1886 Amendments of Alain CADEC
Amendment 19 #
2018/0256M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph
Paragraph
Deplores the legal uncertainty that followed the judgment of the Court of Justice of 21 December 2016; is concerned about the Commission's inability to provide reliable data on preferential imports of fishery products from Western Sahara that may have occurred since that date despite the judgment in question; questions the extent of the damage to the Union budget of any preferences granted without any valid legal basis during this period;
Amendment 22 #
2018/0256M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph
Paragraph
Invites the customs authorities of the Member States to implement all the mechanisms of administrative cooperation provided for in Title V of Protocol No. 4 in the event of doubts as to the actual source (Saharawi or Moroccan) of the goods presented for import;
Amendment 171 #
2018/0210(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) Fisheries are vital to the livelihood and cultural heritage of many coastal communities in the Union, in particular where small-scale coastal fishing plays an important role. With the average age in many fishing communities being over 50, generational renewal and diversification of activities remain a challenge. It is therefore essential that the EMFF should provide support for the attractiveness of the fisheries sector by ensuring vocational training and access for young people to careers in fishing.
Amendment 179 #
2018/0210(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) The EMFF should aim to achieve the environmental, economic, social and employment objectives of the CFP, as defined in Article 2 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013. Such support should ensure that fishing activities are environmentally sustainable in the long-term and managed in a way that is consistent with the objectives of achieving economic, social and employment benefits, and of contributing to the availability of food supplies, and at the same time ensure fair labour conditions.
Amendment 244 #
2018/0210(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
Recital 29
(29) The outermost regions, as outlined in the Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee, the Committee of the Regions and the European Investment Bank of 24 October 2017 entitled 'A stronger and renewed strategic partnership with the EU's outermost regions'10, face specific challenges linked to their remoteness, topography and climate as referred to in Article 349 of the Treaty and also have specific assets on which to develop a sustainable blue economy. Therefore, for each outermost region, an action plan for the development of sustainable blue economy sectors, including the sustainable exploitation of fisheries and aquaculture, should be attached to the programme of the concerned Member States and a financial allocation should be reserved to support the implementation of those action plans. It should also be possible for the EMFF to support a compensation of the additional costs the outermost regions face due to their locationremoteness and insularity. That support should be capped as a percentage of this overall financial allocatione lessons drawn from the 2014-2020 programming period call for a simplified implementation of the compensation of the additional costs scheme in the interest of beneficiaries, in line with the Commission’s goal of simplification. Member States should have more flexibility to modify their allocation during the budgetary period. In addition, a higher aid intensity rate than the one that applies to other operations should be applied in the outermost regions. _________________ 10COM(2017) 623.
Amendment 247 #
2018/0210(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29 a (new)
Recital 29 a (new)
(29a) In order to ensure the survival of the fisheries sector in the outermost regions and in compliance with the principles of differential treatment for small islands and territories mentioned in Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 14, it should be possible for the EMFF to support, on the basis of Article 349 TFEU, the renewal of the outermost regions’ small-scale coastal fishing vessels which land all their catches in ports in the outermost regions and contribute to local sustainable development, so as to increase human safety, to comply with European hygiene standards, to fight IUU fishing and to achieve greater environmental efficiency. This fishing fleet renewal should remain within the limits of authorised capacity ceilings, should be restricted to the replacement of an old vessel by a new one, and should allow sustainable fishing and the reaching of the Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY) objective. It should be possible for the EMFF to support associated measures, such as the construction or the modernisation of small shipyards dedicated to traditional and artisanal fishing vessels in the outermost regions, the renovation of the deck, or studies.
Amendment 251 #
2018/0210(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29 b (new)
Recital 29 b (new)
(29b) With a view to alleviating the above-mentioned specific constraints in outermost regions and on the basis of Article 349 TFEU, it should be possible to grant State operating aid under a simplified procedure.
Amendment 320 #
2018/0210(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 43
Recital 43
(43) Under shared management, each Member States should prepare onea single programme in collaboration with all the regions that should be approved by the Commission. In the context of regionalisation and with a view to encouraging Member States to have a more strategic approach during the preparation of programmes, the Commission should develop an analysis for each sea basin indicating the common strengths and weaknesses with regard to the achievement of the objectives of the CFP. That analysis should guide both the Member States and the Commission in negotiating each programme taking into account regional challenges and needs. When assessing the programmes, the Commission should take into account the environmental and socio- economic challenges of the CFP, the socio- economic performance of the sustainable blue economy, the challenges at sea basin level, the conservation and restoration of marine ecosystems, the reduction of marine litter and climate change mitigation and adaptation.
Amendment 340 #
2018/0210(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point 6
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point 6
(6) ‘fisher’ means any natural person engaging in commercial fishing activities, and who is either the owner of a fishing vessel or a worker, as recognised by the relevant Member State;
Amendment 344 #
2018/0210(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point 7 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point 7 a (new)
(7 a) (new) ‘on-foot fisher’: means any natural person engaging in commercial on-foot fishing activities, as recognised by the relevant Member State;
Amendment 406 #
2018/0210(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1
1. The financial envelope for the implementation of the EMFF for the period 20214-20270 shall be maintained for the period 2021-2027 (EUR 6 1400 000 000 in current prices).
Amendment 416 #
2018/0210(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 1
1. The part of the financial envelope under shared management as specified in Title II shall be 90% of the total EMFF budget (EUR 5 311740 000 000) in current prices in accordance with the annual breakdown set out in Annex V.
Amendment 449 #
2018/0210(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 1
1. The part of the financial envelope under direct and indirect management as specified in Title III shall be 10% of the total budget of the EMFF (EUR 829640 000 000 in current prices).
Amendment 546 #
2018/0210(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) exploratoryerimental fishing;
Amendment 557 #
2018/0210(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point h
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point h
(h) the construction of new ports, new landing sites or new auction halls;
Amendment 638 #
2018/0210(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the first acquisition of a fishing vessel by a young fisher who, at the moment of submitting the application, is under 40 years of age and has worked a least five years as fisher or has acquired adequate vocational qualification;, including when he/she acquires the property as the majority shareholder in a company.
Amendment 640 #
2018/0210(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the replacement or modernisation of a main or ancillary engine to reduce the emission of pollutants or greenhouse gases and increasing the energy efficiency of fishing vessels.
Amendment 698 #
2018/0210(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – title
Article 18 – title
Amendment 705 #
2018/0210(COD)
1. The EMFF may support a compensation for the extraordintemporary cessation of fishing activities caused by:
Amendment 710 #
2018/0210(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) conservation measures, as referred to in Article 7(1), points (a), (b), (c) and (j) of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013, point (c) if there is a determined period of biological recovery in accordance with [CFP Regulation], or equivalent conservation measures adopted by regional fisheries management organisations, where applicable to the Union;
Amendment 713 #
2018/0210(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) in case of application of the emergency measures adopted by the Commission referred to in Article 13 of the [CFP Regulation];
Amendment 722 #
2018/0210(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
(da) The recurrent seasonal suspension of fishing periods shall not be taken into account when granting compensation or making payments under this Article.
Amendment 761 #
2018/0210(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 18 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) on-foot fishers who have worked for at least 120 days during each of the last two calendar years preceding the year of submission of the application for support concerned by the temporary cessation.
Amendment 767 #
2018/0210(COD)
5. All fishing activities carried out by the vessels and fishers concerned shall be effectively suspended during the period concerned by the cessation. The competent authority shall satisfy itself that the vessel concerned has stopped any fishing activities during the period concerned by the extraordintemporary cessation and that any overcompensation resulting from the use of the vessel for other purposes is avoided.
Amendment 790 #
2018/0210(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1
Article 21 – paragraph 1
1. The EMFF may support the compensation of additional costs incurred by beneficiaries in the fishing, farming, processing and marketing of certain fishery and aquaculture products from the outermost regions referred to in Article 6(2). This regime shall apply to all additional costs incurred by operators engaged in the activities of fishing and farming.
Amendment 793 #
2018/0210(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2
Article 21 – paragraph 2
2. Each Member State concerned shall determine, in line with the criteria laid down in accordance with paragraph 7, for the regions referred to in paragraph 1, the list of additional costs that apply to fishing and farming operators. It shall also draw up the list of fishery and aquaculture products and the quantity of those products eligible for the compensation.
Amendment 803 #
2018/0210(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 22 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) compensations to fishers for the collection of lost fishing gears and marine litter from the sea, including the collection of sargassum seaweed in the outermost regions affected;
Amendment 819 #
2018/0210(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Article 22 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 (new)
(g) Training for fishermen, in particular in the use of more selective fishing gear and equipment, with a view to raising awareness and reducing fishing’s impact on the marine environment
Amendment 846 #
2018/0210(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 23 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. (a) In order to foster entrepreneurship in aquaculture, the EMFF may support the setting-up of aquaculture enterprises by new aquaculture farmers under certain conditions: - if new aquaculture farmers possess adequate professional skills and competence, and are certified to operate; - if new aquaculture farmers set up for the first time micro or small enterprise, as managers of that enterprise; and - if new aquaculture farmers submit a business plan for the development of their aquaculture activities and commit to using environmentally friendly aquaculture techniques. (b) Support referred to in paragraph (a) may take the form of fixed grants awarded before starting the project.
Amendment 901 #
2018/0210(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 26 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Actions taken in this sector should be coherent with the regional development strategies so as to allow a sustainable blue economy to grow and coastal territories to have added value.
Amendment 914 #
2018/0210(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Title 3 – chapter 5 a (new)
Title 3 – chapter 5 a (new)
Amendment 1010 #
2018/0210(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II a (new)
Annex II a (new)
Area of Support Maximum possible co-funding rate Article 29 (c) 50% Renewal of small coastal fleets and associated measures Article 29(d) 100% Compensation for additional costs for fisheries and aquaculture products
Amendment 1017 #
2018/0210(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – row 18 – line number 16 a (new)
Annex III – row 18 – line number 16 a (new)
16a (new) Operations carried out by 60% beneficiaries of collective projects
Amendment 1019 #
2018/0210(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – row 18 – line number 16 b (new)
Annex III – row 18 – line number 16 b (new)
16b (new) Operations carried out by 75% an inter-branch organisation, a producer organisation or an association of producer organisations
Amendment 207 #
2018/0193(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) For vessels of 12 or more metres' in length or more, it is important that the information in the logbook is made more accurate and includes data on the catches by haul or by operation, as this will enhance the effectiveness of controls. In the case of vessels less than 12 metres' length, the obligations pertaining to the completion and submission of the logbook should be simplified and masters should only be required to submit the information contained in logbook once, before arrival at port.
Amendment 250 #
2018/0193(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 64 – indent 13
Recital 64 – indent 13
– registration or licensing system, tracking of vessels, and control of gears for certain recreational fisheries;
Amendment 318 #
2018/0193(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 11
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 11
Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009
Article 14 – paragraph 1
Article 14 – paragraph 1
1. The master of each Union catching vessel shall keep an electronic fishing logbook for the purpose of recording fishing activities for catches above 30 kg live-weight equivalent.
Amendment 321 #
2018/0193(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 11
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 11
Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009
Article 14 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 14 – paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Without prejudice to Article 14(1), masters of vessels of less than 12 metres’ length overall shall have the option of keeping their fishing logbook in paper form for two years from the date of entry into force of this Regulation.
Amendment 323 #
2018/0193(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point d
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point d
(d) the date and, where appropriate, time of catches;
Amendment 328 #
2018/0193(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point g
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point g
(g) the estimated quantities of each species in kilograms live weight or, where appropriate, the number of individuals, including the quantities or individuals below the applicable minimum conservation reference size, as a separate entry; for Union fishing vessels of 12 metres' length overall or more, this information shall be provided per haul or per fishing operation;
Amendment 352 #
2018/0193(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12
Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) at least once a day, and where applicable, after each haul; and;
Amendment 505 #
2018/0193(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 35
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 35
Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009
Article 39a – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 39a – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the vessels are equipped with propulsive engines with certified engine power exceeding 221 kilowatts; orand
Amendment 507 #
2018/0193(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 35
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 35
Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009
Article 39a – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 39a – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the vesselcaptain or holder of the fishing licence has alre equipped with propulsiveady been penalised for manipulating an engines with certified engine power between 120 and 221 kilowatts and operate in areas subject to effort regimes or restrictions on engine powerthe aim of increasing its power beyond the maximum continuous engine power given on the engine certificate.
Amendment 534 #
2018/0193(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 44
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 44
Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009
Article 55 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point a
Article 55 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point a
(a) put in place an accessible, affordable registration or a licensing system monitoring the number of natural and legal persons involved in recreational fisheries; and
Amendment 542 #
2018/0193(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 44
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 44
Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009
Article 55 – paragraph 2
Article 55 – paragraph 2
2. As regards stocks, groups of stocks and species that are subject to Union conservation measures applicable to recreational fisherie for which the Council establishes catch limits for recreational fisheries under the multiannual plans, Member States shall:
Amendment 544 #
2018/0193(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1– paragraph 1 – point 44
Article 1– paragraph 1 – point 44
Amendment 548 #
2018/0193(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 44
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 44
Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009
Article 55 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
Article 55 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
(ba) put in place an obligation to declare catches in real time by means of a catch book,
Amendment 557 #
2018/0193(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 44
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 44
Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009
Article 55 – paragraph 5 – point a
Article 55 – paragraph 5 – point a
(a) the registration or licensing systems for recreational fisheries for specific species or stocks for which the Council establishes catch limits for recreational fisheries under the multiannual plans,
Amendment 561 #
2018/0193(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 44
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 44
Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009
Article 55 – paragraph 5 – point d
Article 55 – paragraph 5 – point d
Amendment 566 #
2018/0193(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 44 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 44 a (new)
Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009
Article 55 a (new)
Article 55 a (new)
(44a) Article 55a the following Article 55a is inserted: Marking of catches from recreational fisheries 1. Stocks subject to catch limits set by the Council for recreational fishing under multi-annual plans shall be marked when kept by a recreational fisherman. 2. This marking consists in the removal of the lower part or the upper part of the caudal fin, but in such a way that does not prevent the measurement of the size of the fish. 3. The marking shall be carried out immediately after the capture and killing of the fish, either on the shore or on board if the fishing activity is carried out on a boat. However, specimens brought on board a recreational fishing vessel and kept alive and in good condition before being released shall not be marked.
Amendment 602 #
2018/0193(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 47
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 47
Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009
Article 59–paragraph 3
Article 59–paragraph 3
3. Consumers acquiring up to an amount of 530 kg of fishery product per day which are not thereafter placed on the market but used only for private consumption shall be exempted from this Article.”
Amendment 664 #
2018/0193(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 54
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 54
Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009
Article 65
Article 65
A consumer acquiring products not exceeding 530 kg of fishery product per consumer per day which is not thereafter placed on the market but used only for private consumption, shall be exempted from the provisions laid down in Articles 62 and 64.
Amendment 729 #
2018/0193(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 69
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 69
Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009
Article 90– paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 90– paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Calls on the Commission to publish guidelines, accessible online to inspectors, to clarify the interpretation of the various applicable penalties and to limit disparities in treatment between Member States
Amendment 732 #
2018/0193(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 69
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 69
Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009
Article 91–paragraph 1
Article 91–paragraph 1
1. Where a natural person is suspected of having committed or is caught in the act while committing a serious infringement or a legal person is suspected of being liable for such a serious infringement, Member States, in addition to the investigation of the infringement in accordance with the provisions of Article 85, shall immediately in conformity with their national law, take relevant and immediate measures such as:
Amendment 751 #
2018/0193(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 69
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 69
Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009
Article 92–paragraph 3
Article 92–paragraph 3
Amendment 819 #
2018/0193(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 86 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 86 a (new)
Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009
Article 118a (new)
Article 118a (new)
(86a) The following Article 118 a (new) is inserted: Article 118a (new) In the case of French Guiana, whose vast territory suffers from a structurally inadequate internet coverage, and whose extensive coastline offers a large number of landing spots with little or no electronic infrastructure, a period of up to 72 hours in total is granted for the various electronic operations provided for in Articles 15, 17 22, 24, 58, 62 and 66.
Amendment 234 #
2018/0074(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. In fishing authorisations referred to in paragraph 1, Member States may also limit the total capacity of such vessels using a specific gear.
Amendment 144 #
2018/0050(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article premier – paragraph 5
Article premier – paragraph 5
5. This Regulation also specifies details for the implementation of the landing obligation in Union waters of the western Mediterranean Sea for all stocks of species to which the landing obligation applies under Article 15(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 which are caught in demersal fisheries.
Amendment 164 #
2018/0050(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3
Article 3 – paragraph 3
3. The plan shall implement the ecosystem-based approach to fisheries management in order to ensure that negative impacts of fishing activities on the marine ecosystem are minimised. It shallould be coherent with Union environmental legislation, in particular with the objective of achieving good environmental status by 2020 as set out in Article 1(1) of Directive 2008/56/EC and the objectives set out in Articles 4 and 5 of Directive 2009/147/EC and Articles 6 and 12 of Council Directive 92/43/EEC.
Amendment 188 #
2018/0050(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 2a (new)
2a. Notwithstanding Article 4(1), the target fishing mortality in line with the ranges of FMSY referred to in that paragraph, together with rapid stock replenishment to levels higher than those necessary to achieve MSY in accordance with paragraph 1 or 2 of this article, may be achieved progressively and in stages over a period not exceeding three years, insofar as this is necessary in the light of the economic and social impact of the fishing activities concerned and their effect on employment.
Amendment 211 #
2018/0050(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 6
Article 7 – paragraph 6
Amendment 218 #
2018/0050(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7a (new)
Article 7a (new)
Article 7a Recreational fishing 1. Member States shall take account of fishing mortality in recreational fisheries when allocating the fishing opportunities they have and which are referred to in Article 16 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013, so that the total fishing mortality target is not exceeded. When scientific advice indicates that recreational fishing is having a significant impact on the fishing mortality of a stock referred to in Article 1(2) of this Regulation, the Council may establish non-discriminatory individual fishing opportunities for recreational fishermen. 2. The Council shall refer to transparent and objective criteria, including those of an environmental, social and economic nature, when setting fishing opportunities for recreational fishing. The criteria used may include, in particular, the impact of these fishing activities on the environment, the societal importance of this activity and its contribution to the economy in coastal areas. 3. The individual recreational fishing opportunities referred to in paragraph 1 shall cover periods of no less than one month. 4. Member States shall take the necessary and proportionate measures for the monitoring and collection of data for a reliable estimation of the actual catch levels referred to in paragraph 1.
Amendment 219 #
2018/0050(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8
Article 8
Amendment 232 #
2018/0050(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3
Article 9 – paragraph 3
3. Where a Member State allows vessels flying its flag to fish with trawls, it shall ensure that such fishing is limited to a maximum of 128 hours per fishing day, five fishing days per week or equivalent.
Amendment 242 #
2018/0050(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 1
1. In addition to what is provided for by Article 13 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1967/2006, the use of trawls in the western Mediterranean Sea shall be prohibited within the 100 m isobath from 1 May to 31 July each yearextension of the trawl ban can be envisaged when and where this is necessary according to the best available scientific advice, by means of delegated acts in accordance with Article 15 of that Regulation.
Amendment 258 #
2018/0050(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 18 supplementing this Regulation by establishing the following technical conservation measures for fisheries exploiting demersal stocks in the Western Mediterranean Sea:
Amendment 277 #
2018/0050(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1
Article 14 – paragraph 1
For all stocks of species in the western Mediterranean Sea to which the landing obligation applies under Article 15 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013, and for incidental catches of pelagic species in fisheries exploiting the stocks referred to in Article 1(2) to which the landing obligation applies, the Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 15 supplementing this Regulation by adopting detailed measures for that obligation as provided for in points (a) to (e) of Article 15(5) or Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013.
Amendment 48 #
2018/0012(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) To address the problem of marine litter effectively, it is fundamental to provide the right level of incentives for the delivery of waste to port reception facilities, in particular garbage. This can be achieved through a cost recovery system, which requires the application of an indirect fee, which is due irrespective of the delivery of waste and which should give a right of delivery of the waste without any additional direct charges. However, if a vessel delivers an exceptionally large volume of the types of waste included in Annex V to the Marpol Convention and that volume exceeds the volume put down in the reception and handling plan, an additional direct fee may be charged in order to ensure that the costs related to receiving that waste do not cause a disproportionate burden on a port's cost recovery system. The fishing and recreational sector, given their contribution to the occurrence of marine litter, should also be included in this system.
Amendment 96 #
2018/0012(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point j
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point j
(j) ‘port’ means a place or a geographical area made up of such improvement works and equipment as to permit the reception of ships, including the anchorage area within the jurisdiction of the port, and the reception of ships planning to trade there;
Amendment 110 #
2018/0012(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) all ships, irrespective of their flag, calling at, or operating within, a port of a Member State, with the exception of any warship, naval auxiliary, ship waiting to be chartered or under shelter, or other ship owned or operated by a State and used, for the time being, only on a government non- commercial basis;
Amendment 121 #
2018/0012(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 4
Article 4 – paragraph 4
4. Member States shall investigate all reported cases of alleged inadequacies and ensure that any party involved in the delivery or reception of waste from ships can claim compensation for damage caused by undue delay when that delay results from a failure to implement reception and handling plans.
Amendment 129 #
2018/0012(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) location of port reception facilities applicable to eacDoes not affect the English bverth;sion.)
Amendment 154 #
2018/0012(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 164 #
2018/0012(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 3
Article 7 – paragraph 3
3. The operator, agent or master of a ship, falling within the scope of Directive 2002/59/EC, shall before departure, within one working day after reception, electronically report the information from the waste receipt in the part of the information, monitoring and enforcement system referred to in Article 14 of this Directive, in accordance with Directive 2010/65/EU and Directive 2002/59/EC.
Amendment 166 #
2018/0012(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 5 – point a
Article 7 – paragraph 5 – point a
(a) the ship only calls at anchorage at a port of call for trading purposes for less than 24 hours or, under adverse weather conditions or while waiting to be chartered;
Amendment 171 #
2018/0012(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 6
Article 7 – paragraph 6
6. In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of the exception based on sufficient dedicated storage capacity, implementing powers shall be conferred on the Commission to define the methods to be used for the calculationpercentage of the sufficient dedicated storage capacity on board. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 20(2).
Amendment 174 #
2018/0012(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 7
Article 7 – paragraph 7
7. IWithout prejudice to the provisions of the Marpol Convention, the Member State shall require the ship to deliver all its waste before departure if the next port of call is located outside the Union, or and there are good reasons to believe that adequate facilities are not available in the next port of call, or this port is unknown, the Member State shall require the ship to deliver all its waste before departure.
Amendment 190 #
2018/0012(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) in order to provide for a maximum incentive for the delivery of waste as defined in Annex V to the MARPOL Convention, including the waste that has been collected in nets during fishing operations, except for hazardous waste, the indirect fee to be charged shall cover all the costs of port reception facilities for this waste, in order to ensure a right of delivery without any additional direct charges, up to an amount established in the handling and reception plan;
Amendment 211 #
2018/0012(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 3
Article 8 – paragraph 3
3. The part of the costs which isare not covered by the fees referred to in subparagraphs (b) and (c), if any, shall be covered on the basis of the types and quantities of waste actually delivered by the ship.
Amendment 218 #
2018/0012(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 5
Article 8 – paragraph 5
5. The fees shall be reducedport authority may reduce the fees if the ship’s design, equipment and operation are such that it can be demonstrated that the ship produces reduced quantities of waste, and manages its waste in a sustainable and environmentally sound manner. The Commission shall be empowered by means of delegated acts in accordance with Article 19, to define the criteria for determining that a ship meets the requirements stated in this paragraph in relation to the ship’s on-board waste management.
Amendment 235 #
2018/0012(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) the arrangement under point (b) is evidenced by a signed contract with a port or waste contractor, waste delivery receipts and confirmation that the arrangement has been accepted by all ports on the ship’s route. The arrangement for delivery and payment of the fee shall be made in a port located in the Union in order to constitute sufficient evidence in accordance with this paragraph.
Amendment 257 #
2018/0012(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 2
Article 18 – paragraph 2
Amendment 259 #
2018/0012(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 19 – paragraph 1
Article 19 – paragraph 1
1. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 8(5), Article 18(1), Article 18(218(1) and Article 18(3) shall be conferred on the Commission for a period of five years from [the date of entry into force ...]. The Commission shall draw uppresent a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 263 #
2018/0012(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 25 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 25 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Member States shall adopt and publish, by 31st of December 2020 at the latest, the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive. They shall forthwith communicate to the Commission the text of those provisions. The obligations under Article 4(3), the last subparagraph of Article 5(2), Article 6(2), Article 7(3) and Article 9(3) shall be applied in keeping with the implementation of the revised Directive 2010/65/EU.
