11 Amendments of Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ related to 2017/2273(INI)
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recalls that the right to petition the European Parliament is a cornerstone of European citizenship, as enshrined in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, ranking second in importance to citizens according to recent surveys; underlines the importance of petitions as a means for citizens to feel involved in the activities of the Union and to express their concerns about instances of misapplication or violation of EU law and on potential lacunae, while at the same time highlighting these deficiencies to the Commission in recognition of its role as guardian of the Treaties;
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Notes the increase in EU infringement procedures for 2016 which show that the timely and correct implementation of EU legislation remains a challenge;
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Notes that petitioners very frequently refer to violations of EU law, in the year 2016 many petitions were registered in the fields of internal market, justice, fundamental rights and environment;
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Reiterates its call on the Commission to involve petitioners in the EU pilot procedures initiated in relation to their petitions, inter alia to facilitate dialogue between the petitioner and the national authorities concerned;
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. Notes that many petitions received in 2016 relate to precarious work, such as the use of zero hour contracts; Calls on the Commission to check the compatibility of these contracts with EU employment legislation, including the part time workers directive;
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Reiterates its call on the Commission to include in its annual report the rate of implementation also of EU regulations in same way as for directives;
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomes the increased transparency of, and the provision of more statistical information in, the Commission report for 2016, as compared to previous reports; regrets the fact, however, that it provides no precise information on the number of petitions that have led to the initiation of EU Pilot or infringement procedures and asks the Commission to provide specific information about this; notes with regret that Parliament is not involved in these procedures; reiterates its call on the Commission to share with Parliament information on all EU Pilots opened and infringement procedures initiated in order to improvmote transparency, and reduce the time frame for dispute settlement through the Committee on Petitions, build citizens’ trust in the EU project and, ultimately, enhance the legitimacy of the EU Pilot procedure; acknowledges the Court of Justice’s ruling on cases C-39/05 P and C- 52/05 P of May 2017, according to which documents within the EU Pilot procedure should not be disclosed publicly if there is a risk that such disclosure would affect the nature of the infringement procedure, alter its progress or undermine the objectives of that procedure;
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Regrets there is no publicly available information about how the 3783 complaints submitted to the Commission in 2016 were treated and calls for a more transparent implementation of the enforcement policy;
Amendment 38 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Asks the Commission to report on its priority-setting regarding its enforcement policy announced in the Communication ‘EU Law: Better results through better application’ where it states that it will focus its enforcement action where it can make a real difference, and on policy priorities pursuing cases which reveal systemic weakness in a Member State’s legal system;
Amendment 61 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Notes that, according to Standard Eurobarometer 86, free movement of EU citizens, who can live, work, study and do business anywhere in the EU, is the most positive result of the EU, and a majority of EU citizens favours a common EU policy in areas such as defence, migration and terrorism; recalls that, in order for such policies to be successful, it is paramount that they are implemented in a timely and uniform manner in all Member States; notes with concern that certain Member States are disregarding their obligations with regard to asylum and migration, in particular where relocation of asylum seekers and immigrants is concerned; underlines that the lack of solidarity between some Member states with regard to asylum and migration should be addressed so that all Member States meet their obligations;
Amendment 67 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Welcomes the proactive work of the Commission on the application of union law under the Better Regulation Package, and the support offered to Member States through implementation plans for new directives; points out, however, that Member States should live up to their responsibility to enforce the rules they have jointly adopted and avoid the practice of gold plating when implementing EU law to avoid citizens’ confusion on the distinction between EU and national law and citizens’ impression that the EU over legislates.