Choisissez la langue de votre document :
- bg - български
- es - español
- cs - čeština
- da - dansk
- de - Deutsch
- et - eesti keel
- el - ελληνικά
- en - English
- fr - français
- ga - Gaeilge
- hr - hrvatski
- it - italiano
- lv - latviešu valoda
- lt - lietuvių kalba
- hu - magyar
- mt - Malti
- nl - Nederlands
- pl - polski
- pt - português
- ro - română
- sk - slovenčina
- sl - slovenščina
- fi - suomi
- sv - svenska
|
 Interinstitutional Agreement between the European Parliament and the ECB on cooperation on procedures related to the Single Supervisory Mechanism |
| |||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
The European Parliament, – having regard to the letter from its President of 12 September 2013, – having regard to the draft Interinstitutional Agreement between the European Parliament and the European Central Bank on the practical modalities of the exercise of democratic accountability and oversight over the exercise of the tasks conferred on the ECB within the framework of the Single Supervisory Mechanism, – having regard to the Treaty on European Union, – having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, in particular Article 127(6), the second paragraph of Article 284(3) and Article 295 thereof, – having regard to its position, adopted on 12 September 2013, with a view to the adoption of a Council regulation conferring specific tasks on the European Central Bank concerning policies relating to the prudential supervision of credit institutions(1) and to the report of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs and the opinion of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs on a proposal for such regulation(2), – having regard to the declaration of the President of the European Parliament and of the President of the European Central Bank of 12 September 2013, on the occasion of Parliament’s vote for the adoption of a Council regulation conferring specific tasks on the European Central Bank concerning policies relating to the prudential supervision of credit institutions(3), – having regard to Rule 127(1) and Rule 46(1) of its Rules of Procedure, – having regard to the report of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs (A7-0302/2013), 1. Approves conclusion of the agreement below and, taking into account the substance of the agreement, decides to annex it to its Rules of Procedure; 2. Instructs its President to sign the agreement with the President of the European Central Bank and to arrange for its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union; 3. Instructs its President to forward this decision, including its annex, to the Council, the Commission, the European Central Bank and the national parliaments. ANNEX Interinstitutional Agreement between the European Parliament and the European Central Bank on the practical modalities of the exercise of democratic accountability and oversight over the exercise of the tasks conferred on the ECB within the framework of the Single Supervisory Mechanism (The text of this annex is not reproduced here since it corresponds to the interinstitutional agreement as published in OJ L 320 of 30 November 2013, p. 1.)
| ||||||||||||||
| Number and numerical strength of the interparliamentary delegations, delegations to joint parliamentary committees and delegations to parliamentary cooperation committees and multilateral Parliamentary Assemblies |
| |||||||||||||||
The European Parliament, – having regard to the proposal by the Conference of Presidents, – having regard to its decisions of 6 May 2009(1), 14 September 2009(2), 15 June 2010(3) and 14 December 2011(4) on the number and numerical strength of the interparliamentary delegations, delegations to joint parliamentary committees and delegations to parliamentary cooperation committees and multilateral Parliamentary Assemblies, – having regard to Rule 198 of its Rules of Procedure, 1. Decides that, following Croatia’s accession to the European Union, the Delegation to the EU–Croatia Joint Parliamentary Committee shall cease to exist; 2. Decides to amend as follows the numerical strength of the following interparliamentary delegations: Delegation for relations with Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, Montenegro and Kosovo: 30 members Delegation for relations with the Arab Peninsula: 19 members Delegation for relations with the United States: 57 members Delegation for relations with Canada: 21 members Delegation for relations with the countries of Central America: 16 members Delegation for relations with Japan: 26 members Delegation for relations with the People’s Republic of China: 42 members Delegation for relations with India: 29 members Delegation for relations with the countries of Southeast Asia and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN): 25 members Delegation for relations with Australia and New Zealand: 19 members Delegation for relations with South Africa: 21 members; 3. Instructs its President to forward this decision to the Council and the Commission, for information.
| ||||||||||||||||
| 2011 discharge: European Council and Council |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The European Parliament, – having regard to the European Union general budget for the financial year 2011(1), – having regard to the consolidated annual accounts of the European Union for the financial year 2011 (COM(2012)0436 – C7‑0226/2012)(2), – having regard to the Annual Report of the Court of Auditors on implementation of the budget for the financial year 2011, together with the institutions' replies(3), – having regard to the statement of assurance(4) as to the reliability of the accounts and the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions provided by the Court of Auditors for the financial year 2011 pursuant to Article 287 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, – having regard to its decision of 17 April 2013(5) postponing its decision on granting discharge for the financial year 2011, and the accompanying resolution, – having regard to Article 314(10) and Articles 317, 318 and 319 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, – having regard to Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (6), and in particular Articles 50, 86, 145, 146 and 147 thereof, – having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union and repealing Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002(7), and in particular Articles 164, 165 and 166 thereof, – having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission of 17 May 2006 on budgetary discipline and sound financial management(8), – having regard to Rule 77 of, and Annex VI to, its Rules of Procedure, – having regard to the second report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A7-0310/2013), 1. Refuses to grant the Secretary-General of the Council discharge in respect of the implementation of the European Council's and the Council's budget for the financial year 2011; 2. Sets out its observations in the resolution below; 3. Instructs its President to forward this Decision and the resolution that forms an integral part of it to the European Council, the Council, the Commission, the Court of Justice of the European Union, the Court of Auditors, the European Ombudsman and the European Data Protection Supervisor, and to arrange for their publication in the Official Journal of the European Union (L series). 2.European Parliament resolution of 9 October 2013 with observations forming an integral part of the decision on the discharge for implementation of the European Union general budget for the financial year 2011, Section II – European Council and Council (COM(2012)0436 – C7‑0226/2012 – 2012/2169(DEC)) The European Parliament, – having regard to the European Union general budget for the financial year 2011(9), – having regard to the consolidated annual accounts of the European Union for the financial year 2011 (COM(2012)0436 – C7‑0226/2012)(10), – having regard to the Annual Report of the Court of Auditors on implementation of the budget for the financial year 2011, together with the institutions' replies(11), – having regard to the statement of assurance(12) as to the reliability of the accounts and the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions provided by the Court of Auditors for the financial year 2011 pursuant to Article 287 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, – having regard to its decision of 17 April 2013(13) postponing its decision on granting discharge for the financial year 2011, and the accompanying resolution, – having regard to Article 314(10) and Articles 317, 318 and 319 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, – having regard to Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (14), and in particular Articles 50, 86, 145, 146 and 147 thereof, – having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union and