Amendment 282 #
2017/2191(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 a (new)
Paragraph 32 a (new)
32a. Calls on the Commission to put in place a binding regulatory framework at EU level to combat unfair commercial practices in the food supply chain that adversely affect farmers;
Amendment 285 #
2017/2191(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 b (new)
Paragraph 32 b (new)
32b. Points out that Parliament has already called on the Commission and the national competition authorities to respond to the concerns raised by the combined impact, both on the upstream part of the food supply chain and on distributors and consumers, of the rapid concentration of the distribution sector at national level on the one hand and the alliances being formed among large-scale distributors at European and international level on the other; believes that this structural change raises concerns about possible strategic alignments, a fall-off in competition, and reduced scope for investment in innovation within the food supply chain;
Amendment 42 #
2017/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Calls on the Commission to ensure that it improves coherence between the EU's trade policy and the Common Fisheries Policy;
Amendment 60 #
2017/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Notes that while the provisions of Regulation (EU) No 1379/2013 on the common organisation of the markets in fishery and aquaculture products apply to all fishery and aquaculture products, those on labelling for consumers only apply to a relatively small group of products, excluding prepared, preserved or processed products; considers that consumer information should be improved for these products, too; considers that, with a view to informing consumers and ensuring that fishery and aquaculture products are traceable, the labelling of those products must be improved;
Amendment 5 #
2017/2120(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas it is important to understand the difference between recreational fisheries and semi-subsistence fishing, because the two should be evaluated and regulated separately and it should be made clear that recreational fishing is not semi-subsistence fishing;
Amendment 52 #
2017/2120(INI)
P. whereas owing to the poor state of Northern sea bass and Western Baltic cod stocks, recreational fisheries have been included in recovery plans, by setting bag limits, in order to help recover these stocks; whereas emergency management measures taken when it is thought that the status of a stock is being affected by recreational fishing do not provide the sector with the necessary visibility;
Amendment 71 #
2017/2120(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Amendment 77 #
2017/2120(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Emphasises the need for improved reporting and monitoring of catches connected with recreational fisheries; points out that, when it adopted the European Union budget for 2018, Parliament approved a pilot project aimed at introducing a monthly reporting scheme for sea bass catches;
Amendment 79 #
2017/2120(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Calls upon the Commission to conduct an impact assessment on the recreational fishing in the EU; the assessment of the management plans which include recreational fishing provisions should also be embedded in the Commission’s final report on the impact assessment;
Amendment 89 #
2017/2120(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Calls for recreational fishing to be included in the multiannual management plans for putting in place programmed and long-term management measures so as to provide greater visibility to the sector and ensure there is a balance between recreational and commercial fisheries;
Amendment 94 #
2017/2120(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Points out that the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund supports data-gathering, including with regard to recreational fisheries; calls, therefore, for the Member States to take the necessary steps to gather data, at least with regard to the species on which they are required to gather data where recreational fisheries are concerned; takes the view that the gathering of reliable data is absolutely essential in order to make it possible to put in place measures that reflect the real impact that recreational fishing has on species;
Amendment 117 #
2017/2120(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Commission to propose a comprehensive regulation on maritime recreational fisheries, as well as a definition for the activity at EU level, to be included in the future CFP following an impact assessment, so that both types of maritime fishing – commercial and recreational – can be managed in a balanced, fair and sustainable manner with a view to achieving the desired objectives;
Amendment 125 #
2017/2120(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Reminds that the EMFF provides funds for data collection, including recreational fisheries; calls upon the Commission to widen the future scope of the EMFF in order to provide financial support for research and analysis of the data collected;
Amendment 126 #
2017/2120(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8b. Reminds that traceability is the best tool in determining and controlling when recreational fishing becomes semi- subsistence fishing;
Amendment 8 #
2017/2066(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the EU market in retail financial services remains underdeveloped and highly fragmented; whereas efficient action is therefore needed to facilitate innovation beneficial to end users, while unlocking the full potential of the single marketreleasing the full potential of the single market in retail financial services would boost competitiveness, which would in turn lead to lower prices, create incentives for businesses to be more innovative, and increase the choice and diversity of products;
Amendment 20 #
2017/2066(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas micro-enterprises, SMEs and mid-caps are the backbone of the European economy and drivers of employment and growth; whereas every European law and initiative must be adapted to the characteristics of these companies;
Amendment 23 #
2017/2066(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B b (new)
Recital B b (new)
Bb. whereas the definition of FinTech is set out in the Parliament Resolution of 17 May 2017, which says that FinTech should be understood as finance enabled by or provided via new technologies, affecting the whole financial sector in all its components, from banking to insurance, pension funds, investment advice, payment services and market infrastructures;
Amendment 29 #
2017/2066(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the Commission Action Plan on consumer financial services as a means of addressing some of the challenges raised by Parliament in its report on the Green Paper on retail financial services, with the aim of striving towards a genuine technology-enabled single market for retail financial services, while protecting consumers, guaranteeing data protection, lowering prices and fighting against tax fraud, tax evasion and tax avoidance;
Amendment 45 #
2017/2066(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Considers that the three main strands of work identified by the Commission for the remaining years of the current mandate are worth pursuing; believes, nevertheless, that several concerns raised by Parliament in its report on the Green Paper on retail financial services have not been credibly addressed by the Commission in its Action Plan;
Amendment 58 #
2017/2066(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Considers a high level of consumer protection and transparency key to the development of a single market in retail financial services; believes the enforcement ofat EU and national financial consumer legislation needs to be strengthenenforced across all Member States; points out that the Commission has already begun considering the review of the European supervisory authorities;
Amendment 64 #
2017/2066(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Calls on the Commission to ensure that the ‘same service, same risk, same rule, same supervision’ principle is applied so that competition is not distorted, in particular with the emergence of new market players; stresses that these rules must not hold back innovation;
Amendment 65 #
2017/2066(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Stresses that a European retail financial services market must benefit SMEs in terms of both supply and demand; in terms of supply, this means ensuring an improvement in access to financing for SMEs; in terms of demand, it means enabling SMEs to access cross- border markets more easily; emphasises that increasing competition must not penalise SMEs providing retail financial services which operate on a local basis;
Amendment 67 #
2017/2066(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 c (new)
Paragraph 4 c (new)
4c. stresses that a large number of legislative texts have been drawn up in recent years in the area of retail financial services; share’s the Commission’s view that priority should be given to the transposition and implementation of this legislation over proposing new legislative initiatives;
Amendment 76 #
2017/2066(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the Commission’s commitment to propose an amendment to Regulation (EC) No 924/2009 on cross- border payments, involving payments in non-euro currencies, with the aim of ensuring that the fees for all cross-border and national payments in the EU are identical; calls on the Commission to examine the costs this measure would entail, in particular for consumers who would not benefit from services of this kind;
Amendment 78 #
2017/2066(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Emphasises that enforcing the current legislation is central to tackling ‘dynamic currency conversion’; reaffirms that this will necessitatethe lack of transparency in the ‘dynamic currency conversion’; points out that Directive (EU) 2015/2366 sets out an obligation for merchants to clearly highlight and present the most advantageous optfinal cost of the dynamic currency conversion for consumers, including when these consumers are making ATM withdrawals involving currency conversion;
Amendment 83 #
2017/2066(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Approves of the Commission’s ambition to incorporate the achievements of the Payment Accounts Directive to make it easier to change financial services providers and products; calls on the Commission to present legislative initiatives specifically targeted at the financial sector to end unjustified geo- blocking in orderexplore initiatives with a view to facilitateing switching by customers to more advantageous retail financial services in other Member States;
Amendment 93 #
2017/2066(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. UrgWelcomes the Commission to set up promptly a well-organised and easy-to-use EU comparison portal covering the European retail financial markets in its entirety’s intention to improve financial services comparison websites at EU level by consulting stakeholders; stresses that comparison tools must be accurate and of relevance to consumers, and must focus not only on the price of products, but also on their quality; points out that products should be compared only with similar products so as to avoid confusing consumers;
Amendment 100 #
2017/2066(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Takes the viewpoints out that subsequent to the Commission’s REFIT review of the Motor Insurance Directive, amendments to it will be vital to ensurthe Commission will decide if the Directive needs to be modified in order to improve compensation for traffic accident victims and to safeguard the cross-bordin cases where insurers are insolvent or where portability and recognition of no-claims bonuseast claims records need to be recognised across borders;
Amendment 104 #
2017/2066(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. UrgesCalls on the Commission to put forward legislative proposals to amend the Insurance Distribution Directive to include car rental companies selling insurance add-ons with a view to ensuring transparent pricing covering all car rental companies across the Member Statescheck that the agreement concluded between the five biggest car rental companies to improve the transparency of their sales practices, in particular with regard to the price of vehicle insurance, is being applied;
Amendment 108 #
2017/2066(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Stresses that addressing consumer over-indebtedness linked to credit activities must be given priority if the Commission aims to explore ways of facilitating cross-border access to loans; calls, with that aim in mind, for a comprehensive evaluation of the causes of consumer over-indebtedness; points out that financial education is an effective way to protect consumers who are at risk of over-indebtedness;
Amendment 129 #
2017/2066(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Calls on the Commission to amend the Mortgage Credit Directive and the Consumer Credit Directive to introduce compulsory,explore, with all stakeholders, the possible impact of introducing harmonised, cross- border creditworthiness assessment standards and principles to better mitigate the risk of increasing over-indebtedness when facilitating pan-European online creditprinciples in order to make pan-European credit more workable;
Amendment 140 #
2017/2066(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Calls onSupports the Commission’s intention to present an all-inclusive FinTech Action Plan in the framework of its capital markets union (CMU) and digital single market (DSM) strategies, contributing to an effective and well- functioning integrated technology- driven single market of financial services benefiting all European end-users; supports the Commission’s creation of a FinTech task force;
Amendment 159 #
2017/2066(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Stresses the need to adapt the existing EU legal framework for the digital world to counteract consumer protection risks connected with distance online selling, thereby creating new business opportunities for European start-ups, businesses and FinTechs;
Amendment 14 #
2017/2055(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Stresses the need to adopt a cross- sectoral approach to ensure the sustainability of resources and clean seas and oceans in line with the UN’s sustainable development goal 14 (SDG14); points out that the fishing sector is not the only sector to have an impact on the future of the oceans;
Amendment 56 #
2017/2055(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Points out that the central Arctic Ocean is not covered by international conservation or management systems; stresses the need for a coordinated approach by the European Union and Member States with regard to preventing unregulated fishing in the Arctic Ocean;
Amendment 30 #
2017/2052(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Points up the importance of fisheries control and of scientific-data collection control, those activities being pillars of the CFP; takes the view that they must continue to receive EU funding and that Member States must step up their efforts to make use of the resources concerned;
Amendment 32 #
2017/2052(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6b. Stresses the importance of small- scale coastal fishing for the vitality of coastal areas; points up the need for specific EU support for that type of fishing and for coastal communities;
Amendment 6 #
2017/2044(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Notes that the Member States have adopted the EMFF operational programmes, but that onlthey half of them haveve not yet all appointed regulatory authorities, which is slowing down disbursement of the funds;
Amendment 10 #
2017/2044(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Criticises the fact that the direct management by the Commission of EMFF funding of regulatory activities has not worked, owing to a reluctance on the part of the Member States to put forward joint projects, despite a lower Member State co- financing rate;
Amendment 253 #
2017/0143(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) In order to allow a smooth transition for PEPP providers, the obligation of providing PEPPs comprising compartments for eachten Member States will apply three years after the entry into force of this Regulation. However, upon launching a PEPP, the provider should provide information on which national compartments are immediately available, in order to avoid a possible misleading of consumers.
Amendment 297 #
2017/0143(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 39
Recital 39
(39) The default investment option should allow the PEPP saver to recoup the invested capitalseek to ensure capital protection for the PEPP saver either by way of capital guarantee or the application of a life- cycle investment strategy to the PEPP saver’s assets. The PEPP providers could in addition include an inflation indexation mechanism to at least partly cover inflation.
Amendment 368 #
2017/0143(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 19 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 19 a (new)
(19a) “home Member State of the PEPP distributor” means the Member State in which the PEPP distributor has its registered office;
Amendment 369 #
2017/0143(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 19 b (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 19 b (new)
(19b) “host Member State of the PEPP distributor” means a Member State, other than the home Member State, in which a PEPP distributor distributes PEPPs;
Amendment 380 #
2017/0143(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 28 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 28 a (new)
(28a) “Life-cycle investment strategy” means a strategy which aims at adjusting a portfolio’s risk profile from the investment date until the investor perceives out-payments after retirement age, by progressively reducing its overall risk exposure over time.
Amendment 410 #
2017/0143(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) institutions for occupational retirement provision (IORP) registered or authorised in accordance with Directive 2016/2341/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council45 ; __________________ 45 Directive 2016/2341/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 December 2016 on the activities and supervision of institutions for occupational retirement provision (IORPs) (recast) (OJ L 354, 23.12.2016, p. 37).
Amendment 505 #
2017/0143(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 3
Article 13 – paragraph 3
3. Three years at the latest after the entry into application of this Regulation, each PEPP shall offer national compartments for allten Member States upon request addressed to the PEPP provider.
Amendment 543 #
2017/0143(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1
Article 17 – paragraph 1
1. All contractual arrangements for providing the portability service shall be notified by the PEPP provider to the respective national authority exercising prudential supervision over it and to EIOPA.
Amendment 649 #
2017/0143(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 2
Article 25 – paragraph 2
2. Where advice isAdvice shall be provided prior to the conclusion of any specific contract, t. The PEPP provider or distributor referred to in Article 19(c) of this Regulation shall provide the PEPP saver with a personalised recommendation explaining why a particular PEPP would best meet the PEPP savers’s demands and needs.
Amendment 650 #
2017/0143(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 3
Article 25 – paragraph 3
3. When providing advice on PEPPsithout prejudice to the obligation set out in the preceding paragraph, the PEPP provider or distributor referred to in Article 19(c) of this Regulation shall comply with the applicable national laws giving effect to the rules set out in Article 25(2) of Directive 2014/65/EU and with any directly applicable Union legislation adopted under Article 25(8) of that Directive relating to those rules.
Amendment 661 #
Amendment 768 #
2017/0143(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 1
Article 37 – paragraph 1
1. The default investment option shall ensure capital protection for the PEPP saver, on the basis of abe a simple and safe product that can be easily acquired, including through digital channels, in each Member State. The risk- mitigation technique that results in a safes can take the form of capital protection or de-risking investment strategyies.
Amendment 778 #
2017/0143(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 2
Article 37 – paragraph 2
2. Capital protection shall allow the PEPP saver to recoup the capital investedbe achieved by either one of the following risk- mitigation techniques: (i) the PEPP provider offers a capital guarantee allowing the PEPP saver to recoup the capital invested; (ii) the assets of the PEPP saver are managed using a life-cycle investment strategy.
Amendment 803 #
2017/0143(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 39 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the risk-mitigation technique to ensure capital protection under the defaultunder the default option which seeks to ensure capital protection either by providing a capital guarantee or by a life-cycling investment option;strategy:
Amendment 868 #
2017/0143(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 52 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 52 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Where Member States have not imposed a mandatory link between reaching retirement age and the start of the decumulation phase, PEPP providers shall give PEPP savers the option to defer the start of the decumulation phase to a date after they have reached retirement age.
Amendment 879 #
2017/0143(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 52 – paragraph 2
Article 52 – paragraph 2
2. The choice of the form of out- payments for the decumulation phase shall be exercised by PEPP savers upon conclusion of a PEPP contract and can be changed once every five years thereafter and during the last year of the accumulation phase, if applicabl. This possibility to change should be free of charge.
Amendment 883 #
2017/0143(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 52 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 52 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Where, upon the start of the decumulation phase, the overall value of the assets accumulated in a PEPP account does not exceed an amount to be laid down and revised every year by each Member State, the PEPP saver shall have the right to liquidate the PEPP account and receive a lump sum payment.
Amendment 889 #
2017/0143(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 1
Article 53 – paragraph 1
1. The competent authority of the home Member State of the PEPP provider shall supervise compliance with this Regulation on an ongoing basis. It shall also be responsible for supervising compliance with the obligations set out in the rules or instruments of incorporation of the PEPP provider, and the adequacy of its arrangements and organisation with the tasks to be fulfilled when providing a PEPP. By derogation to the first subparagraph, compliance by the PEPP provider and the PEPP distributor with Chapter IV of this Regulation shall be supervised on an ongoing basis by the competent authority of the host Member State of the PEPP provider and the PEPP distributor.
Amendment 205 #
2017/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33 a (new)
Recital 33 a (new)
(33a) The Commission and ESMA should also be able to impose to the systemically important third-country CCP any additional requirements that they consider necessary to guarantee the EU financial stability.
Amendment 285 #
2017/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 648/2012
Article 17 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 4
Article 17 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 4
Amendment 299 #
2017/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 648/2012
Article 18 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 18 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Amendment 317 #
2017/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point b a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point b a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 648/2012
Article 21 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 2 – point a
Article 21 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 2 – point a
(ba) point (a) of the second subparagraph of paragraph 6 is replaced by the following: (a) conduct a peer review analysis of the supervisory activities of all competent authorities in relation to the authorisation and the supervision of CCPs in accordance with Article 30 of Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010; and and a comparative analysis of the risk management practices of all CCPs authorised in accordance with Article 14 this Regulation; and” Or. en (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32012R0648)
Amendment 330 #
2017/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Regulation (EU) No 648/2012
Article 21 a – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 21 a – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) any decisions adopted in the carrying out of their duties resulting from the requirements set out in Article 16 and Titles IV and V. When ESMA determines that a draft decision submitted by a competent authority pursuant to paragraph 1 should be subject to the procedures pursuant to Article 15 or Article 49, it shall inform the competent authority and the college. Where ESMA makes such a determination, the competent authority shall not adopt its decision. The competent authority informs the CCP, applies the relevant procedure and prepares and submits a draft decision in accordance with paragraph 1.
Amendment 398 #
2017/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 7 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 7 a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 648/2012
Article 22 a (new)
Article 22 a (new)
Amendment 407 #
2017/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 7 b (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 7 b (new)
Regulation (EU) No 648/2012
Article 22 b (new)
Article 22 b (new)
Amendment 468 #
2017/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9 – point b
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9 – point b
Regulation (EU) No 648/2012
Article 25 – paragraph 2 b – point b a (new)
Article 25 – paragraph 2 b – point b a (new)
(ba) the CCP complies with any additional requirement imposed by the Commission (or ESMA);
Amendment 472 #
2017/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9 – point b
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9 – point b
Regulation (EU) No 648/2012
Article 25 – paragraph 2 b – point d
Article 25 – paragraph 2 b – point d
(d) the CCP has put in place all necessary measures and procedures that ensure the effective compliance with the requirements laid down in points (a), (ba) and (c);
Amendment 499 #
2017/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9 – point c
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9 – point c
Regulation (EU) No 648/2012
Article 25 – paragraph 5
Article 25 – paragraph 5
5. ESMA shall, after consulting the authorities and entities referred to in paragraph 3, review the recognition of the CCP established in a third country where that CCP has extended the range of its activities and services in the Union and in any case at least every two years. That review shall be conducted in accordance with paragraphs 2, 3 and 4. Where, following the review referred to in Article 25 (1), ESMA determines that a CCP recognised before [entry into force of this Regulation] qualifies as a Tier 2 CCP in accordance with Article 25 (2a), or that a third-country CCP which has been recognized as Tier 1 CCP should be recognised as Tier 2 CCP, ESMA shall set an appropriate adaptation period which shall not exceed 12 months within which the CCP must comply with the requirements referred to in Article 25(2b). Where, following Article 25 paragraph 2c the Commission concludes that a CCP or one of its clearing services should not be recognised, ESMA shall set an appropriate adaptation period which shall not exceed 12 months within which the CCP may be temporarily recognised.
Amendment 515 #
2017/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9 – point g a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9 – point g a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 648/2012
Article 25 – paragraph 7 – point e a (new)
Article 25 – paragraph 7 – point e a (new)
(ga) in paragraph 7 the following point is added: (ea) where rights on decisions are granted to ESMA in accordance with Article 25b, the procedures concerning the effective enforcement of these rights.
Amendment 516 #
2017/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9 – point g b (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9 – point g b (new)
Regulation (EU) No 648/2012
Article 25 – paragraph 7 – point e b (new)
Article 25 – paragraph 7 – point e b (new)
(gb) in paragraph 7 the following point is added: (eb) the procedures concerning emergency situations, including the agreement of third-country authorities to inform ESMA without undue delay of any emergency situation relating to a CCP including developments in financial markets, which may have an adverse effect on market liquidity and the stability of the financial system in any of the Member States or in the EU as a whole, and including the agreement of third- country authorities to appropriately involve ESMA and the relevant EU central banks of issue in decisions taken in such situations.
Amendment 522 #
2017/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 10
(ba) the effect that the failure of or a disruption to the CCP would have on the liquidity of the markets served or on the monetary policy implementation of the central banks of issue;
Amendment 523 #
2017/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Regulation (EU) No 648/2012
Article 25 a – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point b b (new)
Article 25 a – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point b b (new)
(bb) the substitutability of the clearing services offered by the CCP
Amendment 548 #
2017/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Regulation (EU) No 648/2012
Article 25 b – paragraph 3
Article 25 b – paragraph 3
3. ESMA shall carry out assessments of the resilience of recognised CCPs to adverse market developments in accordance with Article 32(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010, and in coordination with assessments initiated pursuant to Article 21 (6) (b) of Regulation (EU) No 648/2012.
Amendment 557 #
2017/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Regulation (EU) No 648/2012
Article 25 d – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
Article 25 d – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
(ea) The central banks of issue of the financial instruments cleared by the CCP may submit a request to ESMA to participate in such investigations where relevant for the carrying-out of their monetary policy tasks.
Amendment 561 #
2017/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Regulation (EU) No 648/2012
Article 25 d – paragraph 4
Article 25 d – paragraph 4
4. Prior to notifying a Tier 2 CCP of an investigation, ESMA shall inform the relevant third-country competent authority where the investigation is to be carried out of the investigation and of the identity of the authorised persons. Officials of the third-country competent authority concerned may, upon the request of ESMA, assist those authorised persons in carrying out their duties. Officials of the third-country competent authority concerned may also attend the investigations. Investigations in accordance with this Article shall be conducted provided that the relevant third-country authority does not object to them.
Amendment 565 #
2017/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Regulation (EU) No 648/2012
Article 25 e – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 25 e – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
In sufficient time before the inspection, ESMA shall give notice of the inspection to the relevant third-country competent authority where the inspection is to be conducted. Where the proper conduct and efficiency of the inspection so require, ESMA, after informing the relevant third- country competent authority, may carry out the on-site inspection without prior notice to the CCP. Inspections in accordance with this Article shall be conducted provided that the relevant third-country authority has confirmed that it does not object to those inspections.
