urgent need for anti-discrimination policies and minority protection

1.  Considers that it is of primary importance to the enlarged Union of 25 Member States and 450 million inhabitants:

2.  Recalls that, pursuant to Article 191 TEC, political parties at European level are important as a factor for integration within the Union; is concerned, therefore, at the growing public acceptance of profoundly racist, anti-semitic, islamophobic and homophobic statements and actions by prominent politicians and Members of government; calls on all political parties to renew their commitment to the Charter of European political parties for a non-racist society, adopted on 5 December 1997, and therefore stresses that the fundamental prerequisites of the political parties for an inclusive minority policy are:

3.  Takes note of the fact that, in general, minority issues in the Union have not been high enough on the agenda of the Union and now need to be given greater attention, in order to strengthen the effectiveness of the measures taken by the public authorities in this domain; considers that, in this context, the future Fundamental Rights Agency must play a key role;

4.  Points out that recent and future enlargements have led and will lead to a greater number of Member States characterised by cultural and linguistic diversity; believes, therefore, that the EU has a particular responsibility in safeguarding the rights of minorities;

5.  Emphasises the fact that minority rights are an integral part of basic human rights, and considers it necessary to draw a clear distinction between (national) minorities, immigrants and asylum seekers;

6.  Urges the Commission to establish a policy standard for the protection of national minorities, having due regard to Article 4(2) of the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities (FCNM): "The Parties undertake to adopt, where necessary, adequate measures in order to promote, in all areas of economic, social, political and cultural life, full and effective equality between persons belonging to a national minority and those belonging to the majority. In this respect, they shall take due account of the specific conditions of the persons belonging to national minorities";

7.  Points out the inconsistency of policy toward minorities - while protection of minorities is a part of the Copenhagen criteria, there is no standard for minority rights in Community policy nor is there a Community understanding of who can be considered a member of a minority; notes that nor is there a definition of minorities in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities, or in the FCNM; recommends that such an definition should be based on the definition, laid down in Council of Europe Recommendation 1201(1993), of a "national minority" as groups of persons in a state who:

8.  Considers that, as is clear from the situations outlined above:

9.  Notes that the Commission has already taken these standards into account in the context of the Copenhagen criteria(6) during the accession negotiations with the countries of Central and Eastern Europe, Cyprus and Malta and with the current accession and candidate countries;

10.  Points to the fact that, in implementing a policy of protecting minorities and of anti-discrimination, the Union must not seek to question the legal and constitutional structure of its Member States or the principle that all are equal before the law;

The shortcomings in the Member States' responses to the measures based on Article 13 of the EC Treaty

11.  Notes with concern the unsatisfactory state of implementation of anti-discrimination policies; urges all Member States in particular to step up the implementation of anti-discrimination policies, in particular with regard to Directive 2000/43/EC and Directive 2000/78EC, and urges the Commission to include as one of the objectives of the 2007 European Year of Equal Opportunities for All the need to find an adequate solution to the problems relating to:

12.  Notes the importance of developing mechanisms to collect data on racial discrimination in line with data protection legislation as an effective means of identifying, monitoring and reviewing polices and practices to combat racial discrimination and promote racial equality;

13.  Notes that, in many instances, Community law is implemented to only a limited extent, which is mainly due to ignorance of social structures and mistrust and doubt on the part of citizens; considers that Member States should encourage, on the basis of legislation, collective agreements or practice, public and private sector employers to promote programmatically and systematically the principle of equality and non-discrimination at the workplace and in working conditions, access to employment, career development, pay and vocational training;

14.  Advocates an integrated approach to equality and non-discrimination and the mainstreaming of these concepts in relevant EU policies; considers that the objective is to ensure that Member States deal effectively and appropriately with the increasing diversity of their societies;

15.  Welcomes the feasibility study proposed in the abovementioned Green Paper, as an important step towards common standards of protection across the EU, and advocates further EU legislation prohibiting discrimination and promoting equality in the provision of goods and services, on the grounds of disability, religion, sexual orientation and age;

16.  Considers that, in the context of globalisation, where economic activity is not restricted geographically and movements of capital and labour have assumed unprecedented proportions, equality and the elimination of discrimination cannot be tackled from a "European standpoint" alone; points out that the glut of products on world markets is often the result of the overexploitation of labour (which leads to illegal immigration) and that the more developed regions (USA, EU) "import" human scientific resources from the less developed South, making it impossible to overcome "underdevelopment";

