BETA

Activities of Notis MARIAS related to 2015/2326(INI)

Plenary speeches (1)

2014 Annual report on monitoring the application of Union law (A8-0262/2016 - Heidi Hautala) EL
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2015/2326(INI)

Shadow opinions (1)

OPINION on monitoring the application of Union Law: 2014 Annual Report
2016/11/22
Committee: PETI
Dossiers: 2015/2326(INI)
Documents: PDF(134 KB) DOC(195 KB)

Amendments (5)

Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
1. Appreciates the importance attributed in the report to petitions submitted by citizens, businesses and civil society organisations as a secondary means of monitoring the application of EU law through citizens’ direct expression of their views,direct expression by citizens of their views - in addition to their primary avenue for democratic expression: elections and referendums - a right enshrined in the Lisbon Treaty and an important element of European citizenship;
2016/03/04
Committee: PETI
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. Regrets that petitions submitted by EU citizens refer to violations of EU law; considers that these petitions attest to the fact that there are still frequent and widespread instances of late or incomplete transposition, or of misapplication, of EU law, and stresses that the Member States should implement and execute EU law effectively; considers that the EU itself should seek gradually to cut the size of its rulebook by up to half and to concentrate on areas where it enjoys exclusive competence, focusing within shared- competence fields solely on policies that are genuinely more effective when conducted at European level rather than at national level; points out that the EU cannot opt out of periodic assessments of the true impact of its legislation and of drawing conclusions from them, on an objective basis, in order either to maintain legislation, if not enlarge upon it, or to shift its focus or, in line with the subsidiarity principle, to return competence for it to Member States;
2016/03/04
Committee: PETI
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. Regrets that petitions submitted by EU citizens refer to violations of EU law or to a number of consequences thereof for citizens and businesses or to instances of EU maladministration; considers that these petitions attest to the fact that there are still frequent and widespread instances of late or incomplete transposition, or of misapplication, of EU law, and stresses that the Member States should implement and execute EU law effectively;
2016/03/04
Committee: PETI
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
6. Recalls that the area of police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters (previously known as the ‘third pillar’) is frequently addressed in petitions by natural persons; welcomes, therefore,is concerned at the expansion of the Commission’s competences to include police and judicial cooperation as of 1 December 2014, at a time when cooperation between police, court, intelligence and customs services should be heightened and a culture of confidence and communication cultivated within Interpol's current intergovernmental framework, centring on a number of priority areas (terrorism, transnational crime, illegal immigration, drugs and people trafficking), rather than weakening arrangements by adding a layer of bureaucratic oversight which can but be detrimental to the effectiveness of those services, as is illustrated by Europol's poor record, and therefore to territorial security and fundamental freedoms;
2016/03/04
Committee: PETI
Amendment 34 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
7. Underlines the importance of implementation plans adopted by the Commission with the aim of assisting and guiding Member States in the timely, clear and correct transposition of EU directives; underlines the need for the Commission to act quickly, and on a grand scale, so as gradually to cut the number of legislative acts by up to half, by 2020, on the basis of the principle that two old acts should be done away with for every new act adopted; welcomes the importance attributed to Better Regulation and to the monitoring of EU regulatory fitness, which form part of a greater effort to improve the quality of EU legislation and – it is to be hoped – should have a positive impact on the number of petitions submitted.
2016/03/04
Committee: PETI