Amendment 1 #
2016/2325(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A (new)
Recital A (new)
A. whereas the 1998 Baveno Manifesto created the Global Monitoring for Environment and Security with the objective to determine Europe's global monitoring role in the field of the environment and security. Since 2012 this initiative is named Copernicus;
Amendment 2 #
2016/2325(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital B (new)
Recital B (new)
B. whereas political decisions made by the European Parliament and the Council in 2007 resulted in the allocation of a budget for the European satellite navigation programs EGNOS and Galileo and provided for an agreement on the governance structure of the programs;
Amendment 6 #
2016/2325(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the Space Strategy for Europe, which is of great importance for maritime issues and fishing activities and has great potential to develop human activity at sea and to preserve the marine environment;
Amendment 7 #
2016/2325(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the Space Strategy for Europe, which is of great importance for marine and maritime issues and fishing activities;
Amendment 9 #
2016/2325(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Recognises the importance of the Space Strategy for Europe for the coordinated action of administrative bodies and other stakeholderspublic bodies and industry;
Amendment 10 #
2016/2325(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Calls the attention for the lack of mention of the relation between Air and Sea, as the absence of the words "ocean" and "marine" demonstrate;
Amendment 11 #
2016/2325(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Recognises that space technologies, data and services ‘already contribute to a number of public policies and economic sectors’ including control of fishing activities, monitoring of shipping routes and, detection of oil spills and search and rescue operations at sea;
Amendment 14 #
2016/2325(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Recognises that space technologies, data and space based services ‘already contribute to a number of public policies and economic sectors’ including control of fishing activities, forecast and monitoring of shipping routes and detection and monitoring of oil spills;
Amendment 15 #
2016/2325(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Recognises that allowing public authorities to benefit from more permanent and more responsive space- based ocean surveillance capacities will allow them to respond more quickly and to make substantial savings by better targeting their actions and especially while fighting against illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing;
Amendment 17 #
2016/2325(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)
Paragraph 3 c (new)
3c. Emphasises the importance of Galileo and EGNOS on maritime security and navigation strengthening and improving other international systems and contributing to Europe technological independence;
Amendment 18 #
2016/2325(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 d (new)
Paragraph 3 d (new)
3d. Recalls the Commission for the importance of better coordination between Galileo and EGNOS and the related Copernicus services also concerning safety;
Amendment 19 #
2016/2325(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 e (new)
Paragraph 3 e (new)
3e. Recognises the necessity to develop secure satellite communication systems to meet existing and future needs within the European maritime community, including maritime surveillance based upon Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems, which depend heavily on satellite communications;
Amendment 20 #
2016/2325(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 f (new)
Paragraph 3 f (new)
3f. Welcomes the Governmental Satellite Communications initiative of the European Commission (GOVSATCOM);
Amendment 21 #
2016/2325(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 g (new)
Paragraph 3 g (new)
3g. Emphasises the importance of Copernicus to fully understand climate and meteorology, ocean natural biological processes and anthropogenic aggressions, all crucial issues for fisheries;
Amendment 22 #
2016/2325(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 h (new)
Paragraph 3 h (new)
3h. Welcomes the recent launch of the Copernicus Marine Service "Ocean State Report" an effort of 80 European scientific experts from more than 25 institutions is a step forward into the development of regular annual reporting on the state and health of the Global Ocean and European Seas based;
Amendment 23 #
2016/2325(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Emphasises the need to make imagery data easily available to different industries, including ocean surface temperature charts for fisheries. Copernicus Marine Environmental Monitoring System, provided by Mercator Ocean, Copernicus Atmosphere Monitoring System and Copernicus Climate Change Service, provided by European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts should have specific tools for European fisherman and available in relevant European languages;
Amendment 26 #
2016/2325(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Emphasises the need to substantially reinforce educational and training tools that allow full use of the benefits created by space related tools;
Amendment 29 #
2016/2325(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 d (new)
Paragraph 4 d (new)
4d. Recognises the importance of the Copernicus Relay and Copernicus Academy networks in fostering stakeholder engagement, bringing the regional user dimension to the table and increasing the reach of promotion of Copernicus data and services uptake;
Amendment 32 #
2016/2325(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Agrees that Galileo, EGNOS and Copernicus are not yet fully explored and recognises potential on the alliance between public and private sector over space strategy;
Amendment 35 #
2016/2325(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Emphasises that space technology as well as its in situ components requires large budgets and that it is essential to allocate the necessary resources to this sector in the EU budget;
Amendment 37 #
2016/2325(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6b. Encourages the centralised acquisition of satellite data and the establishment, in this context, of a dedicated centralised purchasing system to encourage data sharing and generate economies of scale; regards as good practice the acquisition of data by the European Maritime Safety Agency for the benefit of the various Union agencies, including the European Fisheries Control Agency;
Amendment 38 #
2016/2325(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 c (new)
Paragraph 6 c (new)
6c. Notes that the Commission proposes to "encourage the uptake of space solutions", in particular by providing technical support in using innovative and cross-border procurement for space solutions;
Amendment 40 #
2016/2325(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 e (new)
Paragraph 6 e (new)
6e. Considers that the consolidation of existing and future capacities into a real European space-based maritime surveillance system - which will benefit a number of institutional users and whose services could be commercially exploited for export - could be a textbook case for the Commission's innovative ambitions in the space sector;
Amendment 43 #
2016/2325(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Recalls that the Outermost Regions and Overseas Countries and Territories give an extraordinary dimension and geographic possibilities to Europe, allowing for the development of deployment stations, monitoring facilities and ground-truthing systems all around the globe, and regrets that Outermost Regions and Overseas Countries and Territories are not mentioned in the Strategy;
Amendment 44 #
2016/2325(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Emphasises that priorities on public use of space, including observation, should be related to the legislative needs of European initiatives such as the "Marine Strategy" Framework-Directive;
Amendment 45 #
2016/2325(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7b. Acknowledges the potential offered by space infrastructures and derived services to efficiently contribute to the objectives of an international ocean governance, e.g. to implement the COP21 agreement and mitigate impact of climate change on oceans, coastlines and ecosystems, to fight marine litter or to promote maritime spatial planning (MSP) at global level;
Amendment 46 #
2016/2325(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Recalls the importance of ensuring ‘the needs of various EU agencies’, such as the European Maritime Safety Agency and the European Fisheries Control Agency, and emphasises that these institutions will also contribute to the fulfilment of the objectives of the Space Strategy for Europe; insists on cooperation and sharing of satellite information between the agencies of the Union, particularly the European Maritime Safety Agency, the European Fisheries Control Agency and the European Border and Coast Guard;
Amendment 47 #
2016/2325(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Recalls the importance of ensuring ‘the needs of various EU agencies’, such as the European Maritime Safety Agency and the European Fisheries Control Agency, and emphasises that these institutions will also contribute to the fulfilment of the objectives of the Space Strategy for Europe, and emphasises that these institutions shall also contribute for the fulfilment of the objectives of the Space Strategy for Europe;
Amendment 50 #
2016/2325(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 c (new)
Paragraph 8 c (new)
8c. Recalls that one of the major assets for private sector on the Space Exploration is the development of patents and proprietary information, which should be emphasised in the development of the Space Strategy for Europe;
Amendment 52 #
2016/2325(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 b (new)
Paragraph 9 b (new)
9b. Alerts for the rapid development of new technologies that rely on augmented intelligence, cognitive computing and neural systems, none of those items are mentioned in the Space Strategy for Europe;
Amendment 2 #
2016/2229(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the Agreement also supports the implementation of the reformed system for fisheries management in the EU put in place under the new Common Fisheries Policy, and in particular the introduction of the landing obligation and compulsory measures to maintain stocks above sustainable fisheries limits;
Amendment 33 #
2016/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Calls on the EU to be a leader in the prevention of unregulated fishing in the Arctic Ocean; takes the view that it would have every right to do so, given that the Member States are involved in all levels of governance in the Arctic region;
Amendment 9 #
2016/2181(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Regrets that the reduction of the Agency’s resources and capacity may have as a consequence the weakening of fisheries controls and a concomitant increase in illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing, which would serve certain interests very well;
Amendment 13 #
2016/2181(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Points out that 2016 was a key year for the implementation of the new common fisheries policy concerning the landing obligation rules, and that the operational coordination of the activities of fisheries control inspections with the Member States implies appropriate resources; expresses its concern about the practical difficulties involved in implementation of the landing obligation for demersal fisheries, and considers that monitoring should take these difficulties into account;
Amendment 27 #
2016/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas competition prevents the over-concentration of economic and financial power in the hands of a few; and stimulates actors by providing an incentive for them to be dynamic and innovative and to differentiate themselves in the markets;
Amendment 32 #
2016/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas competition policy keeps markets efficient and open, thus leading to lower prices, the emergence of new actors, better-quality products and services and greater choice for consumers, also promoting innovation and growth;
Amendment 49 #
2016/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Recital F a (new)
Fa. whereas EU competition policy is interdependent with other major EU policies, including tax, industrial and digital policies, the coordination of which is intended to ensure compliance with the fundamental principles enshrined in the Treaties, in particular transparency and loyalty;
Amendment 64 #
2016/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. WStresses that the improvement and development of the functioning of the single market go hand in hand with the development of competition policy; welcomes the Commission’s goal of opening up new opportunities for citizens and businesses by allowing people, goods, services and capital to move freely within the single market; welcomes the Commission’s use of the various instruments at its disposal, including control of mergers, combating abuse of a dominant position and anti-competitive practices, combating cartels, control of state aid, coordination with national competition authorities and sectoral inquiries;
Amendment 140 #
2016/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls on the Commission to take more ambitious steps to eliminate obstacles to online competition, in order to ensure barrier-free online shopping free of barriers and geographic discrimination for EU consumers purchasing from sellers who are based in another Member State; stresses that the Commission should adopt flexible measures to adapt to the fourth industrial revolution, characterised by digitisation and robotisation;
Amendment 159 #
2016/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Stresses that the sharing economy is offering EU consumers numerous innovative products and services; reiterates that beside the taxation and security aspects, the Commission should also examine its competition aspects; underlines that national or EU rules must not impose the same conditions for different kinds of services; stresses the need to guarantee a high level of consumer and personal data protection in connection with the digital single market;
Amendment 184 #
2016/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Calls on the Commission to bring forward a regulatory strategy taking into account technology convergence and, in particular, the multiplication of platforms; recalls that for this purpose ex ante sectoral regulations must balance defence of pluralism, freedom of expression, protection of personal data, protection of the consumer’s autonomy and freedom of choice and equal promotion of competing offers in Europe and of convergent offers for European champions in international competition; calls for inequalities in the balance of power to be corrected and for situations of dependency between economic operators to be alleviated with a view to achieving a fair sharing of value;
Amendment 209 #
2016/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Welcomes the overhaul of the state aid rules; reminds the Member States, nonetheless, that the aim was to better target aid measures towards economic growth, quality job creation and social cohesion; also reminds the Commission of the need to prevent certain governments from acting in bad faith as they do when misspending EU funds; stresses that the requirement for assessment of aid schemes introduced by the modernisation of state aid policy will serve to gather the information needed to better understand the impacts of notified schemes, improve the implementation of competition policy and inform future policy-making by Member States and the Commission; suggests that a specific annual report be sent to Parliament;
Amendment 266 #
2016/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Underlines the importance of the Commission’s investigations into state aid of a fiscal nature, which provide necessary support for the European and international tax agenda, especially in the fight against aggressive tax planning;
Amendment 289 #
2016/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Calls on the Commission to keep its cartel enforcement record strong and effective in all cases where it has sufficient evidence of infringement; points out that competition policy enables competitors to cooperate in innovation without that cooperation being abused for anti- competitive ends; welcomes last year’s five decisions relating to a total of EUR 365 million in fines; also calls, however, for extra vigilance regarding airlines’ ‘anti- competitive cooperation practices’;
Amendment 302 #
2016/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Calls on the Commission to present a legislative proposal establishing a framework for EU coordination of national competition authorities on merger control;
Amendment 329 #
2016/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Recalls that Article 42 TFEU accords the agricultural sector a special status as regards competition law that is specified in the latest reform of the common agricultural policy by strengthening the position of farmers in the food supply chain and allowing for general or specific derogations to Article 101 TFEU;
Amendment 337 #
2016/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 b (new)
Paragraph 20 b (new)
20b. Notes that the increased volatility of agricultural prices and the crises in the agricultural markets, especially in the dairy sector, accentuate the structurally weak position of farmers in the food supply chain;
Amendment 341 #
2016/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 c (new)
Paragraph 20 c (new)
20c. Considers that the lack of clarity as to the scope of these derogations, difficulties in implementation and the lack of uniform application by national competition authorities do not provide sufficient legal certainty for farmers and their organisations wishing to apply the right of derogation;
Amendment 345 #
2016/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 d (new)
Paragraph 20 d (new)
20d. Calls on the European Commission to adopt new initiatives to take better account of the specific nature of agriculture in the application of competition policy and to ensure a complete and satisfactory implementation of the general derogation for agriculture and the specific derogations for the dairy, olive oil, beef and veal, and arable crops sectors;
Amendment 348 #
2016/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 e (new)
Paragraph 20 e (new)
20e. Calls on the Commission and the national competition authorities to address the concerns raised by the cumulative impact at the upper end of the food supply chain of national-level concentration in the distribution sector and the development of European-level alliances of distributors;
Amendment 369 #
2016/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21a. Encourages the Commission to provide analytical methods for the definition of new relevant markets with the digitalisation of the economy and in particular with the phenomenon of convergence of technologies and the commercial use of personal data on a large scale;
Amendment 404 #
2016/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Calls on the Commission to put forward a proposal for EU action to ensure that the national competition authorities are more effective enforcers and act in a coherent and convergent fashion, so that the full potential of the decentralised system of EU competition enforcement can be realised;
Amendment 426 #
2016/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)
Paragraph 26 a (new)
26a. Welcomes the Commission’s initiatives for public consultation in applying merger control and invites it to discuss the results with the European Parliament;
Amendment 427 #
2016/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 b (new)
Paragraph 26 b (new)
26b. Calls for extension of the dialogue between European institutions and national competition authorities, in particular to include exchanges of views with the parliamentary committees of the European Parliament;
Amendment 32 #
2016/2079(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Considers it urgent to provide a response that is collective, based on multi- tier cooperation – international, European, national and regional; considers that all stakeholders, including professional and recreational fishermen, scientists and NGOs, should be involved in an inclusive, bottom-up process;
Amendment 50 #
2016/2079(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses that, according to the FAO, a precautionary approach to the conservation, management and exploitation of living marine resources should be applied, in order to protect and preserve the marine environment as a whole and to highlight that the lack of scientific information must not be an excuse to postpone conservation and management measures, or to make them fail; considers that it is vital to remedy quickly the lack of data and tangible scientific information about the status of stocks; stresses that all stakeholders should be consulted and involved in this process;
Amendment 58 #
2016/2079(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Considers that protecting and safeguarding fisheries resources and marine resources in the Mediterranean basin should not be based only on measures relating to the fishing industry but should also involve other sectors of activity which have an impact on the marine environment;
Amendment 82 #
2016/2079(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Notes that the system of marine protected areas in the Mediterranean covers an inadequate area, with major coverage disparities between the various basins; considers it crucial to increase the percentage of marine protected areas and to identifyconsiders it crucial to optimise the use of marine protected areas and to identify, in the light of scientific advice, the areas to be covered by protection measures, in addition to implementing an effective monitoring and control system to check they are effective;
Amendment 94 #
2016/2079(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Welcomes the undertakings given by the Commission in relation to a multiannual management plan for the Mediterranean Sea; stresses the importance of regionalisation of the CFP for the management of fisheries in the Mediterranean basin; calls for the Mediterranean Advisory Council (MEDAC) to be involved throughout the process of planning and establishing the multiannual management plan and regionalised measures;
Amendment 164 #
2016/2079(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 a (new)
Paragraph 27 a (new)
27a. Welcomes the MEDFISH4EVER campaign launched by the Commission with the aim of raising public awareness of the situation in the Mediterranean Sea;
Amendment 2 #
2016/2076(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Draws attention to the fact that one of the commitments entered into by the Union under the Convention on Biological Diversity is to protect marine biodiversity in general in EU waters and on the high seas; stresses that the objective of protecting marine biodiversity should be pursued by a variety of means including action to combat IUU fishing, monitor all forms of trafficking on the seas, strengthen the external strand of the common fisheries policy and combat crime in general;
Amendment 7 #
2016/2076(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Draws attention to the economic, social and environmental costs of marine species trafficking, which results in marine biodiversity loss, endangers ecosystems, reduces sources of income for those engaged in sustainable fishing and is a threat to health;
Amendment 14 #
2016/2076(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Urges the Commission to acknowledge and pay due attention to IUU fishing carried out in Europe (such as the fishing of glass-eels and sturgeon and damage to cIUU fishing carried out outside EU waters and calls for closer monitoring of vulnerable marine species and species protected under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Floral);
Amendment 38 #
2016/2076(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Suggests that the surveillance and protection of Vulnerable Marine Ecosystems (VME), Ecologically or Biologically Significant Areas (EBSA) and the Natura 2000 network be stepped up, in ongoing consultation with all stakeholders, in order to aid the conservation of species that are under pressure from illegal trafficking;
Amendment 54 #
2016/2076(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Regards ‘effective multilateralism’ as one of the cornerstones of the Union’s external action and points out that the Commission regards it as the most participatory, non-discriminatory, and inclusive way to build international governance, in particular with a view to combating wildlife trafficking; stresses, therefore, the need for the Union to play a more prominent role in international bodies;
Amendment 6 #
2016/2056(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
Amendment 11 #
2016/2056(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas removing the barriers which prevent us from taking full advantage of a single retail financial services market would result in improved competition, which should in turn lead to a fall in prices, motivate companies to innovate and improve product choice and diversity; whereas a European retail financial services market would only be viable if it represented real added value for consumers;
Amendment 20 #
2016/2056(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the further development of the retail financial services market at EU level would not only facilitate important and fruitful cross-border activity, but wouldmight also open up greater scope for healthyincreased competition at national level; whereas the impact of competition on prices will vary according to sector and product;
Amendment 29 #
2016/2056(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the rapid transformation brought about by digitisation and fintech innovation not only creates new and often better financial products for consumers, but also involves key challenges in terms of security, data protection, consumer protection and taxation, taxation, fair competition and financial stability;
Amendment 37 #
2016/2056(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas micro-enterprises, SMEs and mid-caps are the backbone of the European economy and the drivers of employment and growth; whereas every European law and initiative must be adapted to the characteristics of such companies;
Amendment 48 #
2016/2056(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the Commission Green Paper on retail financial services (defined as including insurance) and the vivid and productive debate that it has generated so far; also welcomes the public consultation on the Green Paper, which has given those involved the chance to put forward their opinions based on their specific situations and/or sectors; underlines that a single approach for retail financial services would be counter-productive, given the diversity of the actors and products concerned;
Amendment 49 #
2016/2056(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Takes the view that digitalisation will continue to create new opportunities for consumers, investors, SMEs and other companies in terms of competition, cross- border activities and innovation; stresses that digitalisation alone is not sufficient to create a viable European retail financial services market; notes that the many obstacles such as the various tax, social, judicial, health, contract and consumer protection regimes, as well as the different languages and cultures, cannot be overcome solely by means of digitalisation; asks the Commission to adapt European legislation to the digital economy;
Amendment 56 #
2016/2056(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Finds the Green Paper initiative to be timely, particularly given the need to work proactively at all stages of the policymaking process in order to be able to track and steer developments in such an innovative and fast-changing market; stresses that a large number of legislative texts have been drawn up in recent years in the area of retail financial services; asks the Commission to give priority to the transposition and implementation of this legislation over proposing new legislative initiatives;
Amendment 65 #
2016/2056(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Asks the Commission to ensure that the same rules apply to any given service in order to avoid creating distortions of competition, particularly with the emergence of new providers of retail financial services; stresses that these rules must not act as a brake on innovation;
Amendment 66 #
2016/2056(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Stresses that a European retail financial services market must benefit SMEs in terms of both supply and demand; in terms of supply, this means ensuring an improvement in access to financing for SMEs; in terms of demand, it means enabling SMEs to access cross- border markets more easily; emphasises that increasing competition must not penalise SMEs providing retail financial services which operate on a local basis;
Amendment 70 #
2016/2056(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Emphasises, in particular because of low levels of consumer trust and satisfactionin order to boost consumer trust in the single market, that the Green Paper initiative can succeed only if it has a strong focus on creating an EU market in which well- protected consumers have access to transparent, straightforward and good- value-for-money products;
Amendment 89 #
2016/2056(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Notes the increasing complexity of some retail financial products; insists on the need to developwelcomes the recent initiatives and instruments that allow consumers to identify safe and simple products within the range of products available to them; supports initiatives such as the Key Investment Information Document for undertakings for collective investments in transferrable securities (UCITS) and the Key Information Document for packaged retail and insurance-based investment products (PRIIPs); stresses the need to adapt these information mechanisms to the digital reality; calls for the need to ensure that the amount of information is not so great that it cannot be understood by consumers;
Amendment 114 #
2016/2056(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Recalls the recent developments in the legislative framework for the banking sector, in particular the Bank Recovery and Resolution Directive and the Deposit Guarantee Schemes Directive; insists on the need to inform consumers fully about the impact of the new rules; asks the Commission to check whether the Member States are correctly applying the directive on deposit-guarantee schemes;
Amendment 116 #
2016/2056(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Notes that a European retail financial services market will only be feasible if consumers benefit from the same legal protection throughout the EU; highlights the need to update and promote the 'FIN-NET' financial dispute resolution network;
Amendment 130 #
2016/2056(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Considers that structural changes under way in the financial sector – from the emergence of financial technology companies (fintechs) to mergers and takeovers – which could result in staff cuts and branch closures must be effected without any reduction in the quality of services to the most vulnerable, particularly elderly people and people living in rural or sparsely populated areas;
Amendment 140 #
2016/2056(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Notes that frontline employees at financial institutions have a crucial role to play in opening up retail services to all strands of society and to consumers all over Europe; points out that such employees should, in principle, be given the training and time necessary to be able to serve their customers accurately, and should not be made subject to sales targets or inducements that could bias or distort their advice;
Amendment 180 #
2016/2056(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Emphasises that the enforcement of EU and national financial and consumer legislation needs to be strengthened; notes, at the same time, that the volume of legislation on retail financial services has expanded significantly in recent years with the aims of improving prudential stability, strengthening consumer protection and restoring confidence in the sector; stresses that the European Supervisory Authorities should step up their activities on consumer issues and that the agencies responsible in a number of Member States should start to work more actively and competently in this field; calls on Member State supervisory authorities to conduct exchanges of good practice to ensure that retail financial services legislation is applied in a way that safeguards fair competition;
Amendment 198 #
2016/2056(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Calls for the Commission to intensify its work againstexamine the evidence of discrimination on grounds of residence in the European market on retail financial services and, if necessary, to complement the planned general proposals to end unjustified geo- blocking with further legislative initiatives targeted specifically at the financial sector; once all the EU rules on retail financial services have been fully implemented and subjected to monitoring and analysis; notes that a range of basic factors affecting retail financial services, such as different social insurance, tax and health systems and different rules on contracts and consumer protection, etcetera, can result in differences between the types of service offered in each Member State; calls on the Commission to take into consideration the range of sectors, products and services involved in connection with the use of the term ‘geo- blocking’; recognises that geographical information, including place of residence, has to be taken into account in the provision of certain financial services such as insurance because it affects very significant aspects of many insurance products;
Amendment 208 #
2016/2056(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Urges the Commission, inter alia on the basis of the structure of the Payment Accounts Directive (PAD) and the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority’s analysis of the insurance sector, to put together a step-by- step action plan for building a well- organised and easy-to-use EU comparison portal covering most or all parts of the retail financial services market; emphasises that comparison tools must be accurate and of relevance to consumers and must focus not only on the prices of products but also on their quality;
Amendment 226 #
2016/2056(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. UCalls on the Commission to promote the mutual recognition and interoperability of digital identification techniques, without affecting the level of security of existing systems; therefore urges the Commission and the Member States, by working carefully on the implementation of the eIDAS Regulation and the new anti-money laundering legislation, inter alia, to create – as should be entirely feasible – a general environment in which robust security requirements are combined with fair and simple procedures for consumers to identify themselves; also asks the Commission and the Member States to identify and remove regulatory barriers to the use of electronic signature systems for subscribing to financial services;
Amendment 238 #
2016/2056(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Calls on the Commission to examine new approaches with the potential to give companies greater regulatory flexibility to experiment and be able to innovate, while maintaining high levels of consumer protection and safety;
Amendment 243 #
2016/2056(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 b (new)
Paragraph 18 b (new)
18b. Stresses the need to encourage retail financial services providers to finance projects associated with innovation and the environment; points out that an approach similar to that of the SME supporting factor could be considered;
Amendment 245 #
2016/2056(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 c (new)
Paragraph 18 c (new)
18c. Stresses the need to raise consumers’ awareness of investment options;
Amendment 255 #
2016/2056(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Asks the Commission to study further the feasibility, relevance, benefits and costs of guaranteeing domestic and cross-border portability in various parts of the retail financial services market (for example as regards insurance products and bank account numbers);
Amendment 258 #
2016/2056(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19a. Notes the initiative taken by the Commission in studying the feasibility of a standardised pan-European personal pension product; takes note of the final report by the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA) on public consultation No CP- 15/006 on creating a standardised pan- European personal pension product; underscores the need, when examining the possible introduction of a standardised pan-European personal pension product, to respect Member States’ standards for pension products;
Amendment 266 #
2016/2056(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Encourages the Commission, while ensuring financial stability, to move forward in creating a stronger single market for mortgages and consumer credit, but to do so carefully, balancing privacy and data promphasises that the Mortgages Directive is currently being transposed, or is in the process of implementation, in the Member States; encourages the Commission to monitor its transposition and implementation attecntion concerns wively and to analyse the improved cross-border access to better- coordinated credit databases and making sure that credit-related incidents whereby consumers have been unreasonably exposed to currency exchaact of this legislation on the retail financial services market; notes that there are still significant barriers to the creation of a stronger single risks are not repeatedmarket for mortgages and consumer credit;
Amendment 272 #
2016/2056(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Asks the Commission to conduct, with the Member States, a joint analysis of the implementation and impact of EU legislation on retail financial services; calls on the Commission and Member States to examine in detail the legal barriers and other remaining obstacles to cross-border operations and to the completion of an EU retail financial services market; stresses that the specificities of SMEs must be taken into account in such an analysis;
Amendment 12 #
2016/2047(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses that the CFP also contributes to social cohesion in outermost regions and offshore islands; points out that those regions and islands are dependent on fishinge fishing enterprises in those regions are handicapped by additional costs and should therefore be especially recognised and supported in accordance with Article 349 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
Amendment 15 #
2016/2047(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Points out the need to guarantee sufficient financial support to control fisheries activities on board and in the ports in order to ensure and facilitate the implementation of the landing obligation, given that Member States are experiencing difficulties in fulfilling this obligation.
Amendment 33 #
2016/2047(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Points out that the European Fisheries Control Agency (EFCA) can only perform its role if provided with sufficient technical, economic, human and financial resources; calls on the Commission to ensure sufficient funding for the appropriations devoted to the EFCA in order to enable it to fulfil its new tasks attributed to it in the proposal on a European Border and Coast Guard package; recalls the need to exempt all posts of agencies dealing with the migration crisis from the 5 % staff reduction target.