17.  Considers that, as a priority, the Union should, in agreement with its Member States and using existing legal bases, favour a coherent policy of integration through the adoption of legislative measures and the provision of financial support;

18.  Notes that, as is stated in the Hague Programme, obstacles to the integration of third-country nationals need to be eliminated, and calls for greater coordination of national integration policies and EU initiatives in this field; common basic principles for a coherent European framework for integration should include the fact that integration:

Minorities discriminated against on multiple grounds, including race, ethnic origin, sexual orientation, religion, disability and age

19.  Welcomes the commitments made in the Commission communication on Equal opportunities for people with disabilities: a European action plan (COM(2003)0650), which provides the follow-up to the European Year of People with Disabilities 2003, and welcomes in particular the Commission's adoption of a European Action Plan for people with disabilities; calls for a strengthening of the Action Plan's objectives and tools, with the aim of integrating the principles of disability mainstreaming, non-discrimination and accessibility into EU initiatives, in particular legislative initiatives;

20.  Warns against the possible discriminatory side-effects of measures against crime and terrorism, as there is evidence that ethnic minorities are five to six times more likely to be the target of police action, identity checks, etc;

21.  Calls on the institutions of the European Union, the Member States, all European democratic political parties, and civil society and associations belonging thereto, to:

22.  Reiterates the fact that discrimination on grounds of religion is prohibited; calls on the Member States and the accession and candidate countries to ensure full religious freedom and equal rights for all religions; reiterates, however, the fact that freedom of religion does not justify discrimination, for example in the field of education;

23.  Takes note of the continued prejudice and homophobia that continue to permeate the public sphere and calls on the Union to maintain pressure on all Member States to comply with international and European human rights standards;

24.  Feels that there is a need for action against growing homophobia; notes with concern increasing violence against homosexuals, for example bullying in schools and at the work place, the making of hate-filled comments by religious and political leaders, reduced access to health care (for example exclusion from insurance, reduced availability of organs for transplantation) and reduced access to the labour market; calls on the Commission to come forward with a communication on obstacles to free movement in the EU for married or legally recognised gay couples;

25.  Notes that the burgeoning unemployment and poverty observed in recent years at the heart of European societies have given rise to a specific situation characterised by inequality and discrimination;

26.  Notes the high rates of unemployment amongst the elderly and disabled owing to the greater difficulties they experience in gaining access to training programmes and new job opportunities;

27.  Calls on the social partners to make a substantial effort to eliminate discrimination on grounds of disability or age, and ensure radically improved access to the labour market;

28.  Is convinced that these efforts should also include the promotion of dialogue and cooperation between the various segments of society at the local and national levels, including dialogue and cooperation between different ethnic, linguistic and religious groups; urges Member States to involve and consult stakeholders when drawing up anti-discrimination laws;

29.  Urges the Council and the Commission, and the various levels of local, regional and national government in the Member States, to coordinate their measures to combat all forms of discrimination including anti-semitism, islamophobic/anti-Muslim or anti-Roma behaviour, Romaphobia and Islamophobia and attacks on minority groups, including Roma, third-country nationals and stateless persons, in order to uphold the principles of tolerance and non-discrimination and to promote the social, economic and political integration of all those residing in the Union;

30.  Urges Member States to do their utmost to ensure the effective integration into education systems of the children of refugees, asylum-seekers and immigrants;

Discrimination on grounds of gender

31.  Points to the fact that women continue to suffer discrimination in various areas of everyday life, in spite of the legislation in force on combating discrimination;

32.  Is deeply disappointed to note that, after a quarter of a century of equal treatment policies, the gender pay gap has hardly closed at all; calls on the Commission to report on the state of play of the pay gap in each Member State before the end of 2005;

33.  Points out that, although progress has been made on women's employment and despite their high level of education, women continue to be paid less than men for the same work and to be regarded with suspicion by employers owing to pregnancy and maternity; points also to the cases of sexual harassment where women find it difficult to make a complaint for fear of being publicly humiliated or dismissed;

34.  Underlines the importance of focusing on the aspect of gender in relation to all groups that suffer from discrimination, since the women in these groups often face special problems;

35.  Calls on the EU and the Member States to develop a methodology for examining the interaction of ethnicity and gender and identifying forms of multiple discrimination and their effect on women and girls, so that this methodology may serve as the basis on which legal instruments, policies and programmes are designed and implemented;

