3 Amendments of Dietmar KÖSTER related to 2015/2283(INI)
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes the decrease in the number of reasoned opinions received from national parliaments in 2014; points out, however, that such a decrease might be as a result of the declining number of legislative proposals by the Commission and not of a loss of interest on the part of national parliaments; draws attention to the fact that in 2014 no Commission proposal received a sufficient number of reasoned opinions to trigger thewas subject to ‘yellow’ or ‘orange card procedures’ under Protocol No 2 on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality; recalls that the fact that the yellow card procedure was triggered twice in the past (2012 and 2013) is a sign that the system is already functional while national parliaments are worried about the subsidiarity principle.
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Expresses concern thatWelcomes the Impact Assessment Board (‘IAB’) considered more than 32 % of impact assessments (‘IAs’) reviewed by them in 2014 to have included an unsatisfactory analysis of the principles of subsidiarity or proportionality, or both; notes the crucial importance of impact assessments as tools for aiding decision-making in the legislative process, and stresses the need, in this context, for proper consideration to be given to ikage of measures aimed at improving regulation which was adopted by the Commission on 19 May 2015 and which addresses the concerns raised by the Impact Assues relating tosment Board concerning subsidiarity and proportionality; welcomes, in this connecti the Commission’s new line on, the package of better regulation measures adopted by the Commission on 19 May 2015, which place new emphasisubject which gives greater prominence to the principles onf subsidiarity and proportionality, in the context of impact assessments;cluding in its impact analyses.
Amendment 105 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Notes that legislative proposals may change substantially in the course of the legislative procedure and, in this connection, reiterates that consideration should be given to the introduction of further subsidiarity checks and impact assessments when a major amendment is likely to be adopted and at the conclusion of the legislative negotiations and in advance of the adoption of the final text, in order that compliance with subsidiarity can be guaranteed and that assessments including proportionality can be made;impact assessments at the beginning of the legislative procedure are an important and necessary instrument for compliance with the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality. Stresses that these guiding principles, which ensure that the European Union is close to its citizens, must guarantee the effectiveness of the EU institutions while avoiding excessive bureaucracy.