Amendment 252 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to go beyond the international standards laid down, in particular, by the OECD; calls for the European Union to become an example and a global leader in transparency and tax convergence in order to effectively tackle tax optimisation;
Amendment 39 #
2016/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital S
Recital S
S. whereas recreational fishing is an activity carried out solely for recreational and/or competitive sporting purposes, in which living aquatic resources are exploited, but catches may not, under any circumstances, be sold; whereas although the intention is not to make a profit, recreational fishing is included among the tourist activities that generate a paralleln economy which can be managed by professional fishermen through services, facilities, and infrastructure offered to recreational fishermenmust be exploited;
Amendment 89 #
2016/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Considers it vital to harmonise the definition of tourism-related fishing activities at Union level, laying particular emphasis on fishing tours, shore-based tourist services offered by fishermen, and tourism related to sport/recreational fishing; stresses that, under this definition, fisheries-related tourism is regarded as an ancillary activity which enables fishermen to supplement their main fishing activity without moving into a sector other than fishing;
Amendment 41 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes differences in financing conditions for SMEs between Member States and between regions, notably the quantity and cost of available funding, which are influenced by SME-factors specific and country-specific factorsto SMEs and to the regions in which they are established;
Amendment 67 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Encourages SMEs to consider the whole EU as their home market and to use the potential of the single market for their financing needs; welcomes the Commission’s initiatives supporting SMEs and start-ups in an upgraded Single Market; underlines, in this context, the importance of the implementation of the Small Business Act; calls on the Commission for a follow-up to the Small Business Act; calls on the Commission and Member States to ensure coordination, consistency and synergies between European instruments and programmes for SMEs, such as the European Structural and Investment Funds (ESI funds), Horizon 2020 and COSME;
Amendment 70 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Welcomes the Commission's initiative to restart work on the establishment of a genuine European market in retail financial services with the publication of the Green Paper on Retail Financial Services (2015); asks the Commission to pay particular attention to the specificities of SMEs and ensure that cross-border activities in the field of retail financial services lead to better access to finance for SMEs;
Amendment 227 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)
Paragraph 26 a (new)
26a. Notes that during this period of fiscal restraint, cohesion policy is an important source of support for SMEs, but stresses that the complexity of the rules and the red tape involved in obtaining ESI funding affect SMEs in particular, resulting in disproportionate administrative costs; urges the Member States and the Commission to make significant progress towards further simplification so as to make funding more attractive for SMEs and calls on the Commission to clarify the link between the rules on ESI Funds and the rules on state aid;
Amendment 4 #
2016/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 2 a (new)
Citation 2 a (new)
— having regard to the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Communities in Joined Cases C-132/14 to C-136/14 on the interpretation of Article 349 TFEU, which stresses that Article 349 allows derogations not only from the treaties but also from secondary law,
Amendment 12 #
2016/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the EU needs to assume responsibilities in the maritime realm of the ORs, and whereas their exclusive economic zones (EEZ) make up a large percentageroportion of the EU’s total EEZ;
Amendment 13 #
2016/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the fisheries sectors in the ORs have to be seen against the background of a particular structural, social and economic situation (Article 349 TFEU), which requires specific and adapted consideration of common European policies;
Amendment 15 #
2016/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) recognises the specific characteristics of the ORs andand the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF), which were designed to tackle the problems and challenges of continental Europe, allows for a differentiated approach in these regionfor the ORs but can only provide a limited response to the specific characteristics of fisheries in the ORs;
Amendment 20 #
2016/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas the ORs began to be incorpotegrated into the CFP when the limitation on fishing effort was introduced in the 1990s; whereas, this is the reason the ORs consider themselvesare unfairly treated by the CFP and call it the ‘doubley penalty’ised (no access to previous aid for fleet renewal and the current prohibition on aid for renewal);
Amendment 29 #
2016/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas a sizeable level of illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing takes place in some of the ORs’ EEZ7 EEZs of some ORs7 and in the sea basins around others; _________________ 7 European Parliament Draft study on the management of the fishing fleet in the outermost regions (IP/B/PECH/IC/2016_100) and European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF) operational programme of France.
Amendment 31 #
2016/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
I. whereas the ORs are affected by some of the highest levels of unemployment in the EU (up to 60% youth unemployment in some ORs);
Amendment 40 #
2016/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Considers that sustainable and ‘honest’ fishing is the basis for prosperous coastal communities and contributes to food security in the ORs; insists, in this context, on the need to involve local fisheries in achieving food security for local communities, as food security in the ORs is currently too dependent on imports;
Amendment 42 #
2016/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Points out that the common fisheries policy and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF), designed to tackle the problems and challenges of continental Europe, can only provide a limited response to the specific characteristics of fisheries in the ORs, that they cannot be uniformly applied to the challenges and specific characteristics of fisheries in the ORs and that they must be allowed a degree of flexibility and pragmatism or be subject to derogations; calls also for the development of a strategy for each regional sea basin tailored to the specific situation of each of the outermost regions;
Amendment 44 #
2016/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Stresses the presence in the ORs of a wide variety of small communities which are highly dependent on traditional, coastal and small-scale fishing and for which fishing is often the only livelihood;
Amendment 49 #
2016/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Recalls that marine biological resources around the ORs should be especially protected and hencethat particular attention should be paid to fishing; stresses, therefore, that only fishing vessels registered in OR ports arshould be allowed to fish;
Amendment 52 #
2016/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Is of the opinion that the precautionary principle should prevail as long as the balance between fishing capacity and opportunities is not evidentStresses the need to maintain the balance between fishing capacity and opportunities in accordance with the precautionary principle and taking into account socio-economic realities;
Amendment 56 #
2016/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Points out that in some ORs the fishing fleets are below their capacity limits set by the CFP, owing in particular to the lack of access to financing;
Amendment 59 #
2016/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses the fact that in its 2016 report, the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF)8 could not assess the balance between fishing capacity and opportunities for all fleets operating in the ORs as a result of insufficient biological data; considers, in this regard, that it is vital for reliable data on the state of resources and practices in these overseas EEZs to be available and accessible; _________________ 8 Reports of the (STECF) - Assessment of balance indicators for key fleet segments and review of national reports on Member States efforts to achieve balance between fleet capacity and fishing opportunities (STECF-16-18).
Amendment 64 #
2016/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Regrets the delay in the approval of EMFF Operational Programmes and consequently the late implementation of supportive EMFF provisions, which has resulted in serious financial difficulties for some undertakings in the ORs;
Amendment 70 #
2016/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Welcomes the specific provisions for the ORs in the EMFF, such as the compensation for additional costs – which is higher than in the previous programming period but still not enough for some ORs – and the maximum public aid intensity, which is higher than for other regions;
Amendment 72 #
2016/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Observes the difficulties or even impossibility for certain fishermen in the ORs to access credit and/or insurance for their vessels, causing safety problems and economic constraints for these fishermen;
Amendment 74 #
2016/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Points out that in the ORs small boats make up a large majority of registered vessels; stresses that in some ORs, small vessels are more than 40 years old, which poses real safety problems,
Amendment 77 #
2016/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Stresses the economic multiplying effect of EU funds and support on the private sector contribution, particularly in the ORs;
Amendment 78 #
2016/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 2
Subheading 2
Making better use of possibilities provided under the currentArticle 349 of the Treaty and the CFP
Amendment 80 #
2016/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Calls for the full application of Article 349 TFEU in the European Union's policies, regulations, funds and programmes relating to fisheries, particularly in the EMFF, in order to respond to the specific difficulties encountered by the ORs;
Amendment 84 #
2016/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Calls on the Commission when proposing delegatedislative acts in respect of costs for hygiene, health and safety-related investments and investments related to working conditions, to facilitate a holistic and appropriately tailored approach;
Amendment 87 #
2016/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Calls on the Commission when proposing delegatedislative acts with regard to the criteria for calculation of additional costs resulting from the specific handicaps of ORs, to also consider the impact of climatic and geographical conditions and depredation;
Amendment 92 #
2016/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Deplores the significant level of IUU fishing taking place in the ORs’ EEZEEZ of certain ORs attributable to both domestic and foreign vessels, and in surrounding sea areas in the case of others; points out that for the domestic part, such practices also result from local food supply issues;
Amendment 97 #
2016/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Calls for genuine consideration to be given to the interests of ORs when fisheries agreements are concluded with third countries, including by laying down obligations to land catches in the ORs or to employ personnel from the ORs on vessels;
Amendment 102 #
2016/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Notes that a rebetter structuring of the fishing sector in the ORs is needed and if necessary a reduction of the number of vessels should be considered;
Amendment 105 #
2016/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. Notes that modernisation, and the development of the traditional or small- scale fishing fleet - including that which fishes for shrimps - in the ORs with the aid of public funding (European or national) is necessary, particularly because of the accelerated ageing of their vessels, which gives rise to problems with safety, compliance with European hygiene standards and efficiency, and the unsuitability of the fleet to reach the available resources or to combat IUU fishing; stresses furthermore that such restructuring will help to diversify fishing in the ORs, to improve its quality, to introduce innovation into its fishing activities and to increase efficiency; calls on the Commission therefore to eliminate all obstacles without delay in order to authorise public financing of the gradual renewal of small-scale or traditional fishing fleets - including those fishing for shrimps - of vessels which land their catches in ports in the ORs and which contribute to local, sustainable development of the fishing industry without damaging the sustainability of resources;
Amendment 110 #
2016/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Requests the Member States when implementing the provision of the CFP on the allocation of fishing opportunities to consider indevote particular fishing vesselsattention to traditional or small-scale fishing, which contributes to the local economy and haves a low impact on the environment;
Amendment 131 #
2016/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Advocates reconsidering the fleet segmentation basis under a potential future CFP, in order to make better use of capacity limits and facilitate developmentRecommends that the future CFP take full account of the specific features of the ORs and enable them to realise the strong economic, social and environmental potential created by the sustainable and rational development of the fisheries sectors in the ORs;
Amendment 141 #
2016/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Proposes increasing aid intensity for engine replacement in the ORs where scientific evidence indicates that climate conditions and climate change have a decisive negative impact on the ORs’ fleets;
Amendment 145 #
2016/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Advocates not establishing a dedicated fund for the ORs, as comprehensive resources of the European Structural and Investment Funds are already availableProposes that a specific instrument for fisheries in the ORs be established as soon as possible, modelled on POSEI for agriculture and taking as a basis Regulation No 791/2007, giving consideration to the possibility of bringing together in this specific instrument, in particular, the provisions of Articles 8 (State aid), 13(5) (budget) and 70-73 (compensation plans for additional costs) of the existing EMFF in order to ensure legal certainty of compensation plans for additional costs thanks to prior approval by the Commission and long-term financing;
Amendment 152 #
2016/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)
Paragraph 25 a (new)
25a. Proposes that the capacities of certain segments of the fleets in the ORs be increased provided that it has been scientifically demonstrated that the rate of exploitation of certain fisheries resources can be increased without compromising sustainable fishing objectives;
Amendment 161 #
2016/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Recommends creating better incentives under a future EMFF to encourage young people to enter the fishing sectorwork in the maritime economy;
Amendment 251 #
2016/0365(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 42
Recital 42
(42) Affected shareholders, clearing participantmembers and creditors should not incur losses greater than those which they would have incurred if the resolution authority woulhad not have taken resolution action in relation to the CCP and if they woulhad instead have been subject to possible outstanding obligations pursuant to the CCP's recovery plan or otherand all other contractual arrangements in its operating rules or, and the CCP hads been wound up inunder normal insolvency proceedings, properly taking into account any adverse effects of systemic instability and market turmoil. In the event of a partial transfer of assets of a CCP under resolution to a private purchaser or to a bridge CCP, the residual part of the CCP under resolution should be wound up under normal insolvency proceedings.
Amendment 580 #
2016/0365(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 62 – paragraph 1
Article 62 – paragraph 1
Where, in accordance with the valuation carried out under Article 61, any shareholder, creditor or clearing participantmembers has incurred greater losses than it would have incurred if the resolution authority would not have taken resolution action in relation to the CCP and they would instead have been subject to possible outstanding obligations pursuant to the CCP's recovery plan or other arrangements in its operating rules or the CCP had been wound up under normal insolvency proceedings, that shareholder, creditor or clearing participant shall be entitled to the payment of the difference.
Amendment 584 #
2016/0365(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 72 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 72 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. The lodging of an appeal shall not entail any automatic suspension of the effects of the challenged decision.
Amendment 120 #
2016/0364(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Directive 2013/36/EU
Article 21b – paragraph 2
Article 21b – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall require an intermediate EU parent undertaking in the Union to obtain authorisation as an institution in accordance with Article 8, or as a financial holding company or mixed financial holding company in accordance with Article 21aAn intermediate EU parent undertaking shall be a credit institution in accordance with Article 8, or a financial holding company or mixed financial holding company approved in accordance with Article 21a. By way of derogation from the first subparagraph, where the activities of the third country group are predominantly carried out by investment firms, or the second intermediate EU parent undertaking must be set up in connection with investment activities to comply with a mandatory requirement as referred to in paragraph 1a, the intermediate EU parent company or the second intermediate EU parent company, respectively, may be an investment firm authorised in accordance with Article 5(1) of Directive 2014/65/EU. For the purpose of this paragraph, an activity shall be considered as predominantly carried out by investment firms where the total balance sheet of investment firms in the group represents at least 50% of the group’s total balance sheet, or where the income generated by investment firms represents at least 50% of the group’s total income.
Amendment 178 #
2016/0364(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13
Directive 2013/36/EU
Article 84 – paragraph 2
Article 84 – paragraph 2
2. Competent authorities shall ensure that institutions implement systems to assess and monitor the risks arising from potential changes in credit spreads that affect both the economic value of equity and the net interest income of an institution's non-trading book activitiesre not explained by interest rate risk or by the expected credit-jump to default risk of an institution's non-trading book activities assets accounted for their market values (mark –to – market).
Amendment 179 #
2016/0364(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13
Directive 2013/36/EU
Article 84 – paragraph 3
Article 84 – paragraph 3
3. Competent authorities may require on a case by case basis an institutions to use the standardised methodology referred to in paragraph 1 where the internal systems implemented by theat institutions for the purposes of evaluating the risks referred to in paragraph 1 are not satisfactory. Competent authorities shall duly justify in writing to each institution the decision to require the use of the standardised methodology.
Amendment 181 #
2016/0364(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13
Directive 2013/36/EU
Article 84 – paragraph 3
Article 84 – paragraph 3
3. Competent authorities may require institutions to use the standardised methodology referred to in paragraph 1 as a fall-back where the internal systemmodels implemented by the institutions for the purposes of evaluating the risks referred to in paragraph 1 are not satisfactorydeficient, based on an individual assessment of the institutions measurement models.
Amendment 250 #
2016/0364(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18 – point b
Directive 2013/36/EU
Article 98 – paragraph 5
Article 98 – paragraph 5
5. The review and evaluation performed by competent authorities shall include the exposure of institutions to the interest rate risk arising from non-trading book activities. Supervisory measurGreater attention from competent authorities shall be required at least in the case of institutions whose economic value of equity referred to in Article 84(1) declines by more than 15 % of their Tier 1 capital as a result of a sudden and unexpected change in interest rates as set out in any of six supervisory shock scenarios applied to interest rates..
Amendment 254 #
2016/0364(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18 – point b
Directive 2013/36/EU
Article 98 – paragraph 5
Article 98 – paragraph 5
5. The review and evaluation performed by competent authorities shall include the exposure of institutions to the interest rate risk arising from non-trading book activities. Supervisory measures shallmay be required at least in the case of institutions whose economic value of equity referred to in Article 84(1) declines by more than 15 % of their Tier 1 capital as a result of a sudden and unexpected change in interest rates as set out in any of six supervisory shock scenarios applied to interest rates..
Amendment 257 #
2016/0364(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18 – point c
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18 – point c
Directive 2013/36/EU
Article 98 – paragraph 5a – point a
Article 98 – paragraph 5a – point a
(a) six supervisory shock scenarios, including two parallel scenarios, to be applied to interest rates for every currency; significant currency; these scenarios should be set at a level reflective of the 15% of Tier 1 capital threshold referred to in paragraph 5.
Amendment 259 #
2016/0364(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18 – point c
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18 – point c
Directive 2013/36/EU
Article 98 – paragraph 5a – point c
Article 98 – paragraph 5a – point c
Amendment 292 #
2016/0364(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22
Directive 2013/36/EU
Article 104a – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 104a – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
For the purposes of paragraph 1(a), risks or elements of risk shall only be considered as not covered or not sufficiently covered by the own funds requirements set out in Parts Three, Four, Five and Seven of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 where the amounts, types and distribution of capital considered adequate by the competent authority following the supervisory review of the assessment carried out by institutions in accordance with the first paragraph of Article 73, are higher than the institution's own funds requirements set out in Parts Three, Four, Five and Seven of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013.
Amendment 296 #
2016/0364(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22
Directive 2013/36/EU
Article 104a – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 104a – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
For the purposes of the first subparagraph, the capital considered adequate shall cover all material risks or elements of such risks that are not subject to a specific own funds requirement. This may include risks or elements of risks that are explicitly excluded from the own funds requirements set out in Parts Three, Four, Five and Seven of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013.
Amendment 297 #
2016/0364(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22
For the purposes of the first subparagraph, the capital considered adequate shall cover all material risks of loss or elements of such risks of loss that are not subject to a specific own funds requirement. This may include risks or elements of risks that are explicitly excluded from the own funds requirements set out in Parts Three, Four, Five and Seven of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013.
Amendment 299 #
2016/0364(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22
Directive 2013/36/EU
Article 104a – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
Article 104a – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
Amendment 315 #
2016/0364(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22
Directive 2013/36/EU
Article 104b – paragraph 3
Article 104b – paragraph 3
3. Competent authorities shall communicate to institutions the outcome of the review provided for in paragraph 2. Where appropriate, competent authorities may communicate to institutions any expectation for adjustments to the level of own funds established in accordance with paragraph 1 and on top of the combined buffers. Due to the nature of the guidance of additional own funds, this guidance shall remain confidential.
Amendment 320 #
2016/0364(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22
Amendment 326 #
2016/0364(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22
Directive 2013/36/EU
Article 104b – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 104b – paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. The guidance on additional own funds under Article 104b shall not be subject to mandatory disclosure pursuant to Article 17-1 of the Regulation (EU) N°596/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014 on market abuse.
Amendment 346 #
2016/0364(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 30 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 30 a (new)
Directive 2013/36/EU
Article 131 – paragraphs 2 and 3
Article 131 – paragraphs 2 and 3
(30 a) In Article 131, paragraphs 2 and 3 are replaced by the following: "2. The identification methodology for G-SIIs shall be based on the following categories: (a) size of the group; (b) interconnectedness of the group with the financial system; (c) substitutability of the services or of the financial infrastructure provided by the group; (d) complexity of the group; (e) cross-border activity of the group, including cross border activity between Member States and between a Member State and a third country. Each category shall receive an equal weighting and shall consist of quantifiabl made outside of Member States participating in the Sindicators. The methodology shall produce an overall score for each entity as referred to in paragraph 1 assessed, which allows G- SIIs to be identified and allocated into a sub-category as described in paragraph 9gle Supervisory Mechanism, in accordance with Council Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013. Each category shall receive an equal weighting and shall consist of quantifiable indicators. The methodology shall produce an overall score for each entity as referred to in paragraph 1 assessed, which allows G-SIIs to be identified and allocated into a sub- category as described in paragraph 9. 3. O-SIIs shall be identified in accordance with paragraph 1. Systemic importance shall be assessed on the basis of at least any of the following criteria: (a) size; (b) importance for the economy of the Union or of the relevant Member State; (c) significance of cross-border activities; made outside of Member States participating in the Single Supervisory Mechanism, in accordance with Council Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013. (d) interconnectedness of the institution or group with the financial system. EBA, after consulting the ESRB, shall publish updated guidelines by 1 January 2015XX on the criteria to determine the conditions of application of this paragraph in relation to the assessment of O-SIIs. Those guidelines shall take into account international frameworks for domestic systemically important institutions and Union and national specificities. " Or. en (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32013L0036&qid=1516919265977)
Amendment 76 #
2016/0362(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 4
Article 1 – paragraph 4
Directive 2014/59/EU
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 83b
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 83b
(83b) 'resolution group' means a resolution entity and its subsidiaries that are not resolution entities themselves and that are not subsidiaries of another resolution entity; when the resolution entity of the resolution group is the central body of a network or a cooperative group, the credit institutions permanently affiliated to this central body are also part of the resolution group.
Amendment 123 #
2016/0362(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 18
Article 1 – paragraph 18
Amendment 139 #
2016/0362(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 19
Article 1 – paragraph 19
Directive 2014/59/EU
Article 29a – paragraph 1
Article 29a – paragraph 1
Amendment 196 #
2016/0362(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Directive 2014/59/EU
Article 45 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 45 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. For each institution affiliated to cooperative institutions, authorities shall consider adding to own funds and eligible liabilities of this institution the irrevocable financial support provided by other affiliated institutions through legally- based internal solidarity mechanism to fulfil the requirement.
Amendment 219 #
2016/0362(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Directive 2014/59/EU
Article 45b – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 45b – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Resolution authorities may decide that the requirement referred to in Article 45f is fully or partially met by resolution entities with instruments that meet all conditions referred to in Article 72a of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 with a view to ensure that the resolution entity can be resolved in a manner suitable to meet the resolution objectives. The level of the requirement that is to be covered by instruments that meet the conditions set out in Article 72b of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 shall not exceed the level that arises or would arise from the application of Article 92a(1) of that Regulation taking into account the allowance specified in article 72b paragraph 3 and the transitional provisions specified in Article 494 of that Regulation.
Amendment 265 #
2016/0362(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Directive 2014/59/EU
Article 45c – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 45c – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Amendment 282 #
2016/0362(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Article 1 – paragraph 23
(ii) a recapitalisation amount that allows the resolution group resulting from resolution to restore its total capital ratio referred in Article 92(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 and its requirement referred to in Article 104a of Directive 2013/36/EU at resolution group sub- consolidated level;
Amendment 311 #
2016/0362(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Directive 2014/59/EU
Article 45c – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 45c – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
4. Without prejudice to the last subparagraph, fFor entities that are not themselves resolution entities, the amount referred to in paragraph 2 shall not exceed the greater of any of the following:
Amendment 340 #
2016/0362(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Directive 2014/59/EU
Article 45c – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 4
Article 45c – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 4
The resolution authority shall set the recapitalisation amounts referred to the previous subparagraphs in accordance with the resolution actions foreseen in the resolution plan and may adjustin particular reflecting those rdecapitalisation amounts to adequately reflect risks that affect the recapitalisation needs arising from the entity's business model, funding profile and overall risk profilerease of the total risk exposure amount and of the leverage ratio exposure measure resulting from the resolution actions.
Amendment 366 #
2016/0362(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Directive 2014/59/EU
Article 45d – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 45d – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) any additional requirement for own funds and eligible liabilities determined by the resolution authority specific to the entity in accordance with paragraph 2, which shall be met with liabilities that meet the conditions of Article 45b. (1) and (2). This additional requirement shall be only provided and calculated with respect to the requirement referred to in point (a) of Article 45(2).
Amendment 415 #
2016/0362(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Directive 2014/59/EU
Article 45g – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 45g – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Institutions that are material subsidiaries as defined in Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 of a resolution entity and are not resolution entities themselves shall comply with the requirements laid down in Articles 45c to 45e on an individual basis. A resolution authority may, after having consulted the competent authority, decide to apply the requirement laid down in this Article to an entity referred to in points (b), (c) or (d) of Article 1(1) that is a subsidiary of a resolution entity and is not a resolution entity itself.
Amendment 430 #
2016/0362(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Directive 2014/59/EU
Article 45g – paragraph 2 – point d a (new)
Article 45g – paragraph 2 – point d a (new)
Amendment 457 #
2016/0362(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Directive 2014/59/EU
Article 45g – paragraph 5 – point a
Article 45g – paragraph 5 – point a
Amendment 473 #
2016/0362(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Directive 2014/59/EU
Article 45g – paragraph 5 – point g
Article 45g – paragraph 5 – point g
Amendment 478 #
2016/0362(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Directive 2014/59/EU
Article 45g – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 45g – paragraph 5 a (new)
Amendment 483 #
2016/0362(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Directive 2014/59/EU
Article 45g a (new)
Article 45g a (new)
Article 45g a Waiver for credit institutions permanently affiliated to a central body The resolution authority shall, in accordance with national law, waive the application of Articles 45f or 45g to one or more credit institutions permanently affiliated to a central body, where all the following conditions are met: (a) the credit institutions and the central body are subject to supervision by the same competent authority and are established in the same Member State and are part of the same resolution group; (b) the competent authority of the credit institution has fully waived the application of individual capital requirements of the credit institution pursuant to Article 10 of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (c) the resolution group complies with the requirement referred to in Article 45f(3); (d) there is no current or foreseen material practical or legal impediment to the prompt transfer of own funds or repayment of liabilities between the central body and the affiliated credit institutions in case of resolution.
Amendment 151 #
2016/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 5
Article 1 – paragraph 5
Regulation (EU) No 806/2014
Article 12 i – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 12 i – paragraph 1 – introductory part
The Board mayshall fully waive the application of Article 12h for a subsidiary of a resolution entity established in a participating Member State where:
Amendment 154 #
2016/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 5
Article 1 – paragraph 5
Regulation (EU) No 806/2014
Article 12 i – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 12 i – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) both the subsidiary and the resolution entity are established the samein a participating Member State;
Amendment 191 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) The Basel Committee is currently considering the introduction of a leverage ratio surcharge for globally systemically important banks (G-SIBs). The final outcome of the Basel Committee's calibrFor institutions that are designated globally systemically important institutions (G-SIIs) because of their size, connectivity, complexity, irreplaceable nature or global relevance, a leverage ratio surcharge should be introduced, since G-SIIs in financial distress permanently weaken the entire financial system and this could cause a new credit crunch in the Union. Because of this danger to the financial system and to the financing of the real economy, an implicit guarantee for G-SIIs emerges based on the expectation that the state will rescue them. This can mean that G-SIIs reduce their market discipline and accept too much risk, which in turn makes future distress for the G-SII even more probable. European legislation work should give rise to a discussion on the appropriate calibration of the leverage ratio for systemically important EU institutions. take into account the strict leverage ratios which already exist in other jurisdictions in order to effectively counteract these negative externalities. Furthermore, a surcharge of this kind for G-SIIs is appropriate since G-SIIs in the Union already significantly exceed a leverage ratio of 4%. In the interests of a level playing field and in line with leverage ratios presently maintained by G-SIIs, the leverage ratio for G-SIIs should therefore be raised by 50% of a G-SII’s higher-loss absorbency risk-weighted requirements, in addition to the minimum threshold of 3%.
