Activities of Rupert LOWE

P9_CRE-PROV(2020)01-13(1-062-0000)

P9_CRE-PROV(2020)01-13(1-064-0000)

P9_CRE-REV(2019)10-22(2-187-0000)

P9_CRE-REV(2019)10-09(1-330-0000)

Brexit Party MEPs voted against this legislative report, which concerns amending the European Union Solidarity Fund to cover the ‘financial burden’ that a no-deal Brexit could represent for Member States. We believe that this is highly political, as it is likening no-deal Brexit to a natural disaster, whilst also taking away funds from genuine natural disaster victims. For these reasons, we cannot support this report.

I abstained on this resolution because it should be a decision made at nation state level and not by the EU for all 28 Member States.

The Brexit Party MEPs voted against many of the amendments on this motion for resolution concerning the effects of bankruptcy of Thomas Cook Group. Many of these are calling for more EU action to be taken and funds to be created in the event of similar events happening in the travel and tourism sector. We also voted in favour of any amendments that would reduce any future harmonisation in this area. Whilst we are of course sympathetic to those who have been affected by the collapse of Thomas Cook, more EU legislation is not the answer.

Brexit Party MEPs voted against this motion for resolution, which calls on the Council to break its deadlock and allow legislation on the CBCR proposal to progress forward. We voted against this because we do not want the European Union to continue making more legislation, as this is the prerogative of Member States.

The Brexit Party voted against this non-legislative and non-binding resolution. We do not support the EU developing its foreign policy, as it is superfluous and often counter-productive. The EU should not be involved in the current crisis nor the political resolution post-conflict.

The Brexit Party believes that the best way to stop the tragic loss of innocent lives in the Mediterranean is to strongly combat people smugglers who lure migrants onto unseaworthy vessels. We believe that decisions on asylum claims should be conducted under relevant international law and nation states could, as a sovereign state, choose to accept genuine refugees to enter their country.Brexit Party MEPs voted against this non-legislative resolution on the issue of search and rescue in the Mediterranean. We condemn all parties who are responsible for the unacceptably high death toll in the Mediterranean, particularly people smugglers and traffickers who facilitate dangerous and illegal crossings.The Brexit Party strongly maintains that the issue of search and rescue and securing borders is the sole competence of a Member State. We oppose the principle of the EU developing a refugee distribution mechanism, as it should be the right of a sovereign state to govern whom it allows onto its territory. We also oppose the attempt by the EU to establish legal frameworks to distinguish what forms of assistance should not be criminalised, as this is a clear infringement of the principle of subsidiarity.

The Brexit Party voted against this non-legislative and non-binding resolution. We are opposed to further expansion of the European Union and are pleased to see the vetoing of further progression for these countries. We are opposed to expansion whilst the UK is currently a member of the EU, in any future transition or whilst we retain financial liabilities towards the EU. We think the EU is a poor choice for other Member States but after the UK makes a clean exit from the EU and at a time when we have no liability it is for those states to decide themselves.

The Brexit Party voted against any increases to individual EU budget lines and voted in favour of any cuts to EU budget lines. This vote was a series of amendments to the actual figures and size of each EU budget for the year 2020. Before it arrived in Parliament for amendment, the Commission had initially proposed a budget worth EUR 168.3 billion (+1.3% compared to 2019). The Council then adopted its position of EUR 166.8 billion (slightly lower). Now it was Parliament’s turn, which ended up being much higher than either the Commission or the Council positions. There will now be a negotiation period with the Council to find a compromise. A full UK contribution for 2020 is included in the proposal.

The Brexit Party voted against this non-legislative, non-binding resolution on the EU budget for 2020. The resolution was a shopping list of what MEPs wanted from the EU budget in 2020, with many calls for radially increased funding in many areas of EU policy. The Brexit Party voted against any calls to increase the EU budget and voted in favour of any amendments to decrease the budget.

The Brexit Party voted to refuse granting discharge to the Asylum office. The discharge procedure is a process by which the European Parliament looks at the individual budgets and spending of each EU institution to give a positive or negative appraisal.In this specific case, the asylum office has had a number of problems, such as errors in payments amounting to EUR 7.7 million, breaches of procurement procedures, misappropriation of funds, mismanagement, abuse of position in human resources issues, breaches of data protection rules, harassment and inappropriate behaviour towards staff.The Brexit Party voted to refuse discharge due to all these problems, along with our principled position that we oppose British taxpayers’ having to pay for all these EU institutions and agencies.

The Brexit Party voted to refuse granting discharge to the Council. The discharge procedure is a process by which the European Parliament looks at the individual budgets and spending of each EU institution to give a positive or negative appraisal.Historically the Council refuses to cooperate with the Parliament in this discharge procedure, as it contests the legal base for the Parliament to oversee its budget and 2017 was no different.We voted to refuse discharge as we believe there should be more transparency in how the Council spends its budget, along with our principled position that we oppose British taxpayers’ having to pay for all these EU institutions and agencies.

I abstained on this resolution because it should be a decision made at nation state level and not by the EU for all 28 Member States.

The Brexit Party have voted to abstain on this legislative report. Firstly, we do not believe that a no-deal Brexit would lead to significant job losses. That being said, as the UK would have left the EU by the time this legislation takes effect, and the UK would therefore have no legal obligation to contribute to this fund, the decision should be a matter for the remaining Member States to take as to how they wish this for this fund to be utilised. For this reason, the Brexit Party abstained on this report.

