Activities of Morten MESSERSCHMIDT related to 2018/2094(INI)
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT on the state of the debate on the future of Europe PDF (265 KB) DOC (107 KB)
Amendments (28)
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 25 a (new)
Citation 25 a (new)
- having regard to the statement on the Future of Europe made by the Visegrad Group countries (Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia) on 26 January 2018;
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the European Union is an example unique experiment of supranational integration without equal and has brought last the aims of bringing peace, prosperity and welfare to its peoples; whereas these goals are being threatened by the political drive for an ever closer union which has led to a European Union which is too centralised, too overreaching and too out of touch with ordinary citizens;
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas over the past few years the Union has facedstruggled to cope with multiple crises which have tested its resilience and capacity to act in a decisive and united mannerdemonstrated that the EU's 'one size fits all' approach to all policy areas has created a Union which is too bureaucratic and over-centralised;
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas although Europe has managed to overcome the most critical moments of the economicfinancial crisis, important and urgent reforms still lie ahead in the area of economic governance in general and in the euro area in particular, as well as in terms of recovery of the social standards of our welfare statets structural causes are yet to be tackled and significant economic challenges remain which can only be solved by the Member States building dynamic competitive economies and through improving levels of productivity and innovation to create jobs and prosperity;
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas in view of the multiple current and future challenges facing the Union in a hostile global world, in particular those concerning migration, terrorism, security, completing the EMU, globalisation, climate change, international trade, foreign affairs and defence, the development of the social pillar, and the fight against anti-EU populism, the objective enshrined the Lisbon Treaty of creating an ever closer union among the peoples of Europe should continue to inspire the actUnion needs to avoid becoming overreached by focusing on doing less more efficiently as outlined in scenario four of the Commission's taken by the Union; whereas these clear challenges can only be addressed if tackled togetherWhite Paper on the Future of the European Union;
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas the referendum in the UK of June 2016 leading to the UK’s announcement on 29 March 2017 of its intention to leave the European Union has intensified the debate on the future of the Union; whereas this is reflected, besides in Parliament’s own resolutions on the future of Europe of 16 February 2017, in the Bratislava Declaration and Roadmap, the Commission White Paper on the Future of Europe, the Rome Declaration, the Leaders’ Agenda adopted by the European Council in October 2017, and various contributions by individual Member States or groups of them; whereas the decision of the British people demonstrates the discontent of citizens with current state of the European Union;
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Recital F a (new)
F a. Whereas the results of recent elections, referenda and opinion polls consistently show that the citizens of the European Union reject the supranationalist model of a centralised European Union driven by ideology which undermines the principles of subsidiarity and democracy as highlighted by the German constitutional court;
Amendment 50 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas the upcoming elections to the European Parliament present an opportunity to take stock of the debate on the future of Europe, also in view of the principal institutional priorities of the three institutions for the new term; whereas the views of all political groups in the European Parliament need to better be taken into account in the next term;
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas the EU is facing a particularly important period in its construction processat a critical juncture point, given the nature and dimension of its challenges, and whereas these can only be solved by working together and through greater and better integrationhallenges cannot be solved by undertaking more supranational integration but only by a far more free and differentiated cooperation between Member States and a restoration of a genuine democratic control by national parliaments;
Amendment 65 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital J
Recital J
J. whereas the Meseberg Declaration proposes putting in placein February 2018, Parliament voted comprehensively against the introduction of a transnational lists for the European elections as of 2024;
Amendment 68 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recallgrets that Parliament’s resolutions on the future of Europe of 16 February 2017 emphasised the importance of the single institutional framework and the Community method and suggested several flawed proposals and initiatives of particular importance for European integration that can contribute to building Europe’s futurethat will lead to further centralisation whilst deconstructing European democracies and diversity; instead proposes reforming the European Union by taking an intergovernmentalist approach that allows for common action to be taken between Member States only when it fully respects the principles of conferral, subsidiarity and proportionality;
Amendment 73 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Underlines that the Union must tackle the challenges of its future with greater and better political integration, with full respect for fundamental and democratic values, and by working togetherby reforming to become a community of nations cooperating in shared confederal institutions in areas in which the nations have common interests; agrees with the heads of state and government who addressed Parliament in plenary during the debates on the future of Europe who stated that citizens want a Europe that protects are concerned by the federalist vision behind the call for furtheir rights and their social model on the basis of shared sovereignty, and that the problems we face in Europe can only be solved togetherintegration but remain determined to continue working together on the basis of shared sovereignty in areas which are mutually beneficial to do so;
Amendment 80 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Reiterates its belief that differentiated integcooperation must remain open to all Member States and continue to act as an example of deeper European integration, not as a way to facilitate à la carte soluprovide an option to both Member States and citizens which wish to remain part of the European project whilst simultaneously protecting their national democracy, culture and identities by refraining from further supranational integrations;
Amendment 89 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Stresses that the Commission, when exercising its right of initiative, should act only after conducting thorough impact assessments, and should seek formal authority from the Member States to the principle of proposing a legislative initiative in advance;
Amendment 92 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Reiterates that the unanimity, which the Treaties require in some fundamental matters, is an almost insurmountable obstacle in important moments and decisions, and advocates therefore, with regard to decision-making procedures, the principle of qualified majority voting (QMV) in Council and the use of the ordinary legislative procedure; recalls that under the current Treaties this can be achieved by using the various passerelle clauses or, in the case of enhanced cooperation, by using Article 333 TFEUintentionally high requirement in the decision-making procedure in order to ensure that all Member States have a strong voice in the Council and can protect their national interest with the use of a veto; stresses that the introduction of qualified majority voting (QMV) in Council would further weaken the EU's respect for the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality whilst isolating Member States who are opposed to further integration;