repealing Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002(15), and in particular Articles 164, 165 and 166 thereof, – having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission of 17 May 2006 on budgetary discipline and sound financial management(16), – having regard to Rule 77 of, and Annex VI to, its Rules of Procedure, – having regard to the second report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A7-0310/2013), A. Whereas in a democratic society, taxpayers and public opinion have the right to be kept informed of the use of public funds(17); B. Whereas citizens have the right to know how their taxes are being spent and how the power entrusted to political bodies is handled; C. Whereas the Council, as a Union institution, should be subject to democratic accountability towards the citizens of the Union as far as it is a beneficiary of the general budget of the European Union; D. Whereas Parliament is the sole directly elected body among the Union institutions and has responsibility to grant discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union; 1. Emphasises Parliament's role specified in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) in respect of the budget discharge; 2. Points out that under Article 335 TFEU, "the Union shall be represented by each of the institutions, by virtue of their administrative autonomy, in matters relating to their respective operation" and that accordingly, taking into account Article 55 of the Financial Regulation, the institutions are individually responsible for the implementation of their budgets; 3. Notes that under Rule 77 of its Rules of Procedure, "the provisions governing the procedure for granting discharge to the Commission in respect of the implementation of the budget shall likewise apply to the procedure for granting discharge to […] the persons responsible for the implementation of the budgets of the other institutions and bodies of the European Union such as the Council (as regards its activity as executive), the Court of Justice of the European Union, the Court of Auditors, the European Economic and Social Committees and the Committee of the Regions"; Opinion of the Court of Auditors on the European Council and Council in its statement of assurance for the financial year 2011 4. Emphasises the fact that in the annual report concerning the financial year 2011, the Court of Auditors included observations on the European Council and the Council concerning procurement procedures relating to cleaning services and the purchase of service clothing and shoes, in which certain weaknesses in the application of selection and award criteria were identified; 5. Notes the Council's explanations concerning the procurement shortcomings and its assurance of full respect of the spirit and the principles of the Financial Regulation; 6. Shares the Court of Auditors' recommendations that authorising officers should improve the design, coordination and performance of procurement procedures through appropriate checks and better guidance; recommends the stricter application of the procurement rules, with which all the Union institutions are bound to comply; 7. Notes that the Council did not provide any further reply to the Court of Auditors' recommendation relating to the appropriate checks and better guidance of procurement procedures; Pending issues 8. Regrets the difficulties encountered in discharge procedures for the financial years 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010, which were due to a lack of cooperation from the Council; points out that Parliament refused to grant discharge to the Secretary-General of the Council in respect of the implementation of the Council's budget for the financial years 2009 and 2010 for the reasons set out in its resolutions of 10 May 2011(18), 25 October 2011(19), 10 May 2012(20) and 23 October 2012(21); 9. Expects that future annual activity reports which are received by Parliament from the Council will include a comprehensive overview of all human resources broken down by category, grade, sex, nationality and vocational training, as well as the internal budget decisions of the Council; 10. Stresses that the budget of the European Council and the Council should be separated in order to contribute to the transparency of their financial management and to ensure better accountability of both institutions; 11. Reiterates that the Council must provide a thorough written explanation detailing the total amount of appropriations used in the purchase of the Résidence Palace building, the budget items from which those appropriations were drawn, the instalments that have been paid thus far, the instalments that are yet to be paid and the purpose that the building will serve; 12. Regrets that the Council continues to refuse to answer Parliament's questions; 13. Reiterates that it is still waiting for a reply from the Council to the questions and the request for documents set out in its resolution of 10 May 2012; calls on the Secretary-General of the Council to provide Parliament's Committee on Budgetary Control with comprehensive written answers to these questions; 14. Insist that the expenditure of the Council must be scrutinised in the same way as that of other institutions; is of the opinion that the fundamental elements of such scrutiny are laid down in its resolution of 23 October 2012; 15. Welcomes, however, the fact that the Presidency in office of the Council accepted Parliament's invitation to the debate held in plenary on 16 April 2013 on the 2011 discharge reports; endorses the fact that the Presidency was open to developing a beneficial cooperation between Parliament and the Council; 16. Notes the Irish Presidency's proposal to establish an interinstitutional working group to negotiate possible solutions to the Council's discharge; looks to the Lithuanian Presidency of the Council for a specific proposal; The right of Parliament to grant discharge 17. Emphasises Parliament's prerogatives to grant discharge pursuant to Articles 317, 318 and 319 of the TFEU, in line with current interpretation and practice, namely to grant discharge to each heading of the budget individually in order to maintain transparency and democratic accountability towards Union taxpayers; 18. Recalls that the Commission, in its reply of 25 November 2011 to the letter from the Chair of the Committee on Budgetary Control, wrote that it is desirable for Parliament to continue to give, postpone or refuse discharge to the other institutions, including the Council, as has been the case up until now; 19. Is of the opinion that in any event, an assessment must be carried out of the Council's management as a Union institution during the financial year under examination, thereby upholding Parliament's prerogatives, in particular the assurance of democratic accountability towards the citizens of the Union; 20. Believes, therefore that some progress could be achieved if Parliament and the Council could set up together a list of documents to be exchanged in order to fulfil their respective roles in the discharge process; 21. Considers that a satisfactory cooperation between both institutions materialised in an open and formal dialogue procedure can be a positive sign to be sent to the citizens of the Union in these difficult times.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Recreational craft and personal watercraft ***I |
| ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading) The European Parliament, – having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2011)0456), – having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 114 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C7‑0212/2011), – having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, – having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 8 December 2011(1), – having regard to the undertaking given by the Council representative by letter of 31 May 2013 to approve Parliament’s position, in accordance with Article 294(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, – having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure, – having regard to the report of the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection and the opinions of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety and the Committee on Transport and Tourism (A7-0213/2012), 1. Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out; 2. Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend its proposal substantially or replace it with another text; 3. Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments. Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 9 October 2013 with a view to the adoption of Directive 2013/.../EU of the European Parliament and of the Council on recreational craft and personal watercraft and repealing Directive 94/25/EC
(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Directive 2013/53/EU.)