. ‒ The Brexit Party voted against this legislation for access to waters between the EU and the UK because the proposed arrangement is in practice very one-sided: the EU gets far more benefit than the UK and would therefore be able to continue to plunder UK waters, just as it has for decades.

. ‒ Brexit Party MEPs voted against this piece of legislation. This proposal is to allow the UK to continue making full budgetary contributions to the EU in 2020, in the event of a no-deal Brexit. The UK will have to meet a number of conditions such as adhering to a deadline to inform the Commission in writing that payments will be made, that the payment schedule is made on time and into a specific bank account, that the UK allows OLAF and EU auditing of EU funds on its territory.This will mean the UK can still get EU funding for 2020, that UK entities can bid for most (but not all) EU public tenders, and ensure payments for EU contracts to public and private entities in 2020 continue. However, some rights for the UK will be curtailed such as not having representation on management committees or expert groups.The Brexit Party voted against as we want a clean-break Brexit to stop making full budget payments to the EU and we believe that the UK Government should make up the shortfall for UK entities and universities that are currently receiving EU funds.

. ‒ The Brexit Party voted in favour of this urgency procedure. The report seeks to ensure that air and road travel is not disrupted in the case of a no-deal Brexit by updating the date of implementation to take into account the seven-month extension, as the dates in the original legislation will soon be expiring. The Brexit Party voted in favour as we support the European Parliament’s efforts to prepare for no-deal by putting contingencies in place to ensure that air and road travel is not disrupted, despite the European Union’s insistence that this would not be possible, and therefore proving that future and sincere cooperation is feasible in a no-deal scenario.

. ‒ The Brexit party voted in favour of this urgency procedure. The report seeks to ensure that air and road travel is not disrupted in case of no deal Brexit, updating the date of implementation to take into account the seven months extension. The Brexit party voted in favour as we support bringing forward this report in order to prepare for Brexit.

The Brexit Party have voted to abstain on this report. Whilst data exchanges and cooperation, particularly for the purpose of combatting serious crime, are very important we do not support this being facilitated at EU level. However, if the sovereign nation of Serbia wishes to participate it would not be appropriate to block their decision. Therefore, as we support the underlying principle of cooperation and data sharing to combat serious crime, but not the EU facilitating it, we felt that abstaining was most suitable.

The Brexit Party voted against this budgetary proposal. We would have supported the original Commission proposal as it reduced the amount of money in a number of EU budget lines and would lead to a reduction in Member States’ contributions for this year, thereby saving British taxpayers’ money. However, the rapporteur UK Labour MEP amended this resolution to redeploy the savings, meaning it would be spent in other areas of the EU budget instead of saving taxpayers’ money, so we voted against.

The Brexit Party voted in favour of this budgetary proposal. The original Commission proposal was to reduce a payment plan for future EU spending in the field of migration and security. This proposal was linked to the Draft Amending Budget Number 4, which should have led to a reduction in Member States’ contributions; however, a Labour MEP managed to make amendments to reverse this. In this case, however, the proposition was to support the original proposal to cut EU funding, not the amendments by the rapporteur, so we voted in favour.

The Brexit party abstained on this motion for resolution on active substances including flumioxazine. The report criticises the Commission, as they continue to extend regulated acts on allowing this substance when there are concerns as to how safe it is. The Brexit party believe that the Commission should not act in an undemocratic way without being held accountable; however, we cannot support the motion as it also calls on the Commission to create new legislation.

We voted against the Parliament resolution because, provided proper care is taken, GM offers very considerable benefits in terms of yield, and parasite and disease resistance, i.e. as a fungicide and insecticide, and there is no reputable scientific case against it: in short, the benefits outweigh the risks.

We voted against the Parliament resolution because, provided proper care is taken, GM offers very considerable benefits in terms of yield, and parasite and disease resistance, i.e. as a fungicide and insecticide, and there is no reputable scientific case against it: in short, the benefits outweigh the risks.

We voted against the Parliament resolution because, provided proper care is taken, GM offers very considerable benefits in terms of yield, and parasite and disease resistance, i.e. as a fungicide and insecticide, and there is no reputable scientific case against it: in short, the benefits outweigh the risks.

The Brexit Party has voted against this non-legislative resolution. The Brexit Party wholeheartedly supports free and fair elections, free speech and democratic accountability. These principles, in part, are integral in our cause to leave the European Union. We believe that reports of Russian electoral interference have already been exposed as baseless propaganda in order to shut down debate and discredit legitimate democratic exercises, such as the UK referendum. Furthermore, the Brexit Party voted against the third amendment because it maliciously – and incorrectly – stated that the Leave.eu campaign received funding from foreign actors despite the National Crime Agency clearing Leave.eu of these allegations in September.

The Brexit Party voted against this non-legislative, non-binding resolution. The Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) is the long-term budget for the EU. The resolution called for an MFF of over €1.3 trillion and more EU action and funding in areas such as defence, climate change, migration, foreign affairs to name a few. They will also be seeking to phase out national rebates and bring in new ways to fund the EU budget such as ‘Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base’ and a single use plastic tax.

The Brexit Party has voted to abstain on this non-legislative report. Whilst we fully support many sentiments of this report, such as the need to tackle unemployment, poverty and inequalities, we oppose the EU’s vision on how to resolve these issues. Moreover, with Brexit on the horizon and the fact that the report largely focusses on the euro area, which the UK is not part of, it felt more appropriate to abstain on this vote.