28 Amendments of Nacho SÁNCHEZ AMOR related to 2020/2262(INI)
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 8 a (new)
Citation 8 a (new)
— having regard to the Special report no 14/2019: ‘Have your say!’: Commission’s public consultations engage citizens, but fall short of outreach activities, of the European Court of Auditors,
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 8 b (new)
Citation 8 b (new)
— having regard to the Opinions and Resolutions of the European Committee of the Regions, namely the Resolution of the CoR on changing the ESI funds Common Provisions Regulation to support structural reforms(2018/C 176/02), the Opinion of the CoR “Reflecting on Europe: the voice of local and regional authorities to rebuild trust in the European Union of 09 October 2018 (CDR 1230/2018), and the Resolution of the European Committee of the Regions on the 2021 Work Programme of the European Commission (2021/C 37/01); having regard to the European Committee of the Regions’ priorities for 2020-2025 “Europe closer to the people though its villages, cities and regions” of 30 June - 2 July 2020,
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 8 c (new)
Citation 8 c (new)
— having regard to 9th Subsidiarity Conference - Active Subsidiarity: Creating EU added value together, co- organised by the Committee of the Regions and the Italian Conference of the Presidents of regional Parliaments, in Rome on 22 November 2019,
Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
D a. Whereas the ‘Have Your Say’ web portal has proven a useful point of access for citizens and stakeholders to participate in preparing Commission policy; whereas the European Court of Auditors, however, published a special report in 2019 with a set of recommendations in order to improve this portal, especially when it comes to the use of translation;
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas the Commission received 52 reasoned opinions from national parliaments on the principle of subsidiarity in 2017, 37 in 2018 and none in 2019; whereas in 2020 (not covered in this report) the Commission received a total of only 9 reasoned opinions;
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Recital F a (new)
F a. whereas the current configuration of this mechanism sets in motion 40 legislative chambers in the EU, 75 regional parliaments and assemblies, and thousands of parliamentarians throughout the EU, and which is enormously time-consuming for the agendas of national parliament’s Committees for Union Affairs, overloading them when analysing the legislation sent by the EU Institutions, making it difficult for them to dedicate more time to the analysis of Union policies as a result;
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F b (new)
Recital F b (new)
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F c (new)
Recital F c (new)
F c. whereas, under the framework of political dialogue in the relations of the institutions of the Union with national parliaments, national Parliaments can issue opinions on documents or policy areas where the institutions have power to act, with the aim to transmit their views on a much broader range of issues beyond subsidiarity; whereas this forenamed opinions from national parliaments are called “opinions” by the Commission and “contributions” by the European Parliament; whereas contrary to the falling amount of reasoned opinions, opinions have followed the opposite trend since they have been increasing significantly over the years;
Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F d (new)
Recital F d (new)
F d. whereas the European Committee of the Regions highlights its role as guardian of the principle of subsidiarity and believes this principle should be seen as a dynamic political and legal concept in policymaking and implementation;
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F e (new)
Recital F e (new)
F e. whereas the European Committee of the Regions recently introduced in March 2021 the Regional Hubs 2.0; whereas this project is an own initiative of the Committee to monitor how EU policies work on the ground;
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas the current crisis has strengthened the need to alleviateidentify unnecessary regulatory burdens to make sure that EU laws deliver their intended benefits while reducing unnecessary costs, particularly for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs);
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the constant consideration of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality, which are guiding principles for the European Union when it chooses to act; recalls the concerns raised in previous reports about the somewhat perfunctory character of the annual reports on subsidiarity and proportionality prepared by the Commission, which often fail to pay detailed consideration to how these principles are observed in EU policy- making; acknowledges the growing comprehensiveness of the annual reports on subsidiarity and proportionality of the Commission, within the current legal format, which are increasingly detailed and exhaustive;
Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Recalls that the principle of subsidiarity enshrined in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union aims to ensure that decisions are taken as closely as possible to citizens and that constant checks are carried out to verifythis is constantly respected, and that action at EU level is justified in the light of the possibilities available at national, regional or local level and to guarantee that the EU does not take action, except in the areas that fall within its exclusive competence, unless it is more effective than action taken at national, regional or local level; recalls, too, that the principle of proportionality requires that any action taken by the EU should not go beyond what is necessary to achieve the objectives of the Treaties;
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Acknowledges the work carried out by the EU institutions in the respect of the subsidiarity and proportionality principles as demonstrated in the fact that in more than 5000 analysis of EU legislation no orange card has been triggered; regrets however that the current structure of the subsidiarity process overburdens the agendas of national parliament’s Committees for Union Affairs compelling them to dedicate excessive time to technical and legal assessments with short deadlines, thus not enabling them to have a more political approach in their agendas and for debating on Union policies;
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2 b. Emphasises that EU institutions must be attentive to counteract misemployment of the subsidiarity and proportionality principles for anti- integration policies, thus not to be used as a mechanism to slow the integration of the Union, and therefore defending the correct use of the forenamed principles;