Amendment 243 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point j
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point j
Regulation (EU) 575/2013
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 144 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 144 a (new)
(144a) Irrespective of the accounting classification, leasing contracts where substantially all risks and rewards of an underlying asset are transferred to the lessee are to be classified as finance lease. All other leases are classified as operating lease.
Amendment 265 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Regulation (EU) 575/2013
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point b – point iii
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point b – point iii
(iii) the guarantee is fully collateralised for at leastup to 50% of its amount through a financial collateral arrangement as defined in point (a) of Article 2(1) of Directive 2002/47/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council27 ; __________________ 27 Directive 2002/47/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 June 2002 on financial collateral arrangements (OJ L 168, 27.6.2002, p. 43).
Amendment 280 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Regulation (EU) 575/2013
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
This paragraph does not apply to Title IV of Part Six.
Amendment 289 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Amendment 294 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Regulation (EU) 575/2013
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
This paragraph does not apply to Title IV of Part Six.
Amendment 296 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Regulation (EU) 575/2013
Article 8 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. An authority that is competent for supervising on an individual basis an institution and all or some of its subsidiaries having their head offices situated in the same or different Member States than the institution's head office shall waive in full the application of Title IV Part Six to that institution and to all of these subsidiaries and supervise them as a single liquidity sub-group.
Amendment 317 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 14
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 14
Regulation (EU) 575/2013
Article 36 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 36 – paragraph 1 – point b
Amendment 453 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 36
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 36
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 81 – paragraph 1 – point a – point ii
Article 81 – paragraph 1 – point a – point ii
(ii) an undertaking that is subject by virtue of applicable national law to thcomparable requirements of this Regulation and Directive 2013/36/EU;
Amendment 482 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 39 – point a a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 39 – point a a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 92 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
Article 92 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
(aa) in paragraph 1, the following point (da) is added: "(da) By derogation from point d, an additional leverage ratio buffer requirement will be set at 50% of a G- SII’s higher-loss absorbency risk- weighted requirements. For example, institutions which are G-SIIs subject to a 2% higher-loss absorbency requirement would be subject to a 1% additional leverage ratio buffer requirement."
Amendment 553 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 52 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 52 a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 113 – paragraph 6 – point d
Article 113 – paragraph 6 – point d
(52a) In paragraph 6 of Article 113, point (d) is replaced by the following: "(d) the counterparty is established in the same Member State as the institution;" or both are established in Member States that belong to the Banking Union;" Or. en (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32013R0575&qid=1516908257263)
Amendment 585 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 56 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 56 a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 134 – paragraph 7 a (new)
Article 134 – paragraph 7 a (new)
(56a) In Article 134, the following new paragraph 7a is added: "7a. Where an institution is the lessee under an operating lease contract, the resulting right of use asset shall have an exposure value of 0."
Amendment 591 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 57 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 57 a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 166 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 166 – paragraph 1 a (new)
(57a) In Article 166, the following paragraph 1 a is inserted: "1a. Where an institution is the lessee under an operating lease contract, an exposure value of 0 shall apply to the resulting right of use asset."
Amendment 638 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 84
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 84
Regulation (EU) 575/2013
Article 325 b a – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 325 b a – paragraph 1 – point c
Amendment 647 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 84
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 84
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 325 b f
Article 325 b f
Amendment 648 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 84
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 84
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 325 b f – paragraph 1
Article 325 b f – paragraph 1
Amendment 649 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 84
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 84
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 325 b f – paragraph 2
Article 325 b f – paragraph 2
Amendment 651 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 84
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 84
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 325 b f – paragraph 3
Article 325 b f – paragraph 3
Amendment 652 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 84
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 84
Regulation (EU) 575/2013
Article 325 b f – paragraph 4
Article 325 b f – paragraph 4
Amendment 655 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 84
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 84
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 325 b f – paragraph 5
Article 325 b f – paragraph 5
Amendment 656 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 84
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 84
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 325 b f – paragraph 6
Article 325 b f – paragraph 6
Amendment 657 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 84
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 84
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 325 b f – paragraph 7
Article 325 b f – paragraph 7
Amendment 658 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 84
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 84
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 325 b f – paragraph 8
Article 325 b f – paragraph 8
Amendment 659 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 84
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 84
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 325 b f – paragraph 9
Article 325 b f – paragraph 9
Amendment 661 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 84
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 84
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 325 b f – paragraph 10
Article 325 b f – paragraph 10
Amendment 664 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 84
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 84
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 325 b h
Article 325 b h
Amendment 665 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 84
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 84
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 325 b h – paragraph 1
Article 325 b h – paragraph 1
Amendment 666 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 84
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 84
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 325 b h – paragraph 2
Article 325 b h – paragraph 2
Amendment 667 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 84
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 84
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 325 b h – paragraph 3
Article 325 b h – paragraph 3
Amendment 668 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 84
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 84
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 325 b h – paragraph 4
Article 325 b h – paragraph 4
Amendment 670 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 84
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 84
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 325 b i
Article 325 b i
Amendment 671 #
Amendment 672 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 84
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 84
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 325 b i – paragraph 2
Article 325 b i – paragraph 2
Amendment 674 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 84
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 84
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 325 b j – paragraph 2 – subparagraph g
Article 325 b j – paragraph 2 – subparagraph g
Amendment 679 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 84
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 84
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 325 b n – paragraph 2
Article 325 b n – paragraph 2
2. EBA shall issue guidelines on the requirements of Articles 325bo, 325bp and 325bq by [two yearsix months after the entry into force of this Regulation].
Amendment 687 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 91
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 91
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 390 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Article 390 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Institutions shall calculate exposures arising from contracts referred to in Annex II and credit derivatives directly entered into with a client in accordance with one of the methods set out in Part Three, Title II, Chapter 6, Section 3 to Section 56, as applicable. Institutions with a permission to use the Internal Model Method in accordance with Article 283 may use the Internal Model Method for calculating the exposure value for all transactions for which they have received permission under Article 283.
Amendment 696 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 98 – point a
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 98 – point a
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 399 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 399 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
An institution shallmay use a credit risk mitigation technique in the calculation of an exposure where it has used this technique to calculate capital requirements for credit risk in accordance with Part Three, Title II and provided it meets the conditions set out in this Article.
Amendment 699 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 99 – point a – point ii a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 99 – point a – point ii a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 400 – paragraph 1 – point l a (new)
Article 400 – paragraph 1 – point l a (new)
(la) exposures, including participations or other kinds of holdings, incurred by an institution to its parent undertaking, to other subsidiaries of that parent undertaking or to its own subsidiaries, in so far as those undertakings are covered by the supervision on a consolidated basis to which the institution itself is subject, in accordance with this Regulation, Directive 2002/87/EC or with equivalent standards in force in a third country; exposures that do not meet these criteria, whether or not exempted from Article 395(1), shall be treated as exposures to a third party.
Amendment 700 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 100
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 100
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 401 – paragraph 2
Article 401 – paragraph 2
Amendment 707 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 101
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 101
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 403 – subparagraph 1
Article 403 – subparagraph 1
Where an exposure to a client is guaranteed by a third party or secured by collateral issued by a third party, an institution shall:.may:
Amendment 717 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 103
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 103
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 411 – point 15 a (new)
Article 411 – point 15 a (new)
(15a) In part VI of this regulation, factoring will be treated as trade finance. “Factoring” means an agreement between a business (Assignor) and a financial entity (Factor) in which the Assignor assigns/sells its Receivables to the Factor and the Factor provides the Assignor with a combination of one or more of the following services with regard to the Receivables assigned: Advance of a percentage of the amount of Receivables assigned, that is generally short term, uncommitted and without automatic roll- over, Receivables management, collection and Credit protection. Usually, the Factor administers the Assignor’s sales ledger and collects the Receivables in its own name. The Assignment can be disclosed to the Debtor.
Amendment 741 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 114
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 114
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 428 f – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 428 f – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) covered bonds as referred to in Article 52(4) of Directive 2009/65/EC; and covered bonds that meet the eligibility requirements for the treatment set out in Article 129(4) or (5), as appropriate, where the underlying loans are fully matched funded with the covered bonds issued or where there exists non- discretionary extendable maturity triggers on the covered bonds of one year or more until the term of the underlying loans in the event of refinancing failure at the maturity date of the covered bond, or where national legislation adequately limits refinancing risk for covered bond issuers including through limitations on maturity mismatch between assets and liabilities;
Amendment 748 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 114
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 114
1. By way of derogation from Article 428g and from Chapters 3 and 4 of this Title, competent authorities may on a case- by-case basisshall authorise institutions to apply a higher available stable funding factor or a lower required stable funding factor to assets, liabilities and committed credit or liquidity facilities where all of the following conditions are fulfilled:
Amendment 751 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 114
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 114
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 428 h – paragraph 1 – point a – point v a (new)
Article 428 h – paragraph 1 – point a – point v a (new)
(va) the counterparty is located within the same Member State or in a different Member State;
Amendment 753 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 114
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 114
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 428 h – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 428 h – paragraph 1 – point b
Amendment 758 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 114
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 114
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 428 h – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 428 h – paragraph 1 – point d
Amendment 762 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 114
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 114
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 428 h – paragraph 2
Article 428 h – paragraph 2
Amendment 777 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 114
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 114
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 428 r – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Article 428 r – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
(aa) assets that have a residual maturity of less than six months resulting from secured lending transactions and capital market-driven transactions as defined in Article 192(2) and (3), where those assets are collateralised by assets that qualify as Level 1 assets under Chapter 2 of Title II of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/61, excluding extremely high quality covered bonds referred to in point (f) of Article 10(1) of that Delegated Regulation , and where the institution would be legally entitled and operationally able to reuse those assets for the life of the transaction, regardless of whether the collateral has already been reused. Institutions shall take those assets into account on a net basis where Article 428e of this Regulation applies;
Amendment 782 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 114
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 114
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 428 r – paragraph 1 – point a b (new)
Article 428 r – paragraph 1 – point a b (new)
(ab) assets that have a residual maturity of less than six months resulting from secured lending transactions and capital market-driven transactions as defined in Article 192(2) and (3) with regulated financial customers, where the institution would be legally entitled and operationally able to reuse those assets for the life of the transaction, regardless of whether the collateral has already been reused. Institutions shall take those assets into account on a net basis where Article 428e of this Regulation applies;
Amendment 802 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 114
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 114
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 428 s – point d a (new)
Article 428 s – point d a (new)
(da) For all netting sets of derivative contracts subject to margin agreements under which institutions post variation margins to their counterparties, institutions shall apply a 5% required stable funding factor to the absolute market value of those netting sets of derivative contracts, gross of any collateral posted, where those netting sets have a negative market value.
Amendment 805 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 114
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 114
(db) For all netting sets of derivative contracts that are not subject to a regular margin agreements under which institutions post variation margins to their counterparties but which are subject to contractual clauses which could lead to collateral to post, dependent on specific trigger events such as a downgrade for example, institutions shall apply a 5% required stable funding factor to the absolute market value of those netting sets of derivative contracts, gross of any collateral posted, where those netting sets have a negative market value.
Amendment 829 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 114
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 114
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 428 x – paragraph 2
Article 428 x – paragraph 2
Amendment 833 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 114
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 114
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 428 x – paragraph 3
Article 428 x – paragraph 3
Amendment 882 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 115
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 115
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 429 a – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 429 a – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. By way of derogation from point (a) of Article 429(4), an institution may exclude any of the following exposures from its exposure measure :
Amendment 892 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 115
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 115
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 429 a – paragraph 1 – point m a (new)
Article 429 a – paragraph 1 – point m a (new)
(ma) cash and central banks deposits
Amendment 893 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 115
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 115
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 429 a – paragraph 1 – point m b (new)
Article 429 a – paragraph 1 – point m b (new)
(mb) the Initial Margin posted in segregated accounts
Amendment 894 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 115
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 115
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 429 a – paragraph 1 – point m c (new)
Article 429 a – paragraph 1 – point m c (new)
(mc) Underlying assets of leasing contracts that are classified as an operating lease where the institution is the lessee
Amendment 895 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 115
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 115
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 429 a – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 429 a – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. For the purposes of point (d) of paragraph 1, public development credit institution means a credit institution that meets all of the following conditions or is qualified as a promotional or development bank by a European Commission decision:
Amendment 901 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 115
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 115
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 429 a – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 429 a – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) its activity is limited to advancing specified objectives of financial, social or economic public policy in accordance with the laws and provisions governing that institution, on a non-competitive basis, or to address a market failure. For these purposes, public policy objectives may include the provision of financing for promotional or development purposes to specified economic sectors or geographical areas of the relevant Member State;
Amendment 908 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 115
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 115
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 429 a – paragraph 2 – point e
Article 429 a – paragraph 2 – point e
(e) it is precluded from acceptingdoes not take covered deposits as defined in point (5) of Article 2(1) of Directive 2014/49/EU or in the national law of Member States implementing that Directive.
Amendment 929 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 115
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 115
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 429 c – paragraph 4
Article 429 c – paragraph 4
4. For the purposes of paragraph 1 of this Article, institutions shall not include collateral received in the calculation of NICA as defined in point 12a of Article 272, except in the case of derivatives contracts with clients where those contracts are cleared by a QCCP.
Amendment 967 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 116
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 116
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 438 – point d
Article 438 – point d
(d) the total risk weighted exposure amount and the corresponding total own funds requirement determined in accordance with Article 92, to be broken down by the different risk categories set out in Part Three and, where applicable, an explanation of the effect on the calculation of own funds and risk weighted exposure amounts that results from applying capital floors and not deducting items from own funds.
Amendment 968 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 116
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 116
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 438 – point f
Article 438 – point f
Amendment 969 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 116
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 116
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 438 – point i
Article 438 – point i
Amendment 974 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 116
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 116
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 446 – title
Article 446 – title
Amendment 975 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 116
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 116
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 446 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph a, b, c
Article 446 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph a, b, c
Amendment 992 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 116
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 116
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 455 – paragraph 2
Article 455 – paragraph 2
2. Where applicable in accordance with Article 104b, institutions shall disclose individually for the main trading desks and on an aggregate basis foron the remainingperimeter of trading desks the following: (a) the hat have been granted internal model approval in accordance with Article 325ba Highest, lowest and mean value over the reporting period of the following items: (ia) unconstrained expected shortfall measure UESt as determined in Article 325bc ba(2)(a) ; (ii) market risks that would be calculated in accordance with Chapter 1a of this Title had the institutions not been granted the permission to use their internal models for the relevant trading desk as determined in Article 325 ba(2)(b). (b) for the expected shortfall models: (i) the number of back testing over shootings over the last 250 business days; (ii) breaches over the last 12 months;the own funds requirements for (b) unconstrained expected shortfall measure UESti for broad risk factor category i as determined in accordance with Article 325.bc the number of P&L attribution
Amendment 1005 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 121
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 121
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 494 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 494 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. For the purposes of paragraph 3 of Article 72b, until the resolution authority assesses for the first time the elements referred to in points (b) and (c) of Article 45b(3) of Directive 2014/59/EU [NWCO test] and confirms there is no material adverse impact on the resolvability of the institution, liabilities shall qualify as eligible liabilities instruments up to an aggregate amount that does not exceed, until 31 December 2021, 2.5% and, after that date, 3.5% of the total risk exposure amount calculated in accordance with paragraphs 3 and 4 of Article 92, provided that they meet the conditions laid down in points (a) and (b) of Article 72b(3).
Amendment 1007 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 122 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 122 a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 494 b (new)
Article 494 b (new)
(122a) The following Article 494b is inserted after Article 494a: "Article 494b Grandfathering of own funds instruments and eligible liabilities instruments 1. By way of derogation from Articles 51 and 52 of this Regulation, instruments issued prior to [date of entry into force of CRR 2] may qualify as Additional Tier 1 instruments at the latest until [10 years after the date of entry into force of CRR 2], where they meet the conditions laid down in Articles 51 and 52, except for the conditions referred to in points (q) and (r) of Article 52. 2. By way of derogation from Articles 62 and 63, instruments issued prior to [date of entry into force of CRR 2] may qualify as Tier 2 instruments at the latest until [10 years after the date of entry into force of CRR 2] where they meet the conditions laid down in Articles 62 and 63, except for the conditions referred to in points (o) and (p) of Article 63. 3. By way of derogation from Article 72a(1)(a), liabilities issued before prior to [date of entry into force] are considered eligible liabilities provided they meet the criteria of may qualify as eligible liabilities items where they satisfy the conditions laid down in Article 72b, with the exception of the criteria of except for the conditions referred to in points (f) to (m) of Article 72b(2)."
Amendment 1024 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 127
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 127
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 501 a – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 501 a – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the exposure is to an entity which was created specifically to finance or operate (either directly or through affiliates) physical structures or facilities, systems and networks that provide or support essential public services; or to finance the rights to operate such assets or is an economically comparable exposure.
Amendment 1034 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 127
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 127
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 501 a – paragraph 1 – point j
Article 501 a – paragraph 1 – point j
(j) the obligor has adequate safeguards to ensure completion of the project according to the agreed specification, budget or completion date; including strong completion guarantees or experienced constructor providing adequate liquidated damages as confirmed by the technical advisor (to be provided by credit worthy counterparts or covered by acceptable LC)”;
Amendment 1040 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 127
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 127
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 501 a – paragraph 2 – point a – point iv – indent 3 a (new)
Article 501 a – paragraph 2 – point a – point iv – indent 3 a (new)
– it is partly regulated or contractually fixed and in addition the project is resilient to downside sensitivities regarding price or volume risk, or a combination of both;
Amendment 1045 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 127
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 127
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 501 b – title
Article 501 b – title
Amendment 1046 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 127
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 127
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 501 b – paragraph 1
Article 501 b – paragraph 1
Amendment 1052 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 127
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 127
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 501 b – paragraph 2
Article 501 b – paragraph 2
Amendment 1097 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) The provisions for introducing the new requirements for own funds for market risk in points 47 to 51 and 83 to 88, excluding the requirements on the Profit & Loss attribution requirement and on the modellability of risk factors, as defined in articles 325ba(1)(b), 325bf, 325bh, 325bi(1)(a) and 325bj(2)(g) at the latest of the two dates : – 42 months after the publication of the final EBA technical standards and guidelines defined in Articles 325bg(9), 325bl(4) and 325bn(2) of this Regulation; – four years after entry into force of this Regulation.
Amendment 1098 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b b (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b b (new)
(bb) The Commission shall submit to the European Parliament and to the Council a report by [two years after the entry into force]. The report shall cover the approaches set out in Chapters 1a, 1b, 2, 3 and 4 of Title IV, Part Three and in particular international regulatory developments as regards to the Profit & Loss attribution requirement and the modellability of risk factors. The report shall take into account the international regulatory developments and the specificities of financial and capital markets in the Union. The report shall be informed by a proper European impact study. The report shall cover the appropriateness of the calibration of the approaches set out in Title IV, Part Three to calculate the own funds requirements for market risks and evaluate if a refaction factor shall apply to capital requirements for market risk (MRC). Where appropriate, the report should suggest a sustainable framework for the adjustment of internal models by banks and for competent authorities to review them as regards to a hypothetical legislative proposal. Where appropriate, the report shall be accompanied by a legislative proposal amending the calibration of capital requirements for market risk as defined in Title IV, Part Three.
Amendment 1099 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b c (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b c (new)
(bc) The application of the provisions in point (ba) shall not result in own funds requirements for market risks calculated according to the approaches set out in Chapters 1a and 1b that are lower than the own funds requirements for market risks calculated according to the approaches set out in Chapters 2, 3, 4 and 5 Title IV, Part Three. Until a date that would be defined in the report that the Commission shall submit to the European Parliament and to the Council by [two years after the entry into force], institutions that use the approaches set out in Chapters 1a and 1b, Title IV, Part Three to calculate the own funds requirement for market risks shall multiply their own funds requirements for market risks calculated under these approaches by the ratio, floored by one, of: (a) The average own fund requirements calculated on a quarterly basis, during the 12 months preceding the application date defined in point (ba), according to the approaches set out in Chapters 2, 3, 4 and 5 Title IV, Part Three (CRR); (b) The own funds requirements calculated on the application date defined in point (ba) according the approaches set out in Chapters 1a and 1b, Title IV, Part Three (CRR2).
Amendment 87 #
2016/0238(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) Article 16(4) of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 requires that fishing opportunities be fixed in accordance with the targets set outobjective set out in Article 2(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 and comply with the targets, time-frames and margins established in the multi-annual plans.
Amendment 98 #
2016/0238(COD)
(16) For Norway lobster functional units for which they are available, it is appropriate to use the following trigger abundance levels: minimum abundance (Abundancebuffer) that corresponds to the Bbuffer reference point defined in the Long Term Management Plan for North Sea Nephrops by the North Sea Advisory Council42 and the limit abundance (Abundancelimit) that corresponds to abundance MSY Btrigger (equivalent to Blim) as defined by ICES7. _________________ 42 A Long Term Management Plan for North Sea NephropsICES advised minimum abundance (Abundancebuffer) and limit abundance (Abundancelimit) as trigger abundance levels.
Amendment 104 #
2016/0238(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26
Recital 26
(26) In accordance with Article 10(3) of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 provisions should be established for the periodical assessment by the Commission of the adequacy and effectiveness of the application of this Regulation. Such assessment should follow and be based on periodic evaluation of the plan based on scientific advice: the plan should be evaluated by three years after the entry into force of this Regulation, and every five years thereafter. This period allows for the full implementation of the landing obligation, and for regionalised measures to be adopted, implemented and to show effects on the stocks and fishery. It is also the minimum required period by scientific bodies.
Amendment 114 #
2016/0238(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2
Article 1 – paragraph 2
2. Notwithstanding paragraph 1, Articles 4, 5, 6 and 8 apply to the stock areas for Groups 1 to 4 stocks as defined in Article 2.
Amendment 127 #
2016/0238(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – introductory part
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – introductory part
(2) “Group 1”: means demersal stocks for which targets as FMSY ranges and safeguards linked to biomass are established in this plan as follows:. The Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 18 of this Regulation and Article 18 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 in order to modify this list if necessary.
Amendment 144 #
2016/0238(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Amendment 147 #
2016/0238(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Amendment 155 #
2016/0238(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9
(9) “total allowable catch” (TAC) means the quantity of each stock that can be caught over the period of a: (i) in fisheries subject to the landing obligation referred to in Article 15 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013, the quantity that can be caught from each stock each year; (ii) in all other fisheries, the quantity that can be landed from each stock each year.
Amendment 174 #
2016/0238(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 4 – point b
Article 3 – paragraph 4 – point b
(b) contribute, where justified, to the fulfilment of other relevant descriptors contained in Annex I to Directive 2008/56/EC in proportion to the role played by fisheries in their fulfilment.
Amendment 199 #
2016/0238(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Where, according to the best available scientific advice, the MSY exploitation rate is achieved for the stock concerned by 2020, fishing opportunities for that stock may be fixed in accordance with paragraph 4 thereafter.
Amendment 203 #
2016/0238(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 4 b (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Where, on the basis of the best available scientific advice, the Commission considers that the fishing mortality ranges set out in Annex I no longer correctly express the objectives of the plan, the Commission may as a matter of urgency submit a proposal for revision of those ranges.
Amendment 228 #
2016/0238(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6
Article 6
Amendment 246 #
2016/0238(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Remedial measures referred to in this Article may include: (a) emergency measures in accordance with Articles 12 and 13 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013; (b) measures pursuant to Articles 11 and 11a (new) of this Regulation. The choice of measures referred to in this Article shall be made in accordance with the nature, seriousness, duration and repetition of the situation where the spawning stock biomass is below the levels referred to in paragraph 1.
Amendment 263 #
2016/0238(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Amendment 280 #
2016/0238(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 a (new)
Article 11 a (new)
Amendment 282 #
2016/0238(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 a (new)
Article 12 a (new)
Amendment 284 #
2016/0238(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
The control measures provided for in this Chapter shall apply in addition to those provided for in Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 for demersal stocks of Groups 1-7, save where otherwise provided for in this Chapter.
Amendment 292 #
2016/0238(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. In addition to the prior notification obligation laid down in Article 17(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009, masters of Union fishing vessels of overall length of eight to twelve metres and above shall notify the competent authorities of the coastal Member State at least one hour before the estimated time of arrival at port of the information listed in points (a) to (f) of Article 17(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 when retaining on board at least any of the following quantities of fish:
Amendment 293 #
2016/0238(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) Group 1Cod and hake: 1000 kg; and/or
Amendment 294 #
2016/0238(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point c
Amendment 295 #
2016/0238(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point d
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point d
Amendment 296 #
2016/0238(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15
Article 15
Amendment 305 #
2016/0238(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – title
Article 16 – title
Designated ports for Groups 1, 2, 3, 4 and 7
Amendment 306 #
2016/0238(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) Group 1Cod and hake: 2 tonnes;
Amendment 307 #
2016/0238(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point c
Amendment 308 #
2016/0238(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point d
Amendment 312 #
2016/0238(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1
Article 17 – paragraph 1
No less than fivthree years after the entry into force of this Regulation, and every five years thereafter, the Commission shall ensure an evaluation of the impact of the plan on the stocks to which this Regulation applies and on the fisheries exploiting those stocks. It shall submit the results of this evaluation to the European Parliament and to the Council.