| |||||||||||
| Recognition of professional qualifications and administrative cooperation through the Internal Market Information System ***I |
| ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading) The European Parliament, – having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2011)0883), – having regard to Article 294(2), Article 46, Article 53(1), and Articles 62 and 114 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C7-0512/2011), – having regard to the opinion of the Committee on Legal Affairs on the proposed legal basis, – having regard to Article 294(3), Article 46, Article 53(1) and Article 62 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, – having regard to the reasoned opinions submitted, within the framework of the Protocol (No 2) on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality, by the French Senate, asserting that the draft legislative act does not comply with the principle of subsidiarity, – having regard to the opinion of 26 April 2012 of the European Economic and Social Committee(1), – having regard to the undertaking given by the Council representative by letter of 26 June 2013 to approve Parliament’s position, in accordance with Article 294(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, – having regard to Rules 55 and 37 of its Rules of Procedure, – having regard to the report of the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection and to the opinions of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs and the Committee on Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (A7-0038/2013), 1. Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out; 2. Takes note of the Commission statement annexed to this resolution; 3. Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend its proposal substantially or replace it with another text; 4. Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments. Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 9 October 2013 with a view to the adoption of Directive 2013/…/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2005/36/EC on the recognition of professional qualifications and Regulation (EU) No 1024/2012 on administrative cooperation through the Internal Market Information System ('the IMI Regulation')
(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Directive 2013/55/EU.) ANNEX TO THE LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION Commission statement The Commission will, when preparing the delegated acts referred to in Article 57c(2), ensure a simultaneous, timely and appropriate transmission of relevant documents to the European Parliament and the Council, and will carry out appropriate and transparent consultations well in advance, in particular with experts from competent authorities and bodies, professional associations and educational establishments of all the Member States, and where appropriate with experts from social partners.
| |||||||||||
| EU-Armenia Agreement: facilitation of the issuance of visas *** |
| ||||||
(Consent) The European Parliament, – having regard to the draft Council decision (05835/2013), – having regard to the draft Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Armenia on the facilitation of the issuance of visas (16913/2012), – having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Article 77(2), point (a) and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a), of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C7‑0112/2013), – having regard to Rules 81 and 90(7) of its Rules of Procedure, – having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs and the opinion of the Committee on Foreign Affairs (A7-0290/2013), 1. Consents to the conclusion of the Agreement; 2. Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and of the Republic of Armenia. | |||||||
| EU-Armenia Agreement: readmission of persons residing without authorisation *** |
| ||||||
(Consent) The European Parliament, – having regard to the draft Council decision (05859/2013), – having regard to the draft Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Armenia on the readmission of persons residing without authorisation (05860/2013), – having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Article 79(3) and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a), of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C7‑0113/2013), – having regard to Rules 81 and 90(7) of its Rules of Procedure, – having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs and the opinion of the Committee on Foreign Affairs (A7-0289/2013), 1. Consents to the conclusion of the Agreement; 2. Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and of the Republic of Armenia. | |||||||
| EU-China negotiations for a bilateral investment agreement |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The European Parliament, – having regard to Articles 2, 3, 6 and 21 of the Treaty on European Union, – having regard to Articles 153, 191, 207 and 218 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, – having regard to Articles 12, 21, 28, 29, 31 and 32 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, – having regard to the EU Strategic Framework and Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy of 25 June 2012, – having regard to the Protocol on the Accession of the People’s Republic of China to the World Trade Organisation of 23 November 2001, – having regard to its resolution of 23 May 2012 on ‘EU and China: Unbalanced Trade?’(1) and to the report of July 2011 by its Directorate-General for External Policies on trade and economic relations with China, – having regard to its resolution of 14 March 2013 on EU-China relations(2), – having regard to the generally accepted principles and practices (GAPP) known as the Santiago Principles, which were adopted in October 2008 by the International Monetary Fund’s International Working Group of Sovereign Wealth Funds, – having regard to the joint statement issued on the occasion of the 13th EU-China Summit held in Brussels on 20 September 2012, – having regard to the Commission communication entitled ‘Trade, Growth and World Affairs – Trade Policy as a core component of the EU’s 2020 strategy’ (COM(2010)0612) and to Parliament’s resolution of 27 September 2011 on a new trade policy for Europe under the Europe 2020 strategy(3), – having regard to its resolution of 13 December 2011 on trade and investment barriers(4), – having regard to its resolution of 6 April 2011 on the future European international investment policy(5), – having regard to its resolutions of 25 November 2010 on corporate social responsibility in international trade agreements(6), on human rights, social and environmental standards in international trade agreements(7) and on international trade policy in the context of climate change imperatives(8), – having regard to the Commission communication entitled ‘EU – China: Closer partners, growing responsibilities’ (COM(2006)0631) and its accompanying policy paper ‘Competition and Partnership – A policy paper on EU-China trade and investment’ (COM(2006)0632), – having regard to its resolution of 5 February 2009 on enhancing the role of European SMEs in international trade(9), – having regard to its recent decision introducing publishing requirements for extractive and logging industries concerning their payments to governments(10), – having regard to the joint decision by the EU and China, taken at the 14th EU-China Summit held in February 2012 in Beijing, to launch negotiations on a bilateral investment agreement, – having regard to Rule 110(2) of its Rules of Procedure, A. whereas trade between the EU and China has been growing rapidly and continuously in the last three decades, reaching a peak of total trade of EUR 433,8 billion in 2012, and whereas the imbalance in bilateral trade has been in China’s favour since 1997; whereas this trade deficit amounted to EUR 146 billion in 2012, compared with EUR 49 billion in 2000; B. whereas the EU’s foreign investment stock in China in 2011 amounted to EUR 102 billion, while China’s foreign investment stock in the EU in the same year amounted to EUR 15 billion; whereas in 2006 China’s foreign investment stock in the EU amounted to only EUR 3,5 billion; C. whereas the Treaty of Lisbon made foreign direct investment (FDI) an exclusive competence of the Union; D. whereas 26 EU Member States have individual bilateral investment agreements in force with China; whereas the EU has not yet developed a sustainable long-term industrial policy that would be a driver for its offensive and defensive interests in the framework of