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Underlines that the use of directives as legislative instruments allows for better compliance with and respect for the principle of subsidiarityStresses that in no case should the subsidiarity process lead to a dilemma between regulations and directives, this choice corresponds to another framework, since the subsidiarity analysis concerns "who does what better and closer” and not who prescribes norms or policies, thus it is not a necessarily legal analysis;
Amendment 56 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Notes the conclusions of the Task Force on Subsidiarity, Proportionality and ‘Doing Less More Efficiently’; draws attention to the fact that Parliament declined the invitation to participate by appointing members to the Task Force, with full respect for its institutional role as the only directly elected body of the European Union and of ensuring democratic scrutiny of the activity of European Union; welcomes the results and recommendations of the Report of the Task Force stating that there is EU value added in all existing areas of activity and the task force did not, therefore, identify any treaty competences or policy areas that should be re-delegated definitively, in whole or in part, to the member states;
Amendment 62 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Recalls that the “orange card” procedure has never been activated, and that the “yellow card” has been activated only three times, out of a total of 435 reasoned opinions and 5227 opinions in the period 2007-2019; Emphasises the importance of the participation of national parliaments in the process of law-policy- making at EU level; regretEmphasises the fact that in 2017 the Commission received 20 % fewer reasoned opinions than in 2016 (52 reasoned opinions in 2017 compared to 65 reasoned opinions in 2016), and that in 2018 it received only 37 reasoned opinions; stresses that in 2019, 0 reasoned opinions were submitted; observes that no proposals received more than four reasoned opinions;
Amendment 66 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Underlines that, on the contrary, and in comparison with reasoned opinions, the trend of opinions (“contributions” in the terms of the vocabulary of the European Parliament) demonstrates a consolidation of the substantial interest of national parliaments for political dialogue by means of the opinions, given that the Commission received 524 opinions in 2017 from national parliaments, 532 opinions in 2018, 159 opinions in 2019 and 246 opinions in 2020; identifies that this trend deepens with the abovementioned figures in 2020 despite this last figures not falling within the scope of this report;
Amendment 68 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Underlines that the trend of the number of opinions and reasoned opinions in the period 2007-2019 demonstrates that national parliaments increasingly ask for more political dialogue and a greater involvement in the debate on EU policies, thus dedicating less time to the normative analysis of EU legislative proposals;
Amendment 92 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12 a. Suggests that the European Commission give due consideration to the recommendations of the European Court of auditors on the “have your say portal”, in particular by increasing the linguistic accessibility of consultations, in order to allow citizens and stakeholders to decide what they consider to be of “broad public interest”;
Amendment 99 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
Amendment 102 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Welcome the ‘one-in, one-out’ approach based on stakeholder involvement, through which the Commission aims to offset newly introduced burdens, not to be used as a deregulatory measure, by relieving people and businesses of equivalent burdens at EU level in the same policy area; emphasises, however, that the implementation of this approach should not lead to mechanical decisions to repeal legislation or lower standards; and that its aim should be to modernize and reform EU legislation to face new societal challenges, while taking into account the added value of existing measures for society as a whole;
Amendment 115 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Welcomes, in this regard, the establishment by the Commission of the Fit for Future Platform, a high-level expert group with the participation of various stakeholders, Member State experts, and representatives of the Committee of the Regions and the European Economic and Social Committee, which advises the Commission on how to make EU legislation more efficient, by identifying potentially unnecessarily burdensome existing EU legislationmeasures and how to simplify and modernise ithem, including through digitalisation;
Amendment 117 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15 a. Strongly suggests a revision of the subsidiarity control mechanism with the aim of making it more functional and agile so that local and regional authorities, and mostly national parliaments, are able to dedicate the essential time needed fora genuine debate on European politics, without being encompassed in a less efficient process with hardly any political substance, and therefore not appropriate to the character of national parliaments; recommends the development of a more political approach in this regard, in order to develop a greater added value for citizens;
Amendment 120 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 b (new)
Paragraph 15 b (new)
15 b. Highlights that in the views of a future assessment of the “Better Law Making”, national governments could be considered as the institution who carries out the examination of “who does what better and closer” in regard to the subsidiarity process, since they are legally and administratively equipped and qualified to better analyse it and to determine the feasibility of EU legislation at all levels, and could therefore amount to more of an “active subsidiarity” approach;
Amendment 121 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 c (new)
Paragraph 15 c (new)
15 c. Proposes a further involvement of the European Committee of the Regions in the subsidiarity control mechanism, which have the role of the guardian of the principle of subsidiarity representing regional and local authorities, and which has a right to bring an action before the CJEU for an infringement of the principle;
Amendment 122 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 d (new)
Paragraph 15 d (new)
15 d. Calls on EU institutions to begin to address a complete reassessment of the subsidiarity process ahead of an eventual reform of the control mechanism, which may take place within the framework of the Conference on the Future of Europe;