Amendment 314 #
2016/0238(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 a (new)
Article 17 a (new)
Amendment 85 #
2016/0221(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) In order to keep a high level of investor protection, those managers should continue to be subject to the requirements of Directive 2011/61/EU while complying with certain provisions of Regulation (EU) No 345/2013 or Regulation (EU) No 346/2013, namely the provisions concerning eligible investments, targeted investors and information requirements. Eligible investors should continue to be subject to the rules laid out in Regulation (EU) No 345/2013 and Regulation (EU) No 346/2013.
Amendment 108 #
2016/0221(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
Amendment 121 #
2016/0221(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11 a (new)
Recital 11 a (new)
(11a) Managers of qualifying venture capital funds and qualifying social entrepreneurship funds which are not authorised in accordance with Directive 2011/61/EU may market such funds throughout the Union, but are not allowed to manage such funds cross-border.
Amendment 142 #
2016/0221(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 345/2013
Article 10 – paragraph 2
Article 10 – paragraph 2
Amendment 164 #
2016/0221(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 345/2013
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – point e
(3a) In Article 14(1), point (e) is deleted.
Amendment 220 #
2016/0221(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 346/2013
Article 11 – paragraph 2
Article 11 – paragraph 2
Amendment 225 #
2016/0221(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU) No 346/2013
Article 11 – paragraph 3
Article 11 – paragraph 3
Amendment 237 #
2016/0221(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 346/2013
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – point e
Amendment 20 #
2016/0170(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 2
Recital 2
Amendment 35 #
2016/0170(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point j
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point j
Directive 2009/45/EC
Article 2 – point z a
Article 2 – point z a
Amendment 44 #
2016/0170(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 a (new)
Directive 2009/45/EC
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point (a) – point (ii) a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point (a) – point (ii) a (new)
(iiia) vessels made of aluminium alloy;
Amendment 50 #
2016/0170(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point e – introductory part
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point e – introductory part
(e) the following paragraphs 5 and 6 areis added:
Amendment 53 #
2016/0170(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point e
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point e
Directive 2009/45/EC
Article 6 – paragraph 6
Article 6 – paragraph 6
Amendment 312 #
2016/0074(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1
1. This Regulation shall apply to activities pursued by Union fishing vessels and nationals of Member States, without prejudice to the primary responsibility of the flag State, in the fishing zones referred to in Article 5where the Member States exercise sovereignty or have jurisdiction, as well as by fishing vessels flying the flag of, and registered in, third countries when fishing in Union waters.
Amendment 316 #
2016/0074(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. The landing obligation referred to in Article 15 of Regulation (UE) N°1380/2013 shall not apply to recreational fisheries provided that there is a high survival rate of the fish released, taking into account the characteristics of the gear and of the fishing practices. It is acknowledged that the fish caught by recreational anglers using hooks or lines are always released with a high survival rate, except otherwise demonstrated by scientific evidence.
Amendment 337 #
2016/0074(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) ensure that catches of marine species below minimum conservation reference sizes do not exceed 5% by volumethe levels defined in accordance with Article 2(2)18a, and that contribute to achieving the objectives established in Article 152(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013.
Amendment 347 #
2016/0074(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) ensure that byaccidental catches of marine mammals, marine reptiles, seabirds and other non-commercially exploited species do not exceed levels provided for in Union legislation and international agreements.
Amendment 393 #
2016/0074(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point 16
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point 16
(16) ‘electric pulse trawl’ means an experimental fishing technique which uses an electric field to catch fish. The pulse trawl gear consists of a number of electrodes, attached to the gear in the towing direction, that emit short electric pulses;
Amendment 413 #
2016/0074(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point 45 a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point 45 a (new)
(45 a) ‘full documentation’ means an accounting system that gives comprehensive, complete and reliable documentation of all catches and discards at sea, which may include, but not exclusively, the use of logbooks, on-board observers and/or electronic monitoring.
Amendment 414 #
2016/0074(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point 45 b (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point 45 b (new)
(45 b) ‘metier’ means a group of fishing operations targeting a similar assemblage of species, using similar gear, during the same period of the year and/or within the same area and which are characterised by a similar exploitation pattern.
Amendment 442 #
2016/0074(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
Article 10 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. It shall be prohibited to use bottom- set gillnets, entangling nets and trammel nets to catch the following species: deliberately:
Amendment 444 #
2016/0074(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 4 – indent 5
Article 10 – paragraph 4 – indent 5
Amendment 447 #
2016/0074(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 5
Article 10 – paragraph 5
5. It shall be prohibited to deploy any bottom set gillnet, entangling net and trammel nets at any position where the charted depth is greater than 6800 metres.
Amendment 491 #
2016/0074(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 a (new)
Article 17 a (new)
Article 17 a Derogation from the landing obligation 1.By way of derogation from Article 15 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013, fishing vessels which participate voluntarily in a system of full documentation of catches and discards shall not be required to land non-marketable catches, on condition that they are recorded and counted against quotas where applicable. 2.Full documentation systems as referred to in paragraph 1 must make it possible to record all data on fishing activities, including catches and discards. 3.Full documentation systems as referred to in paragraph 1 may be established by a Member State with the approval of the Commission or by an act of the Union. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 32 concerning: - the establishment or approval of these full documentation systems, - the data to be recorded and the specifications of these systems, with due regard for paragraph 2.
Amendment 493 #
2016/0074(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 b (new)
Article 17 b (new)
Amendment 494 #
2016/0074(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Chapter 2 – section 5 a (new)
Chapter 2 – section 5 a (new)
SECTION 5a - ADAPTATION OF FISHING VESSELS Article 17a - Adaptation of tonnage On new and existing fishing vessels, increases in the tonnage of the vessel intended to improve safety on board, working conditions and the hygiene and quality of products, as well as increases in the tonnage of the vessel intended to store unwanted catches subject to the landing obligation in accordance with Article 15 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 shall be authorised, on condition that they do not result in an increase in the vessel’s catch potential. The corresponding volumes shall not be taken into account for the purpose of assessing fishing capacity in the light of the ceilings imposed in Annex II to Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 or in the entry/exit schemes referred to in Article 23 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013.
Amendment 497 #
2016/0074(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2
Article 18 – paragraph 2
2. In accordance with the procedure set out in Article 18 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 Member States may submit joint recommendations defining appropriate technical measures at the regional level that deviate from the measures set out in paragraph 1. The Commission shall make these joint recommendations public immediately after their submission by the Member States and shall make public any scientific assessment carried out to ensure their compliance with the provisions of Article 18 (5) of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013.
Amendment 505 #
2016/0074(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 a (new)
Article 18 a (new)
Amendment 509 #
2016/0074(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1
Article 19 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission shall be empowered to establish technical measures at regional level with the aim of achieving objectives of multiannual plans referred to in Articles 9 and 10 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013. Such measures shall be established by means of delegated acts adopted in accordance with Article 32 of this Regulation and Article 18 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013. Notwithstanding Article 18(1) and (3) of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013, the Commission may adopt such delegated acts also in the absence of a joint recommendation referred thereto.
Amendment 513 #
2016/0074(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 5
Article 19 – paragraph 5
5. Where Member States submit joint recommendations for the establishment of technical measures as referred to in paragraph 1, they shall provide scientific evidence to support the adoption of those measures. The Commission shall make these joint recommendations public immediately after their submission by the Member States.
Amendment 515 #
2016/0074(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 6
Article 19 – paragraph 6
6. The Commission mayshall require the STECF to assess the joint recommendations referred to in paragraph 5 and shall make this assessment public.
Amendment 535 #
2016/0074(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1
Article 24 – paragraph 1
1. When Member States submit joint recommendations in accordance with Article 19 to allow for the use or extend the use of innovative fishing gears including the pulse trawl as described in Part E of Annex V within a specific sea basin, they shall provide an assessment of the likely impacts of using such gears on the targeted species and on sensitive species and habitatecosystems.
Amendment 555 #
2016/0074(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 a (new)
Article 26 a (new)
Article 26 a Results-based management of fisheries 1.In accordance with the procedure set out in Article 18 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013, Member States may submit joint recommendations defining pilot projects that develop a system of full documentation of catches and discards based on measurable targets and objectives, for the purpose of a results- based management of fisheries. 2.The pilot projects referred to in paragraph 1 may derogate from the measures set out in Annexes V to XI for a specific area and for a maximum period of one year, provided that it can be demonstrated that such pilot projects aim at achieving the objectives set out in Article 3 and reaching the targets set out in Article 4.This one-year period may be extended to one more year under the same conditions. 3.Where Member States submit joint recommendations for the establishment of pilot projects as referred to in paragraph 1, they shall provide scientific evidence to support their adoption. The Commission shall require the STEFC to assess these joint recommendations and shall make this assessment public. 4.Where the pilot projects referred to in paragraph 1 can demonstrate that they successfully achieved the objectives set out in Article 3 and reached the targets set out in Article 4, the Commission may expand or convert them to full scale programmes by means of delegated acts adopted in accordance with Article 32 of this Regulation, on the basis of scientific evidence assessed by the STECF.
Amendment 574 #
2016/0074(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 34 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Where the report shows that a Member State failed to comply with its obligation regarding control and data collection, the Commission may interrupt or suspend the EMFF funding for this Member State, in accordance with Articles 100 and 101 of Regulation (EU) No 508/2014.
Amendment 583 #
2016/0074(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point a
Annex I – point a
Amendment 584 #
2016/0074(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point d
Annex I – point d
Amendment 585 #
2016/0074(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point i
Annex I – point i
Amendment 586 #
2016/0074(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point o
Annex I – point o
Amendment 598 #
2016/0074(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex V – Part A – table 1 – row 25
Annex V – Part A – table 1 – row 25
Amendment 609 #
2016/0074(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex V – Part E – heading 1
Annex V – Part E – heading 1
Amendment 611 #
2016/0074(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex V – Part E – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Annex V – Part E – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Amendment 617 #
2016/0074(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex V – Part E – paragraph 1 a (new)
Annex V – Part E – paragraph 1 a (new)
2. Electrical pulse fishing shall be allowed only when: - no more than 5% of the beam trawler fleet per Member State use the electric pulse trawl; - the maximum electrical power in kW for each beam trawl is no more than the length in metres of the beam multiplied by 1,25; - the effective voltage between the electrodes is no more than 15 V; - the vessel is equipped with an automatic computer management system which records the maximum power used per beam and the effective voltage between electrodes for at least the last 100 tows, and it is not possible for non-authorised personnel to modify this automatic computer management system; - it is prohibited to use one or more tickler chains in front of the footrope.
Amendment 618 #
2016/0074(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex VI – Part A – table – row 26
Annex VI – Part A – table – row 26
Amendment 619 #
2016/0074(COD)
At least 1200mm Whole area None
Amendment 621 #
2016/0074(COD)
At least 100mm ICES sub-areas VIIb, c, None1a f-k A square mesh panel of 120mm shall be fitted. __________________ 1a The total catch may contain up to 50% cod and haddock.
Amendment 622 #
2016/0074(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex VI – Part B – paragraph 1 – table – row 3
Annex VI – Part B – paragraph 1 – table – row 3
At least 1080mm Whole area Directed fishing for hake or whiting ICES Division VII Directed fishing for hake, megrim and anglerfish (together making up 50% of catches) or whiting (50% of catches). A square mesh panel of 80mm shall be fitted. Directed fishing for flatfish (30% of catches) using otter trawls1a or species not subject to catch limits (50% of catches). A square mesh panel of 100mm shall be fittedat least 80mm shall be fitted. __________________ 1a The total catch may contain up to 10% cod and haddock.
Amendment 623 #
2016/0074(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex VI – Part B – paragraph 1 – table – row 4
Annex VI – Part B – paragraph 1 – table – row 4
At least 80mm Whole area Directed fishing for Nephrops norvegicus or species not covered by(30% of catches) 1a. A catch limits. A square square mesh panel of at least least 120mm or sorting grid grid with a maximum bar spacing of 35mm or equivalent selectivity device shall be fitted. _________________ 1a The total catch may contain up to 10% cod and haddock.
Amendment 624 #
2016/0074(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex VI – Part B – paragraph 1 – table – row 6
Annex VI – Part B – paragraph 1 – table – row 6
At least 16mm Whole area Directed fishing for small pelagic species (80% of catches).
Amendment 627 #
2016/0074(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex VI – Part C – paragraph 9 – title
Annex VI – Part C – paragraph 9 – title
9. Use of static nets in ICES divisions Vb, VIa, VIb, VII b, c, h, j, k
Amendment 628 #
2016/0074(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex VI – Part C – paragraph 9 – point 9.1 – introductory part
Annex VI – Part C – paragraph 9 – point 9.1 – introductory part
9.1. IBy derogation from Article 10(5) of this Regulation, it shall be permitted to use the following gears in waters with a charted depth of less than 6800 metres:
Amendment 631 #
2016/0074(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex VI – Part C – point 9.1 – indent 1
Annex VI – Part C – point 9.1 – indent 1
- Bottom set gillnets used for directed fishing for hake (85%) with a mesh size of at least 1200mm and no more than 100 meshes deep, where the total length of all nets deployed does not exceed 25km per vessel and the maximum soak time is 24 hours.
Amendment 632 #
2016/0074(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex VI – Part C – paragraph 9 – point 9.2
Annex VI – Part C – paragraph 9 – point 9.2
9.2. Directed fishing for deepwater sharks as listed in Annex I of Regulation (ECU) No 2347/2002016/2336 in charted depths of less than 600 metres shall be prohibited. When accidentally caught deepwater sharks shall be retained on board. Such catches shall be landed and counted against quotasclassified as prohibited in this Regulation and other Union legislation shall be recorded, unharmed to the extent possible, and shall be promptly released. Deep water shark subject to catch limits shall be retained on board. Such catches shall be landed and counted against quotas. In situations where quota is not or not sufficiently available for the Member State concerned, the Commission may resort to the provisions laid down in Article 105(5) of Council Regulation (EC) N°1224/2009. Where accidental catches of deepwater sharks by the vessels of any Member State exceed 10 tonnes then vessels may no longer avail of the derogations as described in point 9.1.
Amendment 647 #
2016/0074(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex VII – Part A – table – row 26
Annex VII – Part A – table – row 26
Amendment 652 #
2016/0074(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex VII – Part B – paragraph 1 – table – row 2 a (new)
Annex VII – Part B – paragraph 1 – table – row 2 a (new)
At least 70mm1a Whole area None __________________ 1a. A mesh size of 100mm shall be used in directed fishing for hake (40% of catches) in ICES divisions VIII a, b, d and e.
Amendment 658 #
2016/0074(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex VII – Part C – paragraph 4 – point 4.1 – introductory part
Annex VII – Part C – paragraph 4 – point 4.1 – introductory part
4.1 IBy derogation from Article 10(5) of this Regulation, it shall be permitted to use the following gears in waters with a charted depth of less than 6800 metres:
Amendment 223 #
2015/2285(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Stresses the importance for certain Member States of reforming and simplifying their regulatory framework with regard to labour in order to remove some of the obstacles to investment and entrepreneurship; reiterates the urgency of implementing structural reforms that create a company-friendly environment;
Amendment 265 #
2015/2285(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. Stresses the urgent need to establish in each Member State a pension system that fully reflects the reality of population ageing;
Amendment 271 #
2015/2285(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Takes note of the proposal for a Structural Reform Support Programme, to be discussed under the ordinary legislative procedure; reiterates, however, that it falls to the Member States to ensure that structural reforms are implemented by their public administrations;
Amendment 299 #
2015/2285(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Insists on implementation of the Stability and Growth Pact, while making use of available fiscal space, inter alia, to deal with security threats and refugee inflows; reiterates that the Stability and Growth Pact allows for flexibility in the face of unexpected adverse economic events with major unfavourable consequences for government finances; emphasises that this flexibility should not undermine the objective of balancing public finances;
Amendment 312 #
2015/2285(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Emphasises the need for improved tax collection, fighting tax evasion and avoidance and improved tax policy coordination; emphasises the need to speed up the process of fiscal convergence in the European Union;
Amendment 1 #
2015/2183(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Acknowledges the quality and importance of the tasks carried out by the Agency and welcomes its consistency and the very good results achieved since it was set up;
Amendment 2 #
2015/2183(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Acknowledges the important contribution to implementation of the new elementobjectives of the reformed Common Fisheries Policy made by the Agency; welcomes the Agency's close engagement with the Member States to preparorganise the monitoring of the landing obligation by improving the control and surveillance of fisheries activities, brokering cooperation, promoting interoperability and building common capacities;
Amendment 5 #
2015/2183(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Points out that the policy objectives of the reformed CFP mean that control and coordination of these objectives play a crucial role and that it is therefore necessary to enhance the financial and human resources available to the Agency;
Amendment 6 #
2015/2183(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6b. Recalls the importance of strengthening the Agency's mandate so as to put in place joint operational activities with other European agencies in the maritime sector in order to prevent disasters at sea and to coordinate the functions of European coastguards;
Amendment 2 #
2015/2154(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Expresses its deep regret that the vast majority of Member States failed to transmit before the end of 2014transmitted their operational programme related to the EMFF (which can not be dissociated from its delayed approval)very late, which has caused huge delays in the mobilisation of funds; recalls that Member States are mainly responsible tofor implementing credits in share management;
Amendment 4 #
2015/2154(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. CLaments the financial cost generated by the under-utilisation of the tonnage quotas adopted in recent protocols; proposes that payments for access rights be linked more closely with actual catches; calls on the Commission, for that reason, to ensure that sectoral support disbursements are consistent with other budget support payments and calls for an improvement of the results achieved by the partner countries in the implementation of the matrix of commonly agreed actions;
Amendment 6 #
2015/2154(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Expresses concern that fisheries’ activities could be interrupted between two protocols; calls on the Commission to guarantee the legal and economic security of operators by assuring the continuity of fishing operations between two protocols;
Amendment 10 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Sees the digitisation of the economy as an ineluctable and beneficial development – spurring progress, growth and innovation among European companies, not least SMES – and believes it should be supported;
Amendment 67 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Believes that the existing tax framework cannot continue to be applied given the specificities of the digital economy, and therefore calls on the Member States to come up with a new taxation policy suitable for the digital economy; emphasises that, with a view to ensuring fair competition and boosting EU citizens’ confidence in the fairness of tax systems, a European strategy for adapting existing tax arrangements to make them applicable to digital companies is urgently needed;
Amendment 78 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Supports the Commission’s decision to review internet platforms; and encourages ithe Commission to create a suitable legislative and tax framework ensuring the development of innovative ideas, protection of work standards and compliance with exfor these new business models, setting out in particular a new concept of territoriality in order to prevent unfair competition and tax optimisationg fiscal rules;
Amendment 92 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Urges the Commission to foster the exchange of good practices via the European Competition Network with a view to addressing concerns raised in respect of alliances between distributors, many cases of which are already being investigated by the relevant authorities in the Member States; calls for these discussions to consider interactions between the national and European levels;
Amendment 230 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Stresses that State aid proceedings alone cannot put a permanent stop to the unfair tax competition in a number of Member States of the European Union; further tangible results are required, such as a consolidated basis of calculation for capital gains, a review of the VAT Directive in order to prevent fraud, the obligation on large international companies to report their turnover and profits on a ‘country by country’ basis and calling on Member States to introduce greater transparency in their tax practices and mutual reporting requirements; emphasises that tax harmonisation will ultimately be necessary;
Amendment 254 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22a. stresses that for the internal market to function correctly, social dumping must be eliminated; emphasises that establishing a minimum wage in every Member State would be a first step towards achieving this goal;
Amendment 5 #
2015/2132(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Amendment 6 #
2015/2132(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Deplores the fact that, in Title 11 of Section III, the Council has reduced commitment appropriations by EUR 750 388 and payment appropriations by EUR 4 646 986;
Amendment 7 #
2015/2132(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Expresses its concern about the Council’s reading of the budget for 2016, which fails to take into account the political commitments in the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) and reduces certain appropriations which are vital to the implementation of the CFP; calls, accordingly, for the appropriations for Title 11 of Section III of the Commission’s Draft Budget to be reinstated;
Amendment 1 #
2015/2119(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the overall aim of the Protocol is to increase fisheries cooperation between the EU and Guinea-Bissau in the interest of both parties by establishing a partnership framework within which to pursue a sustainable fisheries policy andwhile exploiting fishery resources in a sustainable way in the Guinea-Bissau exclusive economic zone, inand to obtain an appropriate share, corresponding to the interests of both partiesthe EU fleets, of the fishing surpluses available;
Amendment 3 #
2015/2119(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas the European Union shall do all in its power to ensure that sustainable fisheries agreements concluded with third countries are in the mutual interests of both the EU and the third countries concerned, including their local population and their fishing industry;
Amendment 15 #
2015/2119(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Stresses that this agreement contains a non-discrimination clause; is pleased to see that, in the context of the negotiations, Guinea Bissau has made public the fisheries agreements it has concluded with third countries and that they may be consulted; calls on the Commission to follow closely developments in these agreements and in fishing activities in Guinean waters;
Amendment 5 #
2015/2109(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 9
Citation 9
– having regard to the UN Millennium Development Goals Report 2015,2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, and the Sustainable Development Goal to Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development;
Amendment 9 #
2015/2109(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the sea covers 71 % of the Earth’s surface and contains 97 % of the planet’s water; whereas the sea is home to a significant part of the world’s biodiversity which still remains unexplored;
Amendment 10 #
2015/2109(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas an estimated 64 % of the sea, notably thenot all high seas and the deep seabed, are areas beyond the national jurisdiction of states and are governed by international law;
Amendment 13 #
2015/2109(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the preservation of marine biological diversity should be considered as being part of the common natural heritage of mankind, and its preservation and conservation a common concern of all humankind and should be treated as such;a common objective of all humankind in order to guarantee the marine environmental balance and avoid new risks for food security
Amendment 21 #
2015/2109(INI)
Amendment 33 #
2015/2109(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
K. whereas fishing, alone and in conjunction with other marine activities, has a greatan impact on marine biological diversity, and thus should be covered by all conservation and management measuresis adequately covered by RFMOs and existing legislation;
Amendment 47 #
2015/2109(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital M
Recital M
M. whereas the UNFSA is a comprehensive and forward-thinking documentrelevant treaty that shouldall not be changed or undermined;
Amendment 59 #
2015/2109(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital Q
Recital Q
Q. whereas we recognise and support the rights and special requirements of developing states in the context of capacity-building in order for them to be able to benefit from the conservation and sustainable use of theirfish resources and of straddling fish stocks and highly migratory fish stocks;
Amendment 61 #
2015/2109(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital R
Recital R
R. whereas the course of actions of the so- called ‘Kobe Process’ recognises the efforts already made by those RFMOs thatRFMOs have undertaken independent performance reviews and calls on all RFMOs to regularly undertake such reviews and make the results publicly available;
Amendment 67 #
2015/2109(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital T
Recital T
Amendment 73 #
2015/2109(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the decision taken by the UNGA to start working towards a new international instrument under the UNCLOS framework regarding marine biological diversity in ABNJ in order to address the current shortcomingand stresses that this process shall not undermine existing relevant instruments and frameworks as well as relevant global, regional and sectorial bodies;
Amendment 79 #
2015/2109(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses the importance of the conservation and sustainable use of the oceans and seas and of their resources; calls on the EU and the international community to promote conservation and sustainable use of marine resourcesbiodiversity by implementing, among other measures, modern concepts of marine ecosystem management, including, with respect to fisheries management, includorporating science-based marine governance, maintaining stocks to levels capable ofrestoring and maintaining populations of harvested species above levels which can producinge the maximum sustainable yield, ecosystem-based management and conservation of marine biodiversity, enforcement of existing legislation, and the precautionary approach;
Amendment 92 #
2015/2109(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Encourages the Commission to further promote fisheries aspects in this new international agreementStresses that fisheries aspects are adequately covered by RFMOs and existing legislation; encourages the Commission to pay close attention to how fisheries aspects are addressed in this new agreement and to further promote the enforcement of existing legislation;
Amendment 100 #
2015/2109(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Urges the Commission to support and promote the establishment ofStresses that connected, coherent and representative networks of MPAs as networks are essentialgood tools for ensuring ecological and biological connectivity;
Amendment 107 #
2015/2109(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
Amendment 115 #
2015/2109(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Stresses the importance that new activities for the exploitation of marine resources other than fisheries be anticipated in the required environmental impact assessments with a solid scientific basis and that these activities are accompanied by detailed environmental, social and economical monitoring.
Amendment 118 #
2015/2109(INI)
11a. Urges the Commission to call upon States that have not done so to ratify or accede to the UNCLOS.