its new foreign investment policy; E. whereas even with a rise in labour costs of 10 % per annum in recent years, China is still among the top three markets worldwide for investment; F. whereas the development goals expressed in China’s 12th five-year plan and the Europe 2020 strategy, respectively, include a large number of shared interests and common challenges; whereas a higher level of integration and technological exchange between the EU and the Chinese economies could lead to synergies and mutual benefits; G. whereas there should be a level playing-field for public and private companies; H. whereas this investment agreement is the first to be negotiated by the EU on the basis of its overall competence following the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon; whereas the negotiations on this investment agreement, including market access, have the potential to generate great interest as well as possible public concern, and should therefore be conducted with the highest possible level of transparency in order to enable the necessary parliamentary oversight, thus fulfilling one of the preconditions for the necessary consent of the European Parliament to the outcome of the negotiations; I. whereas investors must comply with both the laws of the host country and the provisions of any agreement concluded by the EU and China once it enters into force in order to benefit fully from the best possible protection of their investments; J. whereas the poor implementation or non-implementation by China of certain fundamental social and labour rights and environmental standards, which are, however, internationally recognised, are among the causes of the present imbalance in trade flows between the EU and China, which could be even further exacerbated by deeper investment relations if progress is not achieved in the implementation of those rights and standards; whereas the investment agreement should therefore not have the effect of further lowering social and environmental standards in China, but should, on the contrary, contribute to the improvement thereof as a precondition, leading to a more balanced and mutually beneficial trade and investment relationship; K. whereas an investment agreement should also include investor obligations, including with regard to respect for trade union and other labour rights, transparency and protection of the environment, as defined in the law of each of the two parties, and should be concluded in compliance with World Trade Organisation (WTO) rules and other relevant international agreements and core conventions signed and ratified by the parties; whereas investment agreements should not cover investments in specially created zones that provide for the circumvention of labour rights and standards and other legal requirements; L. whereas goods for export to the EU which are produced in forced labour camps, such as under the Re-education through Labour (RTL) system, generally known by the name Laogai, should not benefit from investments made under this bilateral investment agreement; M. whereas the Commission and the Council have committed to ensuring that EU investment policy takes account of the principles and objectives of the Union’s external action, including human rights, and have committed to delivering as from 2013; N. whereas, since an investment agreement with China would substantially upgrade EU‑China economic relations, it should also make a contribution to upgrading the EU‑China political dialogue, notably on such issues as human rights – in the framework of an effective and results-oriented human rights dialogue – and the rule of law, with a view to keeping political and economic relations on a parallel track, in accordance with the spirit of the Strategic Partnership; O. whereas investors and investments should strive, through their management policies and practices, to be in line with the development objectives of the host states and local levels of government where the investment is located; 1. Welcomes the strengthening of economic relations between the EU and China; calls on the EU and on China to pursue a well-balanced relationship of partnership, regular high‑level dialogue, and mutual benefits rather than engaging in confrontational competition; 2. Points out that China, having acceded to the WTO in 2001, should place more emphasis on liberalising its trade and opening its market in order to ensure a more level playing‑ field, and should accelerate removal of the artificial impediments that companies face in accessing the Chinese market; 3. Notes that European enterprises deplore the existence of numerous tariff and non-tariff barriers to the Chinese market, such as certain forms of discrimination against foreign operators, as well as the complexity of the tariff structure and the technical barriers to trade; 4. Welcomes the inclusion of market access in the negotiating mandate; believes that a reassurance on the part of China that market access will be included in the negotiations should constitute a precondition for launching them; 5. Stresses the need to explicitly include both FDI and portfolio investments in the negotiating process; 6. Notes that Chinese enterprises perceive the Union generally as a stable investment environment, but deplore what they see as the EU’s remaining export subsidies for European agricultural products and the existence of certain trade barriers to the EU market, such as technical obstacles to trade and barriers erected to block third-country investment in certain Member States, and that they are calling for the removal of the remaining unjustified barriers and the facilitation of investment in the Member States; recalls, however, that a security review mechanism to scrutinise foreign investments was recently set up in China and that the use of such mechanisms by both parties may be based on legitimate grounds; points out that the EU and China may have legitimate security concerns that justify total or partial exclusion of some sectors from foreign investment on a temporary or long-term basis; 7. Points out that currently the main form in which foreign companies are allowed to set up in China is through joint ventures, which are often associated with the transfer of strategic technologies that promote China’s competitive development to the detriment of European industry; is convinced that further openness on the part of China towards other legal regulations allowing foreign investors to set up, combined with due protection of intellectual property rights (IPRs), industrial property, brands and geographical indications of products, is crucial and would be mutually beneficial, as well as fostering a greater degree of integration of the European and Chinese economies on the basis of a more strategic approach to economic cooperation that is oriented, among other things, towards environment-friendly technology and innovation; 8. Is convinced that better protection of IPRs and effective implementation of related rules in China would greatly promote the objective of the EU and of other foreign investors of investing, sharing new technological capabilities and updating existing technologies in that country, in particular with regard to environmentally sound technologies; 9. Welcomes the efforts made by the Chinese authorities to improve respect for IPRs since China’s accession to the WTO, but still deplores their inadequate protection in China and considers regrettable the lack of specific means available to European businesses, particularly SMEs, to counter IPR infringements effectively; 10. Is concerned about the unreliability of China’s judicial system, which fails to enforce contractual obligations, and about the lack of transparency and uniformity in the application of the regulatory regime governing investments; 11. Urges the Commission to negotiate an ambitious and balanced EU-China investment agreement that seeks to create a better environment for EU investors in China and vice versa, including improved access to the market, in order to increase the level of reciprocal capital flows and guarantee transparency regarding governance of companies, both state‑owned and private, which invest within the partner economy; recommends the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) guidelines on corporate governance as a reference document; insists also on better law enforcement in order to ensure fair competition between public and private actors, curtail corruption and enhance the legal certainty and predictability of the business climate in China; 12. Underlines the importance of establishing, through this agreement, the preconditions for fair competition between the EU and China; recommends, to this end, that the Commission negotiate strong and binding provisions on transparency and fair competition so that a level playing-field also applies to state-owned enterprises and sovereign wealth funds’ investment practices; 13. Calls for the agreement currently being negotiated to cover both market access and investor protection; 14. Stresses that nothing in the investment agreement should reduce the policy space of the parties and their capability to legislate in order to pursue legitimate and justified public policy purposes while trying not to nullify the benefits accruing from the commitments of the parties; emphasises that guaranteeing the rule of law for all EU and Chinese investors and citizens must remain the priority; 15. Calls on the Commission to ensure full transparency with regard to sovereign wealth funds; 16. Notes that a clear timeframe of negotiations should be established, and reasonable and meaningful transitional periods considered; 17. Considers that the investment agreement with China should be based on best practices drawn from Member States’ experiences, contribute to greater coherence and include the following standards:
18. Reaffirms that with a view to the successful conclusion of the negotiations, quality must always prevail over speed; 19. Notes that the investment protection agreement should include clear definitions of the investment and investor to be protected, and that purely speculative forms of investment should not be protected; 20. Calls for the agreement to be compatible with multilateral obligations under the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) so as to fulfil the criteria for an economic integration agreement; 21. Welcomes the fact that the expected improvement in legal certainty will help SMEs to invest abroad, and stresses that SMEs’ voice must be heard during the negotiations (including through the involvement of the EU’s new SME Centre in China, the EU’s IPR SME Helpdesk and the EU Chamber of Commerce in China), so that the agreement to be concluded fosters the internationalisation of those SMEs that are willing to access the other party’s market; 22. Stresses that a precondition for the conclusion of the agreement should be the inclusion of a strong commitment by the parties to sustainable and inclusive development, in its economic, social and environmental dimensions and in relation to investment, in order to build up a more balanced trade and investment relationship between the EU and China that is not based mainly on low labour costs and poor environmental standards in China; 23. Stresses that investment agreements concluded by the EU must not be in contradiction with the fundamental values that the EU wishes to promote through its external policies and must not undermine the capacity for public intervention, in particular when pursuing public policy objectives such as social and environmental criteria, human rights, the fight against counterfeiting, security, workers’ and consumers’ rights, public health and safety, industrial policy and cultural diversity; calls for the inclusion of the respective specific and binding clauses in the agreement; 24. Requests that in this agreement, as in the case of the other trade commitments into which the EU has entered, protecting public services should remain a key principle; 25. Underlines the fact that the future development of the EU-China investment agreement must be based on mutual trust and full compliance with WTO obligations; deplores the huge levels of public subsidisation of certain sectors with growth potential, including solar panels, and calls on the Commission to ensure that the injurious effects of such dumping and subsidisation are completely removed in order to speed up the negotiations; 26. Recommends, with regard to market access, that both parties commit to appropriate phasing-in periods and transitional arrangements for certain sectors in order to ease the path to full or partial liberalisation therein; acknowledges also that both parties may not be able to make commitments in certain sectors; calls, in this context, for the exclusion of cultural and audiovisual services from the negotiations on market access, in line with the relevant provisions of the EU Treaties; stresses the need to address interventionist industrial policies, inadequate protection of IPRs, ambiguities in the substance and the application of the rules, and other non-tariff and technical barriers to trade; 27. Considers that, since it is difficult to access Chinese markets owing to the preponderance of state-run companies, the agreement must, if it is to be balanced, be viewed as a key opportunity to establish a level playing-field for both state-run and private-sector companies; 28. Stresses the need for the agreement to ensure the EU’s capability to exclude certain strategic sectors from Chinese investors; 29. Stresses that the agreement should allow the parties, and in the case of the EU, its individual Member States, to define and implement key policies for the promotion and protection of cultural diversity; 30. Stresses that the agreement must promote investment which is sustainable and inclusive, and respects the environment, particularly in the area of extractive industries, and encourages good-quality working conditions in the enterprises targeted by the investment; 31. Calls for a clause stating that an investor shall provide a potential host state party with any information that party may require concerning the investment in question, for purposes of decision-making in relation to the investment or solely for statistical purposes, while the state party shall protect any confidential business information from any disclosure liable to prejudice the competitive position of the investor or the investment; 32. Stresses the need for the future agreement to include provisions on the transparency and governance of state-run companies and sovereign wealth funds, based on the Santiago Principles, which were adopted under the auspices of the IMF and define the principles applicable to the governance and institutional structure of sovereign wealth funds and to the transparency of their investment strategies; 33. Reiterates its call for an effective corporate social responsibility clause in line with the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights; affirms that investors should, respectively, apply the ILO Tripartite Declaration on Multinational Enterprises and Social Policy and the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, as well as specific or sectoral international standards of responsible practice where these exist; calls for binding social and environmental clauses as part of a fully fledged sustainable development chapter that is subject to a dispute settlement mechanism; calls on both parties to implement a sustainable and inclusive investment strategy that includes a corporate social responsibility clause with concrete guidelines for investors, as well as an efficient assessment methodology for public authorities overseeing the resulting investments in terms of their social and environmental impact; 34. Stresses that the agreement must oblige Chinese investors in the EU to comply with European social standards and social dialogue arrangements; 35. Underlines the need for the EU-China bilateral investment agreement to deliver on both sustainable growth and job creation, and to foster synergies and positive spill-over effects with other regional trade and investment agreements to which the EU or China is a party; 36. Calls on the Commission to complement its impact assessment by also assessing the impact of the EU-China investment agreement on human rights, as it has committed to do under the Strategic Framework and Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy; 37. Takes the view that the agreement must include a provision stating that all investors are obliged to comply fully with the law of the host party at the local, regional, national and, where applicable, supranational level, and that investors failing to respect the rule of law shall be subject to civil actions for liability in the judicial process of the relevant jurisdiction for any unlawful acts or decisions made in relation to the investment, in particular in cases where such acts or decisions lead to significant environmental damage, personal injuries or loss of life; 38. Insists that the agreement should include a clause which prohibits the watering-down of social and