36.  Draws attention to the multiple discrimination of women who belong to national minorities (especially to the Roma/Sinti minority) or who are migrants, on account of which a coherent policy approach is required;

37.  Calls on the Member States and the Commission to pay particular attention to women members of national or religious minorities as they are frequently victims of discrimination not only by the majority of the population but also by members of their own minority; considers that Member States should take action and measures for the protection of those women's rights; such measures could include providing, on a continuous basis, information to women members of minorities about the rights guaranteed in Community and national law for everyone and especially women;

The Roma community

38.  Considers that this community needs special protection since, with the enlargement of the Union, it is one of the largest minorities in the EU and, as a community, it has been historically marginalised and prevented from developing in certain key areas and notes that Roma culture, history and languages are often neglected or denigrated;

39.  Notes that Roma face racial segregation in education and the risk of being placed incorrectly in schools for the mentally disabled, are discriminated against in the provision of housing, health care and public services, suffer high rates of unemployment, often have their rights denied by public authorities and are politically under-represented;

40.  Welcomes the publication of the abovementioned Green paper, which addresses the problems faced by the Roma in an enlarged EU, the organisation of a workshop for national authorities on how to use the Structural Funds to assist Roma and other disadvantaged groups and the launch of a specific Commission internship scheme for members of the Roma community; considers, however, that the most manifest disadvantages could also be addressed by:

New and settled immigrants

41.  Considers that recent immigrants may experience specific kinds of discrimination, which will differ in some respects from the discrimination faced by settled ethnic-minority EU citizens of the second, third and fourth generations of immigrants;

42.  Considers it important to distinguish between minorities of recent immigrant origin and those traditional national and ethnic minorities who are indigenous to the territory in which they live;

43.  Considers that the most urgent need of minorities of immigrant origin is to integrate into society as soon as possible, including through Member States simplifying further the naturalisation procedure while ensuring that integration does not become unwanted assimilation or undermine the group identity of persons living on their territory; considers that it is equally important to recognise the right of every person who is born and lives in a Member State to have access to citizenship;

Linguistic minorities

44.  Considers that particular attention should be devoted to groups of people belonging to linguistic minorities, and calls on the Commission and the Member States to treat them in accordance with the principles laid down in the European Charter on Regional or Minority Languages, the FCNM and the abovementioned Hague and Lund recommendations;

Traditional or ethnic minorities living on the territory of a Member State

45.  Considers that effective participation in decision-making based on the principles of subsidiarity and self-governance is one of the most effective ways of handling the problems of traditional minority communities, following the best practices existing within the Union; encourages the Member States that have yet to ratify the FCNM to do so without further delay;

46.  Considers that traditional national minority communities have specific needs different from other minority groups, that public policies should be more focused and that the Union itself must address these needs in a more appropriate way, since, with enlargement, there is now a significant number of such communities in the Union;

Stateless persons permanently residing in the Member States

47.  Considers that persons who do not possess the citizenship of any state and who reside permanently in the Member States face a unique situation in the EU, and calls on the Member States concerned to do all they can to encourage them to adopt the citizenship of their country in order to allow them to enjoy full EU citizenship rights;

48.  Calls on the Member States to apply the principle of effective participation of national minorities in public life as set out in Article 15 of the FCNM and in the Lund recommendations with regard to the communities of stateless persons living on their territory, as the key to their integration, and to simplify and speed up the naturalisation procedures in order to extend EU citizenship to the majority of those who do not yet possess it as soon as possible;

Legislative measures to be taken before the entry into force of the Constitutional Treaty

49.  Congratulates the Commission for its work on Article 13 and urges it to continue to implement a coherent general strategy on the problems facing minorities in the Union, by continuing to enforce existing anti-discrimination legislation and considering possible further action based on the following Treaty Articles:

50.  Calls upon the Council to move towards agreement on the Commission's proposal for a Council Framework Decision on combating racism and xenophobia(10); considers that the Framework Decision will be an important step towards establishing a framework for punishing racist/xenophobic violence as a criminal offence across the EU and recognising racist and xenophobic motivation as aggravating circumstances, leading to longer sentences; recalls its position of 4 July 2002(11), which was favourable to the proposal; welcomes the decision of the Justice and Home Affairs Council on 24 February 2005 to reconsider the previously stalled Framework Decision;

Future economic and financial measures

51.  Considers that the Union should complement the action of the Member States at local, regional and national level with adequate financing:

Implementing measures and feedback mechanism

52.  Welcomes the recent initiatives taken by the Commission in this field, namely:

53.  Calls for data to be collected on direct and indirect discrimination (i.e. the percentage of people belonging to national minorities among those living at risk of poverty and among the employed and unemployed, their level of education, etc.) so as to ensure proper feedback on the effectiveness of Member State anti-discrimination and minority-protection policies;

54.  Calls on Member States to integrate a gender dimension into their Action Plan for the elimination of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance and in particular to develop gender-sensitive and gender-specific guidelines and indicators and use sex-disaggregated data at all levels;

55.  Urges the establishment of specific units within the law enforcement agencies of the Member States and accession and candidate countries to counter incidents of racially motivated offences and the activities of racist groups; these units should set up systems to monitor, classify, record and follow up racist incidents brought to their attention; recommends the further development of guidelines for the collection of data on racist incidents by the EUMC in accordance with data protection safeguards and in tandem with law enforcement agencies such as the police and public prosecution services; encourages the development of alternative mechanisms to collect data, such as racist crime surveys;

56.  Calls on Member States to ensure that staff providing public services and counselling are aware of the particular issues facing ethnic minority and migrant women and that this staff receives anti-racism training which includes a gender-sensitive perspective;

57.  Reaffirms its conviction that remembrance and education are vital components of the effort to make intolerance, discrimination and racism a thing of the past, and urges the Council, Commission and Member States to strengthen the fight against all forms of discrimination by:

58.  Calls on Member States to introduce legal protection against discrimination, including positive measures taking into account the gender dimension, on the grounds covered by Article 13 of the EC Treaty;

59.  Is convinced that, in line with the subsidiarity principle, there should be close cooperation between representatives of minorities and local, regional, national and European institutions; considers that such cooperation should be based on:

60.  Taking into account Articles 262 and 265 TEC, asks respectively the Committee of the Regions and the European Economic and Social Committee to deliver their opinion on the issues of minority protection and anti-discrimination policies raised by this resolution; encourages the two Committees to deliver such an opinion by mid 2006, and to focus on the specific role that could be played by the regional or local authorities and the various economic and social components of organised civil society;

61.  Considers it of the utmost importance for the Fundamental Rights Agency to become a useful tool of cooperation with the European Institutions, in close coordination with national institutions dealing with fundamental rights; believes that the Agency should also monitor the impact of the policies outlined in this resolution and should report regularly to the European Parliament and national parliaments;

62.  Invites the Commission to begin to review the application of Directives 2000/43/EC and 2000/78/EC, with the aim of strengthening European Union anti-discrimination measures, and to organise a major conference involving all the actors concerned, in particular political representatives and representatives of public institutions at national, regional and local level and of NGOs and associations active in this field;

o
o   o

63.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and of the accession and candidate countries, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions.

(1) Once the Treaty establishing a Constitution enters into force, the term "minorities" will for the first time appear in primary law, in two provisions: Article 21 of the Charter (Art. II-81 of the Constitution), which forbids all discrimination based on "membership of a national minority"; Article I-2 of the Constitution, which refers to "human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities" as one of the values on which "the Union is founded". The Constitution also states that the Union must "combat social exclusion and discrimination, and shall promote social justice and protection, equality between women and men, solidarity between generations and protection of the rights of the child" (Article I-3(3), subparagraph 2). (2) OJ L 180, 19.7.2000, p. 22. (3) OJ L 303, 2.12.2000, p. 16. (4) OJ L 269, 5.10.2002, p. 15. (5) OJ C 104 E, 30.4.2004, p. 408. (6) One of the three Copenhagen criteria concerns being a stable democracy, the rule of law, human rights and respect for and protection of minorities. (7) Infringement procedures against a number of Member States have already been launched by the Commission for failing to communicate national measures transposing Directives 2000/43/EC and 2000/78/EC.  Further infringement procedures for "non-conformity" (incomplete or incorrect transposition) are expected to be launched soon. (8) The Commission is concerned at the failure to establish functioning equality bodies, as required by Directive 2000/43/EC, in a number of Member States.  Where such bodies have been established, there are also concerns, in some cases, relating to their independence and capacity to operate effectively. (9) Examples of homophobic hate crimes include the nail bomb in London (1999), the attacks on LGBT Pride Marches in Poland and Bosnia (2004) and the fierce attack on Sebastien Nouchet, who was burnt alive in his hometown in France (2004). (10) OJ C 75 E, 26.3.2002, p. 269. (11) OJ C 271 E, 12.11.2003, p. 558.