Amendment 21 #
2015/2093(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas implementation of Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 and the corresponding sanctions are the responsibility of the Member States;
Amendment 29 #
2015/2093(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
Ea. whereas the landing obligation is a key issue as regards control, to which the legislator and the authorities responsible for control need to pay particular attention;
Amendment 55 #
2015/2093(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Notes that Member States transpose the regulations into national law differently because of the large number of optional provisions in Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009; stresses the non- enforceability ofdifficulties in enforcing some of its provisions in practice, either owing to the poor adaptability of the regulations to reality or because of contradictions such as Article 17 of this Regulation which is openwhich may lead to several different interpretations by inspectors;
Amendment 60 #
2015/2093(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Notes that the level of infractionsanctions applied differs from one Member State to another, and that for the same infraction the sanction may be either an administrative or penal one; contends that the points-based system could beis relevant as a European instrument which would serve to imposeable to provide a framework for sanctions for serious infractions, but that without uniformity would aggravate an alreadyof sanctions it simply upholds an inequitable situation;
Amendment 62 #
2015/2093(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Recalls that the EFCA ensures the application of common control, inspection and surveillance standards and facilitates operational cooperation between Member States through joint deployment plans; reiterates the importance of strengthening the EFCA’s mandate in order to set up joint fisheries control operations enabling efficient coordinated action by many local, regional and national authorities, and EU agencies performing coast guard duties at EU level;
Amendment 77 #
2015/2093(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Is in favour of the simplification of Union legislation with a view to achieving ‘better lawmaking’, in particular through the revision of Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009, scheduled for 2017; Considers that a substantial revision of Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 would not be desirable as this Regulation constitutes a sound European framework; considers nonetheless that simplification and targeted amendments would be welcome in order to render controls more uniform and establish a balance between flexibility and fairness;
Amendment 84 #
2015/2093(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Considers that a sound and harmonised control system is needed for the regionalisation envisaged in the new CFP; is firmly opposed to the ‘Control’ Regulation being weakened or regionalised in any way and believes that the existing framework already provides sufficient flexibility, which it is the responsibility of Member States to use;
Amendment 87 #
2015/2093(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 b (new)
Paragraph 12 b (new)
12b. States that while further harmonisation of controls may be achieved with difficulty through EU legislation, closer cooperation between Member States would be a better way; stresses the importance in this regard of the Expert group on compliance with the obligations under the Union fisheries control system;
Amendment 101 #
2015/2093(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Recalls that Member States are responsible for implementing the Control Regulation; calls on Member States to comply with their obligations and cooperate closely with each other in order to exchange good practices and data and make interoperability of control systems possible;
Amendment 107 #
2015/2093(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Calls for the implementation by the EFCA of a European training course for inspectors, funding for which could come from the EMFF;
Amendment 130 #
2015/2093(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19a. Asks the Commission to determine whether linking penalty points to fishing licences is pertinent; stresses that under this system points are transferred with the licence when the vessel is sold, which can reduce the value of vessels in some cases and may thus prevent their resale, for example to young fishermen wishing to start up in the business;
Amendment 142 #
2015/2093(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21a. Recalls that it is Member States that have responsibility for sanctions and that the European Union is not legally able to impose standardisation thereof via Regulation 1224/2009; points however to the importance of the points system in providing a framework for sanctions and calls on Member States to take the initiative for an extensive standardisation of sanctions, in particular penal ones, in order to put an end to inequities existing at present;
Amendment 155 #
2015/2093(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22a. States its opposition to any mandatory video surveillance system on board;
Amendment 167 #
2015/2093(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)
Paragraph 25 a (new)
25a. Stresses that implementation of the landing obligation has to be accompanied by appropriate flexibility concerning its control, as the basic changes imposed on fisheries by this obligation should be taken into account, particularly as regards multi-specific fisheries; reiterates the importance of applying progressively sanctions and the points system in the event of serious infringements linked to non-compliance with the landing obligation, in accordance with Regulation 2015/812 on implementation of the landing obligation;
Amendment 17 #
2015/2092(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas technical measures that have piled up over the years are currently so complex, diverse and disorganised, as to be frequently inconsistent or even contradictory, not to mention being difficult for those in the fisheries sector to comprehend;
Amendment 26 #
2015/2092(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas the complexity of the technical measures and the difficulties arisingin implementing them, coupled with the absence of any tangible results or incentives under the CFP have contributed to making fishermen mistrustful;
Amendment 40 #
2015/2092(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas the discard ban involves a radical change of approach to fisheries management, and hence to technical measures in key areas such as catch composition and netting;
Amendment 51 #
2015/2092(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
K. whereas codecision is not always necessary for measures taken at regional level or subject to frequent changes, but must be used for the adoption of rules that are common to all sea basins or not likely to be amended in the foreseeable future;
Amendment 67 #
2015/2092(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital O
Recital O
O. whereas the adoption of technical measures on a regional basis should follow the model agreed by the co-legislators under the new common fisheries policy, namely for adoption by the Commission of delegated acts on the basis of joint recommendations from the Member States concerned; whereas the EP nevertheless retains the right to object to any delegated act, in accordance with the Treaty;
Amendment 86 #
2015/2092(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital Q
Recital Q
Q. whereas technical measures applicable in the Mediterranean are not always adapted to the needs of the different local fisheries, and implementing them is made difficult by the great number of derogations that exist;
Amendment 107 #
2015/2092(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital U
Recital U
U. whereas difficulties in implementing the discard ban in mixed fisheries are likely towill inevitably arise with 'choke' species; whereas the multiannual plans should therefore seek to promote instruments, such as fishing effort regulation, that are unconstrained by the rigidities of the TAC and quota system, thereby helping to ensure maximum sustainable yield and improve the economic performance of fleets at a given fishing mortality rate;
Amendment 125 #
2015/2092(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital AD
Recital AD
AD. whereas progress has been made with the multi-annual plan for the Baltic, the Council having agreed to work jointly with the EP, on the basis of Article 43(2) TFEU, on the adoption of fishing mortality targets;
Amendment 146 #
2015/2092(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Considers that, in order to make CFP rules more acceptable to the fisheries sector and ensure compliance therewith, fishermen must be more involved in decision making, especially within the context of advisory councils, given incentives such as more aid for innovation and encouraged to use more selective fishing gear;
Amendment 166 #
2015/2092(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Believes codecision sometimes to be unnecessary for measures adopted at regional level or possibly subject to frequent changes, and that reasonable recourse to delegated acts makes it possible to meet this need of flexibility and responsiveness; recalls however that the EP retains the right to object to any delegated act, in accordance with the Treaty;
Amendment 168 #
2015/2092(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Recommends that a clear, general European framework for the technical measures should be defined, setting out a limited number of major cross-cutting principles; believes that all rules not applicable to the vast majority of European waters should not be included in this general framework but instead come under regionalisation;
Amendment 172 #
2015/2092(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Considers that rules regarding technical measures should be structured on three co- decisional axes and a fourth regionalisation axis. The first three would comprise a set of common centralised rules and definitions (including a list of prohibited gear and species), a set of specific rules for the larger sea basins and a number of specific technical regulations, all off which would be adopted by co- decision; Notes that regionalisation would apply to rules applicable at regional level or subject to frequent changes
Amendment 178 #
2015/2092(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Underlines the need for the new framework of technical measures to read clearly, which will require a significant clarification effort; consequently requests that the existing technical measures, in particular Regulations 850/98 and 1967/2006, be revoked beforehand in order to bring an end to the piling-up of regulations;
Amendment 205 #
2015/2092(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Believes that the landing obligation constitutes a fundamental change for fisheries, and that the technical measures therefore need to be adapted so as to allow them to implement and facilitate more selective fishing; recommends the following three measures in order to achieve this: - substantially modifying, or even revoking, the rules governing the composition of catches, - affording greater flexibility as regards netting, - making it possible to hold several types of gear on board;
Amendment 206 #
2015/2092(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 b (new)
Paragraph 10 b (new)
10b. Takes note of the difficulties arising from the coexistence of the marketing standards laid down by Regulation 2406/96 and the minimum catch sizes; requests that they be harmonised by the new framework of technical measures;
Amendment 207 #
2015/2092(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 c (new)
Paragraph 10 c (new)
10c. Questions the importance of a management approach based solely on the minimum catch sizes in certain fisheries, especially in the Mediterranean; believes that it would be appropriate to supplement this approach with time-area measures relating to fishing effort;
Amendment 220 #
2015/2092(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Believes that multi-annual plans are being called on to play an increasingly significant vital role in the conservation of fisheries resources under the CFP, being the most suitable vehicle for the adoption and implementation of specific technical measures at regional levelthe level of the different fisheries;
Amendment 242 #
2015/2092(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Believes that the European Parliament should give particularly close scrutiny to delegated acts regarding discard plans and reserve the right to object to any if it deems it necessary;
Amendment 115 #
2015/2091(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Is concerned about the potential interruption of fishing activities between two protocols when negotiations on a new protocol become protracted; calls on the Commission to guarantee the legal and economic security of operators by assuring the continuity of fishing operations between two protocols;
Amendment 136 #
2015/2091(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Laments the financial cost caused by under-utilisation of the tonnage quotas adopted in certain recent protocols, and therefore invites the Commission to link the access rights figures more closely to actual catches;
Amendment 145 #
2015/2091(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Calls for detailed informationon the Commission to improve transparency on the catches and activities of vessels allowed to fish in Mauritanian waters and the associated conditions of access to be publicly available;, and also strongly encourages the Commission to ensure that similar provisioconsiderably to improve trans pare included in other future protocols, leading to much-improved transparencyncy for other protocols regarding total fishing effort and conditions of access;
Amendment 156 #
2015/2091(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Believes that the Commission should set up a database covering all private agreements between EU ship-owners and third countries that involve access to third- country fisheries, including conditions for access, allowable fleet capacity, the identity of the vessels and the resulting fishing activities, and that this database should be in the public domain;
Amendment 170 #
2015/2091(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Welcomes the recent publication of the names of EU-flagged vessels granted authorisation to fish outside EU waters, and insists that the Commission publish such information as a matter of course, including data on their activities and catches;
Amendment 176 #
2015/2091(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Notes that the basic regulation includes a provision requiring vessels that leave and subsequently return to the EU register to provide information on their activities before their return; considers that this requirement should be strengthenrigorously observed, sucho that a vessel’s complete flagging history must be submitted to the Commission and included in the Community Fleet Register database prior to thethe Commission can ensure that such vessels have conducted their activities in full compliance with the standards applicable to vessel’s acceptance in the registerflying an EU flag;
Amendment 194 #
2015/2091(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Takes the view, in particular, that the provisions of bilateral and multilateral trade agreements should include an explicit reference to the IUU Regulation; warnadvises the Commission against proposing any type of improvedto propose a suspension of trade relations towith a third country that has been identified under Article 31 of the IUU Regulation;
Amendment 16 #
2015/2090(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
D a. whereas Regulation (EU) No 508/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 May 2014 on the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund defines small-scale coastal fishing as fishing carried out by vessels of less than 12 metres and not using towed fishing gear, and whereas this is the only definition of coastal fishing in European legislation;
Amendment 18 #
2015/2090(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D b (new)
Recital D b (new)
D b. whereas operations financed by the EMFF may benefit from an increase by 30 points in aid intensity where they concern small-scale coastal fisheries;
Amendment 19 #
2015/2090(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D c (new)
Recital D c (new)
D c. whereas Regulation (EU) No 508/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 May 2014 on the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund states that in Member States where over 1 000 vessels can be considered small-scale coastal fishing vessels, an action plan must be drawn up for the development, competitiveness and sustainability of small-scale coastal fishing;
Amendment 57 #
2015/2090(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital M a (new)
Recital M a (new)
Ma. whereas logbooks often represent an administrative burden for small coastal fishing businesses and greater flexibility would be desirable;
Amendment 84 #
2015/2090(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Calls on the Commission to propose a suitabladapt the definition of coastal, small-scale coastal and traditional fishing that will be based more onin line with the socio-economic characteristics and specificities of a specific region than onthe different regions, rather than solely according to the dimensions and power of fishing vessels;
Amendment 90 #
2015/2090(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Proposes to make use of regionalisation in order to adapt the definition of coastal fishing on a case-by-case basis in line with the specificities of each fishery, against a number of indicative criteria such as the size of the vessels, the gears used, the lengths of the fishing trips and whether the fisherman in charge is on board;
Amendment 98 #
2015/2090(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Considers that the revision of the framework of technical measures must take into account the specificities of coastal fishing and allow for certain derogations, provided these are justified, in the context of regionalisation;
Amendment 101 #
2015/2090(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2 b. Calls on the Member States to give priority to small-scale coastal fishing when granting EMFF funding and to streamline procedures for operators of those types of fisheries;
Amendment 104 #
2015/2090(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 c (new)
Paragraph 2 c (new)
2 c. Calls on the Commission to be accountable to the Parliament in respect of the action plans for the development, competitiveness and sustainability of small-scale coastal fishing drawn up by the Member States for the purposes of the EMFF;
Amendment 149 #
2015/2090(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9 a. Calls for greater flexibility with regard to logbooks for vessels of less than 12 metres, in particular in terms of the requirement that documents must be sent within 48 hours, as this represents a considerable administrative burden; proposes in this context to allow vessels that sell all of their fish at auction to be exempted from this obligation, which would enable the required information to be obtained without imposing an unnecessary administrative burden;
Amendment 154 #
2015/2090(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 b (new)
Paragraph 9 b (new)
9 b. Stresses that the outermost regions have specific characteristics as a result of their remoteness and insular nature; emphasises that these specific characteristics incur additional costs for coastal fishing in these regions and that these additional costs should be compensated in full as part of the EMFF;
Amendment 155 #
2015/2090(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 c (new)
Paragraph 9 c (new)
9 c. Stresses that coastal fishing fleets in the outermost regions often consist of ageing vessels, which causes issues in terms of onboard safety; calls on the Commission to propose a revision of Regulation (EU) No 508/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 May 2014 on the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund with a view to authorising aid for the renewal of small-scale coastal fishing vessels in the outermost regions, providing this does not increase capacity;
Amendment 210 #
2015/0310(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27 a (new)
Recital 27 a (new)
(27a) Cooperation on coast guard functions, notably by means of enhanced collaboration between national authorities and the three EU agencies (the European Border and Coast Guard Agency, the European Fisheries Control Agency and the European Maritime Safety Agency), should in no way affect the division of powers between these agencies as regards the definition of their missions and should not impinge on their autonomy and independence in respect of their initial assignments. This cooperation also enables the creation of synergies between them, without changing their mission statements.
Amendment 262 #
2015/0310(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 14 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 14 a (new)
(14a) ‘Coast guard functions’: all fact- finding, monitoring, planning and organisation missions and operations entrusted to a local, regional, national or European authority with the necessary powers to perform maritime surveillance; these missions entail, in particular, safety, security, search and rescue, border control, fisheries control, customs control, general law enforcement and environmental protection.
Amendment 946 #
2015/0310(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 52 a (new)
Article 52 a (new)
Article 52a Assessment of European cooperation on coast guard functions 1. The Commission shall submit a report evaluating the implementation of European cooperation on coast guard functions to the European Parliament and the Council by 31 December 2021 at the latest. The report shall analyse and set out, in particular: (a) the arrangements for cooperation between the European Border and Coast Guard Agency, the European Fisheries Control Agency and the European Maritime Safety Agency, and for cooperation with Member States; (b) the missions performed under this cooperation and their quantified results, particularly as regards fisheries control; (c) the benefits of cooperation in terms of improved understanding of the maritime situation as well as operational activities and rapid response to crises at sea; (d) the financial resources used in the context of this cooperation. 2. The European Border and Coast Guard Agency, the European Fisheries Control Agency, the European Maritime Safety Agency and the Member States shall provide the Commission with the information necessary to carry out the assessment referred to in paragraph 1.
Amendment 65 #
2015/0289(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12 a (new)
Recital 12 a (new)
(12a) The Commission should play a mediating role when the possibility of withdrawing, suspending or modifying a fishing authorisation is raised on account of evidence of serious threats to the exploitation of the resource.
Amendment 71 #
2015/0289(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) A specific issue pertaining to sustainable fisheries partnership agreements is the reallocation of under- utilised fishing opportunities that occur when fishing opportunities allocated to Member States by the relevant Council Regulations are not fully used. Since the access costs set out in the sustainable fisheries partnership agreements are financed for a large part by the Union budget, a temporary reallocation system is important to preserve Union financial interests and ensure that no fishing opportunity which has been paid for is wasted. It is therefore necessary to clarify and improve the reallocation system, which should be a last resort mechanism. Its application should be temporary and it should not affect the initial allocation of fishing opportunities among Member States. R, which means that it will not damage relative stability. As a system of last resort, reallocation should only occur once the relevant Member States have given up on their rights to exchange fishing opportunities among themselves.
Amendment 81 #
2015/0289(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) ‘fishing authorisation’ means an authorisation issued in respect of a Union fishing vessel or third country fishing vessel, entitling it to carry out specific fishing activities during a specified period, in a given area or for a given fishery under specific conditions;
Amendment 99 #
2015/0289(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) the operator and the fishing vessel haves not been subject to a sanction for a serious infringement according to the national law of the Member State pursuant to Article 42 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1005/2008 and Article 90 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 during the 126 months prior to the application for the fishing authorisation;
Amendment 109 #
2015/0289(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. A flag Member State may only issue a fishing authorisation if it is satisfihas checked that, during the period that the vessel referred to in paragraph 1 operated under a third country flag:
Amendment 119 #
2015/0289(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3
Article 7 – paragraph 3
3. A flag Member State shall monitor at least once a year whether the conditions on the basis of which a fishing authorisation has been issued continue to be met during the period of validity of that authorisation.
Amendment 120 #
2015/0289(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4
Article 7 – paragraph 4
4. If a condition on the basis of which a fishing authorisation has been issued is no longer met, a flag Member State shall amend or withdraw the authorisation and immediately notify the operator, the secretariat of the RFMO or the third country and the Commission accordingly.
Amendment 122 #
2015/0289(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 5
Article 7 – paragraph 5
5. Upon a request from the Commission, aThe Commission may request that the flag Member State shall refuse, suspend or withdraw the authorisation in cases of overriding policy reasons pertainingserious threats to the sustainable exploitation, management and conservation of marine biological resources or the prevention or suppression of illegal, unreported or unregulated fishing, or in cases where the Union has decided to suspend or sever relations with the third country concerned. The Commission shall immediately inform the operator and the flag Member State accordingly. The refusal, suspension or withdrawal by the flag Member State shall apply only once 20 days have elapsed since the notification of the Commission’s request to the flag Member State. During the 20-day period referred to in the first paragraph, the Commission shall communicate to the operator and the flag Member State the reasons for the request, whether they be concerned with sustainable resource management or with preventing IUU fishing. During the 20-day period referred to in the first paragraph, the Commission, the operator and the flag Member State shall consult at the initiative of the Commission to ensure that the decision to refuse, withdraw or suspend a fishing authorisation is justified. The Commission shall conduct the monitoring in consultation with the flag Member State and the authority empowered to issue the authorisation and shall keep them informed regularly of the results of monitoring.
Amendment 131 #
2015/0289(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 6
Article 7 – paragraph 6
6. If, after the 20-day period referred to in paragraph 5, the information available to the Commission leads it to conclude that serious threats as referred to in paragraph 5 exist and if the flag Member State fails to refuse, amend, suspend or withdraw the authorisation in accordance with paragraphs 4 and 5, the Commission may decide to withdraw the authorisation and notify the flag Member State and the operator accordingly.
Amendment 156 #
2015/0289(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 5
Article 12 – paragraph 5
5. If a third country informs the Commission that it has decided to issue, refuse, suspend or withdraw a fishing authorisation for a Union fishing vessel under the agreement, the Commission shall immediately inform the flag Member State accordingly, if possible by electronic means.
Amendment 157 #
2015/0289(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – title
Article 13 – title
Amendment 159 #
2015/0289(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. During the sixth month of a specific year or halfwany other relevantrough the period of the implementation of a protocol to a sustainable fisheries partnership agreement, the Commission may identify unused fishing opportunities and inform the Member States benefiting from the corresponding shares of the allocation accordingly.
Amendment 160 #
2015/0289(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Within 120 days of receipt of this information from the Commission, the Member States referred to in paragraph 1 may:
Amendment 161 #
2015/0289(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) inform the Commission that they will use their fishing opportunities later in the year or the relevantin the last six months of the year or the second half of the period of implementation by providing a fishing plan with detailed information on the number of fishing authorisations requested, the estimated catches, zone and period of fishing; or
Amendment 162 #
2015/0289(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 3
Article 13 – paragraph 3
3. If certain Member States have not informed the Commission of one of the actions referred to in paragraph 2 and, if as a result fishing opportunities remain unused, the Commission may, during the seventh month of a specific period or during a period of ten days after the end of the first half of the period of implementation of a protocol to a sustainable fisheries partnership agreement, launch a call for interest for the available unused fishing opportunities among the other Member States benefiting from a share of the allocation.
Amendment 163 #
2015/0289(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 5
Article 13 – paragraph 5
5. If deemed necessary for the assessment of the request, the Commission may ask the Member States concerned for additional information about the number of fishing authorisations applied for, catch estimates, the zone and the fishing period.
Amendment 164 #
2015/0289(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 6
Article 13 – paragraph 6
6. In the absence of any interest in the unused fishing opportunities by the Member States benefiting from a share of the allocation at the end of the ten-day period, the Commission may launch a call for interest to all Member States. A Member State may communicate its interest in the unused fishing opportunities under the conditions referred to in paragraph 4.
Amendment 165 #
2015/0289(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 7
Article 13 – paragraph 7
7. On the basis of the information provided by Member States in accordance with paragraphs 4 or 5 and in close cooperation with the Member States concerned, the Commission shall reallocate the unused fishing opportunities on a temporary basis by applying the methodology set out in Article 14.
Amendment 167 #
2015/0289(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 7 a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. The reallocation shall be temporary, which means that it is to apply only during the stated period and that it can occur only once during that period.
Amendment 168 #
2015/0289(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 7 b (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 7 b (new)
7b. The Commission shall inform the Member State whose fishing opportunities have been temporarily reallocated: – to which Member States the reallocation has been made; – of the quantities allocated to the Member States to which the reallocation has been made; and – of the allocation criteria used for the reallocation.
Amendment 193 #
2015/0289(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point c – indent 2 – indent 1
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point c – indent 2 – indent 1
– a scientific evaluation provided by the third country and/or by a regional fisheries management organisation; and/or a scientific institute recognised by the Commission or by a Member State
Amendment 199 #
2015/0289(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point c – indent 2 – indent 2
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point c – indent 2 – indent 2
– an examination of the latter by the flag Member State oin the basis of the assessment ofcooperation with its national scientific institute;
Amendment 202 #
2015/0289(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point c – indent 3
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point c – indent 3
– a copy of the third country’s fisheries legislation or a reference to the legislation of the third country applicable;
Amendment 210 #
2015/0289(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 4
Article 19 – paragraph 4
4. If a third country informs the Commission that it has decided to issue, refuse, suspend or withdraw a direct authorisation to a Union fishing vessel, the Commission shall immediately inform the flag Member State accordingly, which shall inform the owner of the vessel.
Amendment 211 #
2015/0289(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 5
Article 19 – paragraph 5
5. If a third country informs the flag Member State that it has decided to issue, refuse, suspend or withdraw a direct authorisation to a Union fishing vessel, the flag Member State shall immediately inform the Commission and the owner of the vessel accordingly.
Amendment 212 #
2015/0289(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1
Article 20 – paragraph 1
This Chapter shall apply to fishing activities carried out by Union fishing vessels on stocks under the auspices of a regional fisheries management organisation, in Union waters, on the high seas and in third country waters.
Amendment 213 #
2015/0289(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 a (new)
Article 20 a (new)
Article 20a Application of the European Union’s international commitments in RFMOs In order to apply the union’s international commitments in RFMOs and in accordance with the objectives referred to in Article 28 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013, the Union shall encourage periodic assessments of performance by independent bodies, and shall play an active role in setting up and reinforcing implementation committees in all RFMOs to which it is a contracting party. It shall in particular ensure that these implementation committees perform general supervision of the implementation of the external fisheries policy and of the measures decided within the RFMO.
Amendment 228 #
2015/0289(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 3
Article 28 – paragraph 3
3. A vessel chartered Union vesselin one of the Member States of the Union may not use the fishing opportunities of its flag Member State. The catches of a chartered vessel shall be counted against the fishing opportunities of the chartering State.
Amendment 230 #
2015/0289(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 1
Article 30 – paragraph 1
If data are collected on board a Union fishing vessel under an observer programme in accordance with the legislation of the Union or of the RFMO, the operator of that vessel shall send these data to its flag Member State.
Amendment 231 #
2015/0289(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 3
Article 31 – paragraph 3
3. TAfter a reminder from the third country to the operator or the owner of the vessel, the non-transmission of catch declarations and landing declarations to the third country referred to in paragraph 1 shall be considered a serious infringement for the purposes of applying the sanctions and other me, attested by non-receipt by the flag Member State of a copy of that transmission, shall be considered a serious infringement asu res provided for by the common fisheries policyferred to in Article 90 of Regulation No 1224/2009. The gravity of the infringement shall be determined by the competent authority of the Member State, taking into account criteria such as the nature of the damage, its value, the economic situation of the offender and the extent of the infringement or its repetition.