environmental legislation in order to attract investment, and ensures that neither party may fail to effectively enforce the relevant legislation through a sustained or recurring course of action or inaction, as an encouragement for the establishment, acquisition, expansion or retention of an investment in its territory; 39. Insists that the EU-China bilateral investment agreement must comply with the EU acquis, including the social and environmental legislation in force, and that neither party may fail to effectively enforce its legislation in these areas, so that all provisions of this agreement encourage the lawful establishment, acquisition, expansion or retention of an investment in the respective territory of both parties, and foster best entrepreneurial practices and business fair play; 40. Insists on the need for the agreement to require compliance by foreign investors with EU data protection standards; 41. Expresses its deep concern regarding the level of discretion of international arbitrators to make a broad interpretation of investor protection clauses, thereby leading to the ruling‑out of legitimate public regulations; demands that the arbitrators appointed by the parties in the context of a dispute be independent and impartial, and that the arbitration provided follow a code of conduct based on the rules adopted by the UN Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL), on those of the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) or on any other international agreements and standards recognised and agreed to by the parties; 42. Considers that the agreement should include, as a key priority, effective state-to-state and investor-to-state dispute settlement mechanisms in order, on the one hand, to prevent frivolous claims from leading to unjustified arbitration, and, on the other, to ensure that all investors have access to a fair trial, followed by enforcement of all arbitration awards without delay; 43. Takes the view that the agreement should provide for state-to-state dispute settlement procedures and for investor-state dispute settlement mechanisms that are set within a suitable legal framework and subject to strict transparency criteria; 44. Calls for the EU and China jointly to establish an early-warning mechanism in order to give themselves a chance to solve proactively any incipient dispute on trade or investment at the earliest possible stage using all appropriate measures, including soft power and trade diplomacy; 45. Considers also that the agreement should include provisions for out-of-court dispute settlement in order to foster swift, affordable and amicable dispute resolution between parties that freely decide to have recourse to it; 46. Suggests that precise definitions of flexible dispute-settlement mechanisms such as mediation be provided in the agreement as regards, for example, the duration, cost and implementation of the solutions agreed by the parties; 47. Expresses its view that, once concluded and fully ratified, an EU-China investment agreement would replace all existing bilateral investment agreements between individual EU Member States and China, in line with Union law; 48. Recommends that negotiations be opened only on condition that formal approval has first been given by China’s State Council for market access to be included in the investment agreement; 49. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| EU-Taiwan trade relations |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The European Parliament, – having regard to its resolution of 17 February 2011 on Europe 2020(1), – having regard to Article 3(5) of the Treaty on European Union and Article 7 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, which establish, respectively, that ‘in its relations with the wider world, the Union shall […] contribute to […] the strict observance and the development of international law’ and that ‘the Union shall ensure consistency between its policies and activities’, – having regard to its resolution of 11 May 2011 on the annual report from the Council to the European Parliament on the main aspects and basic choices of the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) in 2009(2), – having regard to its resolution of 12 September 2012 on the annual report from the Council to the European Parliament on the Common Foreign and Security Policy(3), – having regard to its resolution of 14 March 2013 on EU-China Relations(4), – having regard its resolution of 25 November 2010 on human rights and social and environmental standards in international trade agreements(5), – having regard to its resolution of 5 February 2009 on enhancing the role of European SMEs in international trade(6), – having regard to its resolution of 18 December 2008 on the impact of counterfeiting on international trade(7), – having regard to its resolution of 4 September 2008 on trade in services(8), – having regard to its resolution of 20 May 2008 on trade in raw materials and commodities(9), – having regard to its resolution of 19 February 2008 on the EU’s strategy to deliver market access for European companies(10), – having regard to its resolution of 22 May 2007 on Global Europe – external aspects of competitiveness(11), – having regard to its resolution of 7 July 2005 on relations between the EU, China and Taiwan and security in the Far East(12), – having regard the Communication from the Commission entitled ‘Trade, Growth and World Affairs – Trade Policy as a core component of the EU’s 2020 strategy’ (COM(2010)0612), – having regard to the Communication from the Commission entitled ‘Global Europe: competing in the world. A contribution to the EU’s Growth and Jobs Strategy’ (COM(2006)0567), – having regard to the Commission’s Trade and Investment Barriers Report 2013, published on 28 February 2013 (COM(2013)0103), – having regard to the question to the Commission on EU-Taiwan trade relations (O‑000093/2013 – B7‑0509/2013), – having regard to Rules 115(5) and 110(2) of its Rules of Procedure, A. whereas the rule-based multilateral trading system, established through the World Trade Organisation (WTO), is the most suitable framework to achieve open and fair trade worldwide; whereas it is essential, however, to understand that bilateral agreements are also part of the same common international affairs toolbox; B. whereas the EU remains fully committed to achieving a balanced and fair outcome for the Doha Development Agenda (DDA) as its preferred approach, and whereas progressing in parallel with bilateral trade agreements with other industrialised countries is also a valid option; C. whereas the total amount of bilateral trade between EU and Taiwan has increased more than twelvefold in the past two decades, exceeding EUR 40 billion in 2011; D. whereas Taiwan is the EU’s seventh largest trading partner in Asia and 23rd largest trading partner in the world; E. whereas in 2010 the EU accounted for 31,5 % of all foreign direct investment (FDI) flows and 21 % of FDI stocks in Taiwan, and was the largest foreign investor in the country; F. whereas the overall trade relationship between the EU and Taiwan is currently performing well below its potential; G. whereas open and fair trade is a powerful means of creating more growth and well‑being, building on the comparative advantages of each economy and the potential synergies flowing from greater economic integration and new inputs into knowledge-driven economies; H. whereas duties are already at generally low levels between the two trade partners; whereas the EU and Taiwan have a regular structured dialogue addressing trade and investment matters of common interest and concern; whereas, within this framework, four technical working groups have been set up to deal with IPR-, TBT- and SPS-related issues and the pharmaceutical sector; I. whereas, despite relatively low tariffs, bilateral trade volumes between the EU and Taiwan lag behind the bulk of the EU’s trade exchanges with its other main trading partners; J. whereas the ICT industry is a high-added-value sector and a source of growth in both the EU and Taiwan, especially with respect to further development of smart products and services; K. whereas the EU and Taiwan can further deepen their economic relations in a way that is genuinely of mutual benefit, also with a view to tackling common societal challenges; L. whereas Taiwan has been a full member of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) since 2002 and is also a full member of Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) and the Asian Development Bank; M. whereas Taiwan’s