Amendment 97 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Welcomes in this regardRegrets the announcement by President Juncker in his State of the Union address of 13 September 2017 of the intention to propose using QMV in the Council for matters such as the common consolidated corporate tax base (CCTB), VAT and taxation of the digital economy, but regrets that the MFF regulation is not among the subjects listed; reminds that the ability for citizens to elect national representatives to set taxes is a fundamental part of a modern democracy and that any taxes set at an EU level would further exacerbate the problem of the EU's democratic deficit;
Amendment 102 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Welcomes in particularExpresses serious concerns with the fact that the Commission and somea few Member States are also contemplating using QMV for the common foreign and security policy, given the importance of speeding up decision-making and making iat such policies must remain a national competence as an independent mfore effective, and the need for the Union to speak with one voiceign policy is a key requirement for a nation to be sovereign;
Amendment 111 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8 a. Underlines its support to modernise the Luxembourg Compromise where any government raising a “very important interest”, mandated by its parliament, would demand a unanimity- based decision at the Council of Ministers and European Council on strategic matters;
Amendment 129 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. WelcomNotes the joint proclamation endorsing the European Pillar of Social Rights; points out that the competences and tools required to deliver on the pillar are and must remainly in the hands of local, regional and national authorities, as well as social partners and civil society, while progress in its implementation should receive particular attention within the economic policy coordination of the European Semester; recalls in this context that social dialogue has proven to be an indispensable instrument to improve EU policy- and law-making;
Amendment 153 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Welcomes the Commission communicationStrongly rejects the proposal onf a European Minister of Economy and Finance; points out that merging the posithis and any harmonisations of Commission Vice-President for Economic Affairs and Chair of the Eurogroup could improve parliamentary accountability at European leveltaxation policies would imprison the member states in a 'fiscal cage'; recalls how Europe needs fair fiscal competition between its Member States;
Amendment 155 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14 a. Stresses the need to aim to reduce the economic costs of regulatory burden which have resulted from excessive existing Union regulations by 25% by 2020, with a more ambitious and longer term target of 50% by 2030, taking particular regard for the effects of such over-regulation on SMEs;
Amendment 165 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. WelcomeRejects the Commission proposal on own resources introducing new real own resources, as requested by Parliament; expresses concern at the Commission proposal for the multiannual financial framework (MFF) for 2021-2027, and regres it fails to take into account the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the Union and the necessary reduction in EU spending that must coincide with it; supports the positions taken by somethe many Member States that refuse to provide more resources to the EU, despite unanimous recognition of the need to face new challenges and responsibilities, and therefore the need for more financial resources recognising the failure of the Commission to propose a MFF that is more efficient, better targeted and solely focused on areas in which the EU can add value;
Amendment 179 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. WelcomeRegrets the Council decision establishing permanent structured cooperation (PESCO), the Coordinated Annual Review on Defence (CARD) and the European Defence Fund (EDF) as important steps towards a common defence policy, and note, and rejects proposals by certain Member States for an EU Security Council and a European Intervention Initiative; recallalso rejects its call for the establishment of a permanent Council of Defence Ministers chaired by the Vice- President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (VP/HR), and underl; remineds the importance of appropriate democratic accountability of decisions taken in this area and the need for reinforced cooperation between the European Parliament and national parliaments in this regardat defence policy must remain a matter of national sovereignty, with NATO as the cornerstone of Europe’s defence and security objectives; insists therefore that any further developments by the EU in this area must adhere to the commitments made in the 2016 EU-NATO Joint Declaration;
Amendment 182 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
Amendment 197 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Underlines its determination to continueExpresses concerns with the Spitzenkandidaten process for the election of the next Commission President, and welcomes the support of the Commission and certain Member States in this respect; underlines that it will reject any candidate in the investiture procedure of the Commission President who w; regrets that in 2014 the process failed to engage with citizens as nbot appointed as a Spitzenkandidat in the run-up to European Parliament elections and who does not have a sufficient parliamentary majority; considers it essential to strengthen the social legitimacy of the European elections and the supranational role of the European Parliament as an exponent of European citizenship and European sovereigntyh the candidates and European political parties were entirely unknown to a vast majority of citizens, weakening the political legitimacy of both Parliament and the Commission; warns that this same situation will occur in the 2019 European elections;
Amendment 206 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Regrets the frequent and widespread temptation to attribute unpopular decisions to Brussels and to free national authorities of their responsibilities and politics, given that this unjust and opportunistic attitude damages Europe, promotes anti-European nationalism and discredits the EU institutioof MEPs to state one policy position in Brussels and an entirely different one to their citizens in the Member States, given that this unjust and opportunistic attitude damages Europe, discredits the EU institutions and has contributed to further supranational integration without and even against the consent of its citizens;
Amendment 213 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Underlines the need to strengthen the European public sphere as a suprademocratic legitimacy of the European institutions by increasing the role of national parea of European democracyliaments in the EU decision- making process; stresses that the major challenges Europe is facing must be addressed and discussed from both a European perspective and not from a national perspective; poremintds out that, for this reason, European democracy needs a Europethat Europe is a continent with diverse cultures and identity, a genuinely European demos, more European institutional education and a deliberative, more participatory and less national social frameworkies and that there can never be a European demos; points out that the diversity in the European Union is its strength, and that it should therefore refrain from attempting to harmonise the cultures and identities of its Member States;
Amendment 224 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Welcomes the approach taken to the current negotiations on the United Kingdom’s orderly withdrawal from the European Union, and underlines the remarkable unity displayed by the EU institutions and Member States; notereminds that experience in the negotiations to date has shown the enormous complexities of such decisionsthe deal currently being negotiated between the EU and the UK can serve as a model agreement for any other Member State who wishes to leave in the future;