14 Amendments of Dita CHARANZOVÁ related to 2019/2204(INI)
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the Defence Procurement Directive seeks to introduce fair and transparent rules for defence procurement in an effort to make it easier forto make sure that defence companies in the Member States tocan access other Member States’' defence markets;
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas the Defence Package Directives are needed to further develop a common European security and defence culture, based on the European Union's shared values and objectives, with respect to the specific character of the security and defence policies of the Member States;
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas the EPRS study pointed out the limitedinsufficient effect of the Defence Procurement Directive on the Europeanisation of defence value chains;
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)
Recital G a (new)
Ga. whereas an important reason for the lack of participation of SMEs is the lack of cross-border access to supply chains; whereas, defence supply chains have a substantial national focus, which adds challenges for SMEs that wish to enter defence supply chains in other European countries; whereas, moreover, OEMs continue and limit themselves to subcontract SME's they have a pre- existing working relationship with, due to financial reasons;
Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes some of the positive trends witnessed in the progressive implementation of the Defence Procurement Directive, namely the increasing number of contract notices and contract-award notices issued by Member States, and the increasing proportion of procurement that has been tendered competitively through Tenders Electronic Daily (TED); stresses, howeverStresses, that a very high volume of procurement expenditure is still incurred outside the directive;
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Believes, in this regard, that the Commission should take a more proactive roleits responsibility in monitoring the exclusions used by the Member States in their awarding of contracts outside the scope of the Defence Procurement Directive, and should not be mainly reliant on received complaints filed by the industry;
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Calls on the Member States to properly implement the Defence Procurement Directives and those with a large established defence industry to lead by example;
Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Observes, further, that there was a slower and lower than expected uptake of certification, and that there are still barriers to effective application of the directive, with low levels of awareness, particularly among SMEs, of the tools available under the directive, and the system used by the Member States in their export controls, in addition to the lack of harmonisation in the implementation of GTLs, which act as major barriers to the effective application of the directive; underlines the fact that an introduction of the ‘de Minimis’ rule principle, known from the Schmidt-Debré harmonisation agreement, in bilateral and/or multilateral agreements between Member States has the potential to further stimulate participation of SMEs in joint ventures and common export licenses throughout the internal market;
Amendment 50 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Calls on the Commission to further improve the directive’s implementation in individual Member States by continuing its dialogue withinsisting on national authorities in order to resolve outstanding issues;
Amendment 59 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Calls on the Commission to be boldstrong in enforcing the directives, including, where necessary, by making use of infringement proceduresby making use of their right laid down in Article 258 TFEU to start infringement procedures; asks the Commission to initiate infringement procedures instead of solely acting on complaints filed by the industry;
Amendment 63 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Considers, therefore, that the goal of increasing SME participation has onlynot been partially achieved;
Amendment 64 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Is of the opinion that the subcontracting provisions of the directive had no or a very limited impact on the cross-border access of sub-suppliers and defence SMEs; calls on the Member States to ascertain that their internal procedures are not blocking SMEs’llow for SME cross border participation and to simplify access for companies that fall within the EU definition of SMEs for the participation in tendering processes in the fields of defence and security;
Amendment 69 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Considers that Member-State action could significantly improve cross-border market access for SMEs and sub-suppliers in the defence sectors, and therefore, calls on the Member States to seriously take into consideration and follow when possibleimplement the Commission recommendations as much as possible;
Amendment 70 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)
Paragraph 24 a (new)
24a. Calls on the Commission to improve access to finance for SMEs such as European guarantee funds;