accession to the WTO Government Procurement Agreement (GPA) in July 2009 was a substantial and positive step, which will enable it not only to benefit from reciprocal opening-up of GPA markets but also to improve efficiencies on its home market; N. whereas Taiwan and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) have adopted a constructive approach contributing to the conclusion of 19 agreements signed between the Straits Exchange Foundation – for Taiwan – and the Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Straits – for the PRC; whereas these agreements include the Cross-Straits Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) and Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Agreement signed on 29 June 2010 as well as Investment Agreement and Customs Cooperation Agreement signed on 9 August 2012; O. whereas other constructive alternatives have led Taiwan to conclude 31 Bilateral Investment Agreements (BIAs) with third countries, including with Japan on 22 September 2011, and an Economic Cooperation Agreement with New Zealand on 10 July 2013, to resume its talks on a Trade and Investment Framework Agreement (TIFA) with the United States on 10 March 2013, and to be currently negotiating an investment agreement with the Republic of Korea and a free trade agreement with Singapore (ASTEP); P. whereas the Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office in the United States and the American Institute in Taiwan have agreed on Joint Statements on Principles for International Investment and on ICT services; whereas, similarly, Taiwan has concluded comprehensive income tax agreements with 25 countries, including nine EU Member States; Q. whereas closer economic ties with Taiwan do not in any way contradict the EU’s ‘one China’ policy, given that China and Taiwan respectively joined the APEC in 1991 and acceded to the WTO in 2002; 1. Considers that the multilateral trading system, embodied by the WTO, remains by far the most effective framework for achieving open and fair trade worldwide; believes that the EU and Taiwan should contribute to the advancement of multilateral trade negotiations; 2. Considers that, while the EU is working on upgrading its economic relations with China, it should consider the possibility of doing the same with Taiwan in order to consistently pursue the path of giving support to Taiwan’s democratic system, social pluralism and good record in respecting human rights and the rule of law; 3. Considers, therefore, that the EU should respond positively to Taiwan’s willingness to launch parallel negotiations for bilateral agreements on investment protection and market access in order to strengthen further the legal certainty of investments, and increase the volume and quality of investment flows; 4. Believes that the decision to start such negotiations with Taiwan should be based on economic reasons, and should not be interlinked with an assessment of relations between the EU and the People’s Republic of China; 5. Underlines the fact that Parliament is in favour of agreements on investment protection and market access with Taiwan, which would lead to deepening the existing economic relations between the EU and Taiwan; 6. Considers that EU-Taiwan agreements on investment protection and market access have the true potential to lead to a win-win situation, which will be beneficial to both economies; 7. Notes that any agreement should duly take into account SMEs and improve their ability to invest abroad; 8. Recalls also that the EU and Taiwan already have a well integrated economic relationship, generally low customs duties on both sides and a well structured dialogue, involving regular meetings to solve bilateral trade and investment issues; 9. Stresses that the agreement should include a strong commitment by the parties to sustainable and inclusive development in economic, social and environmental terms, with regard to investment; 10. Stresses that investment agreements concluded by the EU must respect the capacity for public intervention, in particular when pursuing public policy objectives such as social and environmental standards, human rights, security, workers’ and consumers’ rights, public health and safety and cultural diversity; calls for specific clauses on these objectives to be included in the agreement; 11. Recommends that, with regard to market access, both parties be allowed to exclude certain sectors from their liberalisation commitments in order to protect strategic national interests; 12. Reiterates its call for an effective corporate social responsibility clause and effective social and environmental clauses; 13. Stresses that the agreement must oblige foreign investors in the EU to abide by European social standards and social dialogue requirements; 14. Calls on the Commission to start talks for such agreements between the EU and Taiwan; 15. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the governments and parliaments of the Member States, and the Taiwanese Government and Legislative Yuan.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment ***I |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| EU and Member State measures to tackle the flow of refugees as a result of the conflict in Syria |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||
The European Parliament, – having regard to its previous resolutions on Syria, in particular those of 16 February 2012(1), 13 September 2012(2), 23 May 2013(3) and 12 September 2013(4), and on refugees fleeing armed conflict, – having regard to the Foreign Affairs Council conclusions on Syria of 23 January, 18 February, 11 March, 22 April, 27 May, 24 June, 9 July and 22 July 2013; having regard to the European Council conclusions on Syria of 8 February 2013, – having regard to the statements by the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (VP/HR), Catherine Ashton, of 21 August 2013 on the latest reports of use of chemical weapons in Damascus, of 23 August 2013 on the high urgency of a political solution to the Syrian conflict (reflecting the agreed position of the EU on Syria of 7 September 2013), of 10 September 2013 on the proposal to place Syria’s chemical weapons under international control, and of 14 September 2013 following the US-Russian agreement on chemical weapons in Syria, as well as to the statements made by the VP/HR during Parliament’s plenary debate in Strasbourg on 11 September 2013, – having regard to the statements made by the Commissioner for International Cooperation, Humanitarian Aid and Crisis Response, Kristalina Georgieva, on Syrian refugees and the EU’s response, in particular her statement of 3 September 2013 on the latest figure regarding refugees fleeing from the Syrian crisis, and to the ECHO (Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection) situation reports and factsheets on Syria, – having regard to the remarks made by the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, António Guterres, at the Informal Meeting of the Justice and Home Affairs Council in Vilnius, on 18 July 2013(5), – having regard to the Security Council briefings on Syria issued by the Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator, Valerie Amos, in particular that of 18 April 2013, – having regard to the joint statement of the Ministerial Meeting of Syria Bordering Countries organised by the UN High Commissioner for Refugees on 4 September 2013, – having regard to the UN Human Rights Council resolutions on Syria, – having regard to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, – having regard to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948, – having regard to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Optional Protocol thereto on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict, and the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, to all of which Syria is a party, – having regard to Articles 78, 79 and 80 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, – having regard to the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and the additional protocols thereto, – having regard to Rule 110(2) of its Rules of Procedure, A. whereas up to 20 September 2013 the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) had registered a total of 1 929 227 Syrian refugees in neighbouring countries and in North Africa; whereas the total number of refugees, including those unregistered, is estimated at 2 102 582; whereas according to the same sources 76 % of the Syrian refugee population are women and children; whereas 410 000 Syrian refugee children are of primary school age (between 5 and 11); whereas according to the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) the number of internally displaced persons (IDPs) as at 9 September 2013 was 4,25 million; B. whereas according to the UNHCR the number of refugees (including those awaiting registration) present in receiving countries as at 20 September 2013 was as follows: Turkey, 492 687; Lebanon, 748 608; Jordan, 531 768; Iraq, 190 857; Egypt, 124 373; Morocco, Algeria and Libya, 14 289 (registered); whereas thousands of Syrians are fleeing on a daily basis to neighbouring countries and the UN Syria Regional Response Plan is projecting a total of 3,5 million refugees from Syria by the end of 2013; C. whereas asylum claims in the EU from Syrians have continued to increase in 2013, with a total of 52 037 asylum claims having been made since the beginning of the conflict in 2011 in the EU and its closest neighbours (Switzerland and Norway); D. whereas, within the EU-28, Germany (14 842) and Sweden (14 083) have received 59 % of the claims lodged; whereas, while other countries have experienced significant increases in applications, only one other Member State has received more than 2 000 claims (the UK, with 2 634); E. whereas there is a lack of fully accurate and reliable data about the total number of Syrians coming to Europe, and of information on the numbers seeking asylum in European countries and the number present overall; whereas, according to the UNHCR, despite these gaps, and the fact that statistics and data on adjudication practices in respect of asylum claims in EU Member States have flaws, there are indications that gaps in the protection of Syrians within the EU persist; F. whereas the Syrian refugee crisis constitutes a first test for the newly revised Common European Asylum System (CEAS); G. whereas EU legislation already provides some tools, such as the Visa Code(6) and the Schengen Borders Code(7), making it possible to grant humanitarian visas; H. whereas the Member States should be encouraged to make use of the funds that will be available under the Asylum and Migration Fund and of the funds available under the Preparatory Action ‘Enable the resettlement of refugees during emergency situations’, which covers, among other things, the following measures: supporting persons already recognised as refugees by the UNHCR; supporting emergency action in the case of groups of refugees, identified as priorities, who are under armed attack and who face conjunctures of extreme vulnerability and of a life-threatening nature; providing, where needed, extra financial support during emergencies to the UNHCR and to its liaison organisations in the Member States and at EU level; I. whereas the latest tragedy off Lampedusa, on 3 October 2013, left 130 migrants dead, with hundreds of others missing; whereas tens of thousands of migrants have died trying to reach the EU; pointing once more to the need to do everything possible to save the lives of people in danger and to the need for Member States to abide by their international sea-rescue obligations; 1. Is deeply concerned about the ongoing humanitarian crisis in Syria and the heavy strain it is putting on neighbouring countries; expresses concern that the exodus of refugees continues to accelerate with no sign of the outflow ending soon; 2. Praises the efforts and solidarity of the authorities of those countries and the generosity of their populations in assisting refugees from Syria; 3. Welcomes the open-door policy of Syria’s neighbouring countries and urges them to keep their borders open to all refugees fleeing Syria; 4. Expresses concern that a growing number of Syrians are risking their lives by embarking on dangerous boat crossings across the Mediterranean to the EU; 5. Welcomes the fact that the EU and its Member States have committed more than EUR 1 billion in humanitarian and non-humanitarian assistance to Syrians inside and outside Syria; notes that the EU is the largest humanitarian donor to the Syrian crisis; calls also on the EU to monitor the distribution of that funding; 6. Calls for the EU to continue its generous funding of humanitarian and non-humanitarian efforts in response to the needs of people in Syria and refugees from Syria in neighbouring countries; 7. Encourages the Member States to address acute needs through resettlement in addition to existing national quotas and through humanitarian admission; encourages the Member States to make use of the funds still available under the preparatory action / pilot project on resettlement; 8. Calls for the international community, the EU and the Member States to continue providing support in response to this exceptional humanitarian crisis and to commit themselves to providing effective assistance to Syria’s neighbouring countries; 9. Calls for the EU to convene a humanitarian conference on the Syrian refugee crisis, with priority being given to actions directed at host countries in the region (in particular Lebanon, Jordan, Turkey and Iraq) in order to support them in their effort to host ever‑growing refugee populations and maintain an open-door policy; stresses that such a conference should involve all EU institutions and civil society organisations and focus on humanitarian efforts and on strengthening the EU’s role and involvement in the diplomatic efforts to help end the conflict in Syria; 10. Stresses the importance at this stage of exploring concretely whether, how and when Member States could do more to reinforce their protection response to Syria; points to the need for solidarity and for proactive strengthening of the overall protection response in the EU through enhanced cooperation, information sharing, capacity building and policy dialogue; 11. Welcomes the general consensus existing among Member States that Syrian nationals should not be returned to Syria; stresses, however, that a more coherent approach and greater solidarity with Member States facing particular pressure are needed in the reception of refugees from Syria; calls on the Member States to make sure that all the provisions of the different instruments of the CEAS are correctly implemented; 12. Calls on the Member States to explore all existing EU laws and procedures for providing safe entry into the EU in order to temporarily admit Syrians fleeing their country; notes that legal entry into the EU is preferable to more dangerous irregular entry, which could entail human trafficking risks; notes that some of the Member States have granted Syrians either permanent residency (e.g. Sweden) or temporary admission (e.g. Germany); 13. Reminds the Member States that Syrians fleeing the conflict who are seeking international protection should be referred to competent national asylum authorities and have access to fair and efficient asylum procedures; 14. Calls for the EU to take appropriate, responsible measures regarding a possible influx of refugees into its Member States; calls on the Commission and the Member States to continue monitoring the current situation and to work on contingency planning, including the possibility of applying the Temporary Protection Directive(8), if and when conditions demand it; 15. Points out that the Member States are required to come to the assistance of migrants at sea, and calls on Member States which have failed to abide by their international obligations to stop turning back boats with migrants on board; 16. Calls on the Member States to respect the principle of non-refoulement, in compliance with existing international and EU law; calls on the Member States to put an immediate end to any improper and extended detention practices in violation of international and European law, and points out that measures to detain migrants must always be subject to an administrative decision, and must be duly substantiated and temporary; 17. Calls on its relevant committees to continue monitoring the situation in Syria and neighbouring countries and the measures taken by the Member States in this respect; 18. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the Vice‑President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, the parliaments and governments of the Member States, the Secretary-General of the United Nations, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, the Secretary-General of the Arab League, the Parliament and Government of the Syrian Arab Republic, and the parliaments and governments of those countries neighbouring Syria and all the parties involved in the conflict in Syria.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Legal notice - Privacy policy |