Amendment 239 #
2015/0289(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 33 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the operator and the fishing vessel have not been subject to any sanction for a serious infringement according to the national law of the Member State pursuant to Article 42 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1005/2008 and Article 90 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 during the 126 months before the application for the fishing authorisation;
Amendment 244 #
2015/0289(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 2
Article 35 – paragraph 2
2. The Commission may refuse, suspend or withdraw the authorisation in cases where a fundamental change of circumstances has occurred or in cases where overriding policy reasonserious threats pertaining inter alia to international standards of human rights or serious threats relating to the fight against illegal, unreported or unregulated fishing warrant such action or in cases where, for such or any other reason of overriding policyreason the Union has decided to suspend or sever relations with the third country concerned.
Amendment 254 #
2015/0289(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 40 – paragraph 1 a (new)
To make a Union fishing authorisation register operational and to enable Member States to meet the technical transmission requirements, the Commission shall provide technical assistance to the Member States concerned. In order to do so, it shall help national authorities to forward the information that operators are required to supply for each type of authorisation and, within six months of the entry into force of this Regulation, develop an IT application for the Member States to enable them to transfer to the Union fishing authorisation register automatically and in real time data concerning applications for authorisations and the characteristics of vessels.
Amendment 255 #
2015/0289(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 40 – paragraph 1 b (new)
For the technical and financial support for the transfer of information, Member States may draw on financial aid from the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund pursuant to Article 76(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 508/2014.
Amendment 98 #
2015/0270(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Title 1
Title 1
REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL amending Regulation (EU) 806/2014 in order to establish a European Deposit IReinsurance Scheme
Amendment 317 #
2015/0270(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU) No 806/2014
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) credit institutions affiliated to participating deposit-guarantee schemes and subject to consolidated supervision under the Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR) (Regulation (EU) No. 575/2013).
Amendment 352 #
2015/0270(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Regulation (EU) No 806/2014
Article -41 a (new)
Article -41 a (new)
Article -41 a Entry into application of this Chapter 1. This Chapter shall apply from no earlier than the latest of the following dates: (a) the date of application, or, where relevant, the expiry of the transposition period of the international standard for Total Loss Absorbing Capacity (TLAC) and of revised rules in relation to a minimum requirement for own funds and eligible liabilities (MREL), for all credit institutions affiliated to the participating DGSs; (b) the date of application, or, where relevant, the expiry of the transposition period of an insolvency ranking for credit institutions, harmonised at Union level, in relation to subordinated debt; (c) the date of application, or, where relevant, the expiry of the transposition period of a framework for business insolvency, harmonised at Union level, in relation to the early restructuring of companies in order to prevent and better handle the pressing issue of non- performing loans; (d) the date of application, or, where relevant, the expiry of the transposition period of an act amending Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 and Directive 2013/36/EU, resulting in a binding leverage ratio requirement with additional requirements for G-SIBs. 2. Without prejudice to paragraph 1, the Commission is empowered to adopt a delegated act in accordance with Article 93 in order to supplement this Regulation by establishing the exact date of application of this Chapter. That empowerment shall be based on a verification, to be conducted in 2023, of compliance with the following conditions: (a) adherence by all credit institutions to the minimum capital requirements in the baseline scenario of an Asset Quality Review (AQR) for all credit institutions affiliated to the participating DGSs in 2023; (b) publication by the Commission, by 31 December 2023, of an impact assessment in relation to the entry into application of this Chapter; (c) proper consideration, as a minimum, of international standards on the prudential treatment of sovereign debt held by credit institutions by 31 December 2023. That delegated act shall set a date of application for this Chapter that shall, in any event, be no earlier than 1 January 2024 and, where that date is exceeded, no later than one year from the time all the conditions of this Article are met.
Amendment 408 #
2015/0270(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Regulation (EU) No 806/2014
Part IIa – title I – chapter 2
Part IIa – title I – chapter 2
Amendment 426 #
2015/0270(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Regulation (EU) No 806/2014
Part IIa – title I – chapter 3
Part IIa – title I – chapter 3
Amendment 482 #
2015/0270(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Regulation (EU) No 806/2014
Article 41j – paragraph 1
Article 41j – paragraph 1
1. A participating DGS shall only be reinsured, co-insured or fully insured by EDIS during the year following any of the dates set out below, if, by that date, by EDIS if by 2024 its available financial means raised by contributions referred to in Article 10(1) of Directive 2014/49/EU amount to at least the following percentarges of the total amount of covered deposits of all credit institutions affiliated to the participating DGS: – – – – – – – –t level as described in Article 74b (1). by 3 July 2017: 0.14%; by 3 July 2018: 0.21%; by 3 July 2019: 0.28%; by 3 July 2020: 0.28%; by 3 July 2021: 0.26%; by 3 July 2022: 0.20%; by 3 July 2023: 0.11%; by 3 July 2024: 0%.
Amendment 592 #
2015/0270(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 34
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 34
Regulation (EU) No 806/2014
Article 74 b – paragraph 1
Article 74 b – paragraph 1
1. 1. By the end of the reinsurance period3 July 2024 the available financial means of the DIF shall reach an initial target level of 205% of four ninth of the sum of thethe aggregated minimum target levels that participating DGSs shall reach in accordance with the first subparagraphArticle 10(2) of Directive 2014/49/EU, while the available financial means of participating DGS shall reach 75% of this aggregated minimum target level. By way of derogation from subparagraph 1, where a lower minimum target level has been authorised in application of Article 10(26) of Directive 2014/49/EU, the available financial means of the participating DGSs shall reach 60% of that lower target level.
Amendment 649 #
2015/0270(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 34
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 34
Regulation (EU) No 806/2014
Article 74 c – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 74 c – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 650 #
2015/0270(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 34
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 34
Regulation (EU) No 806/2014
Article 74 c – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 74 c – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 654 #
2015/0270(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 34
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 34
Regulation (EU) No 806/2014
Article 74 c – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
Article 74 c – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
Amendment 671 #
2015/0270(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 34
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 34
Regulation (EU) No 806/2014
Article 74 c – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1
Article 74 c – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1
The Commission ishall be empowered to adopt a delegated acts in accordance with Article 93 in order to specifyupplement this Regulation by specifying, in accordance with this paragraph, a risk-based method for the calculation of risk-based contributions in accordance with paragraph 2 of this Articleof participating DGSs to the DIF.
Amendment 676 #
2015/0270(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 34
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 34
Regulation (EU) No 806/2014
Article 74 c – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
Article 74 c – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
It shall adopt onethat delegated act specifying the method for the calculation of risk- based contributions payable toby participating DGSs and, for the reinsurance period only, to the DIF. In thisat delegated act the calculation of these contributions shall be based on the amount of covered deposits and the degree of risk incurred by each credit institutionparticipating DGS relative to all other credit institutions affiliated to the same participating DGSs.
Amendment 679 #
2015/0270(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 34
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 34
Regulation (EU) No 806/2014
Article 74 c – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Article 74 c – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
The risk-based contributions to be paid by participating DGSs to the DIF shall range between 75 % and 150 % aggregate risk weighting (ARW) of covered deposits.
Amendment 702 #
2015/0270(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 34
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 34
Regulation (EU) No 806/2014
Article 74 c – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 4 – point e
Article 74 c – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 4 – point e
(e) the management of credit institution’s business model and managementaffiliated to a participating DGS;
Amendment 191 #
2015/0268(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40
Recital 40
(40) Once a class of securities is admitted to trading on a regulated market, investors are provided with ongoing disclosures by the issuer under Regulation (EU) 596/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council12 and Directive 2004/109/EC. The need for a full prospectus is therefore less acute in case of subsequent offers to the public or admissions to trading by such an issuer. A distinct prospectus should therefore be available for use in case of secondary issuances and its content should be alleviated compared to the normal regime, taking into account the information already disclosed. Still, investors need to be provided with consolidated and well- structured information on such elements as the terms of the offer and its context, including the working capital statementa structured and synthetic presentation of recent ongoing information, the working capital statement, the statement of capitalisation and indebtedness, the use of proceeds, material risk factors specific to the issuer and the securities, board practices, directors’' remuneration, shareholding structure or relating-party transactions. As such information is not required to be disclosed on an ongoing basis under Regulation (EU) 596/2014 and Directive 2004/109/EC, it is appropriate that the prospectus drawn up in case of secondary issuance should at least include this information. __________________ 12 Regulation (EU) No 596/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014 on market abuse (market abuse regulation) and repealing Directive 2003/6/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Commission Directives 2003/124/EC, 2003/125/EC and 2004/72/EC, (OJ L 173, 12.6.2014, p. 1).
Amendment 220 #
2015/0268(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 56
Recital 56
(56) It is also necessary to harmonise advertisements in order to avoid undermining public confidence and prejudicing the proper functioning of financial markets. The fairness and accuracy of advertisements, as well as their consistency with the content of the prospectus are of utmost importance for the protection of investors, including retail investors, and. Without prejudice to the passport mechanism under this Regulation, the supervision of such advertisements is an integral part of the role of the competent authoritiesy of the host Member States, considering their linguistic competences and better knowledge of local corporate and consumer laws, investors' culture and level of financial education.
Amendment 268 #
2015/0268(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 3 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) an offer of securities addressed to fewer than 1500 natural or legal persons per Member State, other than qualified investors;
Amendment 317 #
2015/0268(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point m – point ii
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point m – point ii
(ii) for any issues of non-equity securities whose denomination per unit amounts to at least EUR 1 000, and for any issues of non- equity securities giving the right to acquire any transferable securities or to receive a cash amount, as a consequence of their being converted or the rights conferred by them being exercised, provided that the issuer of the non-equity securities is not the issuer of the underlying securities or an entity belonging to the group of the latter issuer, the Member State where the issuer has its registered office, or where the securities were or are to be admitted to trading on a regulated market or where the securities are offered to the public, at the choice of the issuer, the offeror or the person asking for admission. The same shall apply to non-equity securities in a currency other than euro, provided that the value of such minimum denomination is nearly equivalent to EUR 1 000;
Amendment 465 #
2015/0268(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2
Article 14 – paragraph 2
2. By derogation to aArticle 6(1), and without prejudice to Article 17(2), the prospectus drawn up under the minimum disclosure regime for secondary issuances shall contain the relevant information which is necessary to enable investors to understand the prospects of the issuer and of any guarantor, based on minimum financial information included or incorporated by reference into the prospectus covering the last financial year only, the rights attaching to the securities, the reasons for the issuance and its impact on the issuer, in particular the working capital statement and the disclosure of indebtedness and capitalisation. The information contained in the prospectus shall be presented in an easily analysable, succinct and comprehensible form and shall enable investors to make an informed investment decision. The ongoing information shall be presented in a structured and synthetic form.
Amendment 467 #
2015/0268(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 14 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
The Commission shall adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 42 to specify the reduced information to be included in the schedules applicable under the minimum disclosure regime, taking into account the information which is already disclosed to the public under Directive 2004/109/EC, where applicable, and Regulation (EU) No 596/2014, provided that ongoing information remains consolidated and well-structured for comprehensibility purposes.
Amendment 537 #
2015/0268(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1
Article 21 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1
5. The competent authority of the homest Member State shall have the power to exercise control over the compliance of advertising activity, relating to an offer to the public of securities or an admission to trading on a regulated market, with the principles referred to in paragraphs 2 to 4.
Amendment 543 #
2015/0268(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 21 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Where necessary, the home Member State shall assist the competent authority where the advertisements are disseminated with assessing the consistency of the advertisements with the information in the prospectus. Where necessary, the home Member State shall provide assistance to the competent authority of the host Member State in order to assess the consistency of the advertisements with the information provided in the prospectus.
Amendment 230 #
2015/0226(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – point b
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) regularly perform stress tests on the cash flows and collateral values supporting the underlying exposures that are commensurate with the nature, scale and complexity of the risk of the securitisation position; this requirement shall however not apply when investors are exposed to STS securitisations;
Amendment 276 #
2015/0226(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 a (new)
Article 4 a (new)
Amendment 312 #
2015/0226(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 1
1. Originators, sponsors and SSPE's shall use the designation "STS" or a designation that refers directly or indirectly to these terms for their securitisation only where the securitisation meets all the requirements of Section 1 or Section 2 of this Regulation, and they have notified ESMA pursuant to Article 14 (1), and the requirements aforementioned have been assessed by a third party authorised by ESMA. 2. ESMA shall develop draft regulatory technical standards specifying conditions that should be met by the third party to be authorised to assess criteria laid down in Articles 7 to 10 or Articles 11 to 13. ESMA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 6 months after the entry into force of this Regulation. Power is delegated to the Commission to adopt the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010.
Amendment 366 #
2015/0226(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 a (new)
Article 10 a (new)
Amendment 118 #
2015/0133(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) data requirements to achieve the objectives of Articles 6, 9 and 25 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013;
Amendment 124 #
2015/0133(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
(aa) the quantifiable targets required for the implementation of the multiannual plans referred to in Article 9 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013, such as such as fishing mortality rates and spawning stock biomass;
Amendment 132 #
2015/0133(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Amendment 60 #
2015/0096(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 7
Article 8 – paragraph 7
7. By way of derogation from paragraph 3 and 6, fFor the years 2015, 2016, and 2017, each Member State shall limit the numbers of its purse seiners not authorised to fish for Bluefin tuna under the derogation referred to in Article 13(2)b to the numbers of purse seiners it authorised in 2013 or 2014to the numbers of purse seiners it authorised in 2013 or 2014. This shall not apply to purse seiners operating under the derogation referred to in Article 13(2)(b).
Amendment 892 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39
Paragraph 39
Amendment 908 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39 a (new)
Paragraph 39 a (new)
39a. Calls, in the light of the decentralised European Union institutions and the need for citizens to see and feel close to the European Parliament, for the permanent recognition as part of treaty revisions of the fact that the European Parliament has officially and historically had its headquarters in Strasbourg;
Amendment 1 #
2014/2240(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 a (new)
Citation 1 a (new)
- having regard to Directive 2014/89/EU of 23 July 2014 establishing a framework for maritime spatial planning,
Amendment 23 #
2014/2240(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas there is a great deal of ignorance about the seas and oceans, their resources and biodiversity, and the ways in which these interact with human activities – whether taking place or still to be developed – and whereas inadequate knowledge on those points severely inhibits sustainable use of the resources concerned and poses an obstacle to innovation;
Amendment 33 #
2014/2240(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas investments in marine and maritime research and innovation will strengthen the position of the EU as a global leader in the field of maritime policy;
Amendment 35 #
2014/2240(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Stresses the importance of fishing and aquaculture to the blue economy; considers that the competitiveness of fishing activities should go hand-in-hand with a sustainable management fish stocks in the framework of Common Fisheries Policy rules;
Amendment 43 #
2014/2240(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls on the Commission to assess the financial requirements for blue growth, in particular in terms of data gathering, research and training; suggests that a plan for such financing be drawn up by 2020; insists in this regard on the contribution of the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF);
Amendment 44 #
2014/2240(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Deeply regrets the programming delays relating to the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF) in certain Member States;
Amendment 52 #
2014/2240(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Stresses the importance of maritime spatial planning to ensure the sustainable and coordinated development of the blue economy; and thus requests the strengthening of the governance of the Integrated Maritime Policy at both EU and maritime basin level;
Amendment 63 #
2014/2240(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Calls for the development of a unified European maritime industrial strategy which should bring together EU initiatives on all maritime-related sectors;
Amendment 64 #
2014/2240(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Defends that the value and services, including non-monetary services, associated to marine biodiversity and ecosystem functioning should be taken into real consideration on blue growth initiatives and investments.
Amendment 73 #
2014/2240(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Calls on the Commission to launch a comprehensive study on the importance and weight of the blue economy for the European Union;
Amendment 84 #
2014/2240(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls for clear-cut objectives and time- frames to be laid down with a view to making data – whether relating to the sea- floor or to the water column and living resources – more accessible and, more fully interoperable and harmonised for information about seas and oceans to be supplied to the public;
Amendment 94 #
2014/2240(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Calls for an EU initiative to encourage private companies of the maritime sector to share economically insensitive data for research purposes;
Amendment 100 #
2014/2240(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Urges the Commission to bring regular assessment to bear on the implementation of the Horizon 2020 programme in fields related to the blue economy and to publicise the findings; supports the establishment of a contractual Public Private Partnership for the maritime industry under the framework of Horizon 2020 and calls for it to be included in the work programme of Horizon 2020 for 2016/17.
Amendment 106 #
2014/2240(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Points out that the Member States and regional authorities have a key role to play in developing the blue economy and urges the Commission to support and encourage all forms of cooperation between Member States and regional authorities, for example joint programming initiatives;
Amendment 119 #
2014/2240(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Considers the shortage of qualified professionals in various fields of study and activity – including, though not confined to, researchers, engineers, and technicians, to be a huge hurdle that could prevent the blue economy from fully realising its potential; maintains that this shortcoming is closely bound up with the growing disengagement and disinvestment by Member States in the spheres of science and education and with the decline in ththerefore urges Member States and regional authorities to invest in an ambitious social dimension of blue pgrofessional status and social standwth and maritime literacy ing of several of the professions concerned, and therefore calls for thesrder to promote training and access for young people two trends to be reversed without delaymaritime professions;
Amendment 135 #
2014/2240(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Calls for an appropriate financial framework to be established in order to stimulate innovation, the development of the blue economy and job creation, combining and coordinating the financial instruments available – structural and investment funding (EMFF, ERDF, ESF, Cohesion Fund), the research framework programme, the possible creation of a future KIC focused on the blue economy and so forth; points out that the instruments should be better geared to the needs of individual stakeholders – public institutions, businesses, especially SMEs, non-governmental organisations, etc. – and the opportunities being offered widely publicised;
Amendment 136 #
2014/2240(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Calls for an appropriate financial framework to be established in order to stimulate the development of the blue economy and job creation, combining and, coordinating and facilitating the access to the financial instruments available – structural and investment funding (EMFF, ERDF, ESF, Cohesion Fund), the research framework programme, and so forth; points out that the instruments should be better geared to the needs of individual stakeholders – public institutions, businesses, especially SMEs, non- governmental organisations, etc. – and the opportunities being offered widely publicised;
Amendment 145 #
2014/2240(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Urges the Commission to support the efforts of Member States to promote specialisation strategies with a view to creating and exploiting value chains linked to the many and varied blue economy activities; considers that the development of clusters or ‘hyperclusters’ implies that Member States must play an active role in fostering synergies between sectors; considers that strategies for maritime research and technological development could pilot in a single sea basin at first and hence serve for the wider blue economy as a best practice example;
Amendment 149 #
2014/2240(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Stresses the importance of maritime spatial planning for the sustainable and coordinated development of maritime activities;
Amendment 151 #
2014/2240(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 b (new)
Paragraph 13 b (new)
13b. Considers that the implementation of the Maritime Spatial Planning directive in a timely manner will foster investment in the blue economy as it provides the necessary certainty;
Amendment 153 #
2014/2240(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 c (new)
Paragraph 13 c (new)
13c. Stresses in this context the importance of land-sea interactions and Integrated Coastal Zone Management;
Amendment 163 #
2014/2240(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Considers that environmentally healthy coastal and maritime areas are key for sustainable human activities; calls therefore for the full implementation of the Marine Strategy Framework directive;
Amendment 164 #
2014/2240(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. All concerned sectors´ interests should be taken into account at an equitable manner at every stage in the development of the blue economy, namely when designing maritime spatial planning and integrated coastal zone management.
Amendment 165 #
2014/2240(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 b (new)
Paragraph 14 b (new)
14b. Considers that the governance of Integrated Maritime Policy should be strengthened at EU and sea-basin levels;
Amendment 204 #
2014/2240(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Stresses that renewable marine energies are an industrial sector for the future that can combat climate change and EU energy dependence, achieve greater energy sustainability and meet the Europe 2020 targets; points out that in this regard offshore grids between the Member States are of great importance;
Amendment 209 #
2014/2240(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Calls on the Commission to propose and update a non-exhaustive list of maritime activities (e.g. offshore energy production, deep-sea mining, sand and gravel exploitation at sea etc.) requiring prior environmental impact assessments; considers that prospection and mining on the continental shelf require uninterrupted State involvement, especially as regards information, environmental impact assessment, analysing and minimising risks, and the exercise of sovereignty; points to the potential offered by these activities for embedding scientific knowledge and development and technology transfer; points to the challenges entailed in extracting minerals dissolved in sea water;
Amendment 221 #
2014/2240(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22a. Emphasises the importance of promoting socially, economically and environmentally sustainable forms of tourism that can constitute a significant source of added value for maritime areas;
Amendment 223 #
2014/2240(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 b (new)
Paragraph 22 b (new)
22b. Believes that a maritime safety "Erika IV" package should be launched to prevent further major maritime disasters; considers that this package should recognise the ecological damage to marine waters in the European legislation;
Amendment 250 #
2014/2228(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point a – point i a (new)
Paragraph 1 – point a – point i a (new)
(ia) to ensure that reciprocity in terms of social, health and environmental standards is a fundamental principle in the negotiations of TTIP; the TTIP must under no circumstances weaken European standards in these fields, and their preservation must be considered to be a red line in the negotiations;
Amendment 290 #
2014/2228(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point a – point iv a (new)
Paragraph 1 – point a – point iv a (new)
(iva) to ensure that disagreements relative to the investments are settled in the context of the parties’ courts; settlement of disagreements must not be delegated to a private mechanism;
Amendment 303 #
2014/2228(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point i
Paragraph 1 – point b – point i
(i) to ensure that the market access offers in the different areas are equally ambitious and reflect both parties’ expectations, as market access for industrial goods, agricultural, fisheries and aquaculture products, services and public procurement is equally important in all cases and a balance is needed between the different proposals for these areas;
Amendment 465 #
2014/2228(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point ix a (new)
Paragraph 1 – point b – point ix a (new)
(ixa) to ensure compliance with European health standards applicable to agricultural, fisheries and aquaculture products; to ensure that rigorous traceability requirements for these products are maintained;
Amendment 466 #
2014/2228(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point ix b (new)
Paragraph 1 – point b – point ix b (new)
(ixb) to ensure a carve-out from TTIP for the management of fishing rights and quotas; TTIP should not lead to liberalisation of fishing rights through, for example, a system of individual transferable quotas (ITQs);
Amendment 700 #
2014/2228(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point d – point viii a (new)
Paragraph 1 – point d – point viii a (new)
(viiia) to ensure that TTIP does not deprive signatories of the right to regulate the economic exploitation of their maritime zones, particularly in relation to access to the zones by private sector operators. Traditional maritime activities such as fishing should be protected in the event of conflicting demands on maritime zones;
Amendment 708 #
2014/2228(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point d – point ix a (new)
Paragraph 1 – point d – point ix a (new)
(ixa) to ensure that TTIP contributes to the sustainable management of fishery resources, particularly through cooperation between the parties in combatting illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing (IUU);
Amendment 116 #
2014/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Deplores the fact that many Member States are failing to make the appropriate structural reforms; points out that even a single Member State can undermine the entire economy of the EU; insists, therefore, that each Member State has the responsibility to introduce structural reforms aimed at fiscal consolidation and economic recovery;
Amendment 123 #
2014/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Calls on the Member States to make their labour markets more efficient, to modernise social protection systems, including pensions, and to improve and streamline the legal and administrative environment for business investment; stresses that structural reforms need to be complemented by well-targeted, longer- term investments in education, research and development, innovation, infrastructure, industry, ICT and sustainable energy;
Amendment 177 #
2014/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Reiterates the importance of ensuring labour mobility (both cross-border and cross-sectoral), enhanced labour productivity (connected with skills trainings to improve employability) and labour market flexibility, while preserving the necessary scope of work security; stresses the importance of putting an end to social dumping within the EU in order to achieve an internal labour market which is fully functional and effective;
Amendment 223 #
2014/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Is concerned that only five Member States were found to be fully compliant with the provisions of the Stability and Growth Pact (SGP); insists that the PSC was developed by consensus among the EU Member States and that all parties are therefore obliged to respect it fully and completely;
Amendment 4 #
2014/2214(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas the Adriatic Sea has peculiar hydrographic features such as different depth and coastline greatly varying from the North to the South of the region; whereas within the future framework regulation for technical measures in the reformed CFP, measures should be regionally devised and tailor-made to the specificities of this area and fisheries;
Amendment 9 #
2014/2214(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas in Italy there are 804 159 anglers with an economic turnover of EUR 241 247 700 (reported in 2012), and the region in question is estimated to have around 1.2 million registered anglers;
Amendment 25 #
2014/2214(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Calls on the Commission, as an independent facilitator in this strategy, and as the financier, to do its best to make sure the socio-economic differences between the countries are reduced and not increased; calls for a greater harmonization of rules on fishing and for a solid cross-border cooperation of the countries concerned in the region;
Amendment 35 #
2014/2214(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Calls on the Commission to update the list of maritime activities (e.g. deep-sea mining, offshore energy production etc.) which could have an impact on the marine environment and on the status of fish stocks;
Amendment 42 #
2014/2214(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Is concerned about the damage caused by plastic waste at sea; calls on the Commission to support initiatives to collect and recycle this waste; stresses the importance of involving fishermen in the process;
Amendment 43 #
2014/2214(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Calls on the Commission to promote a fruitful scientific cooperation between the actors of the Adriatic-Ionian region, with the aim of identifying opportunities for sustainable exploitation of marine resources;
Amendment 46 #
2014/2214(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Calls on the Commission, taking into consideration the need for a fish repopulation of some zones of the Adriatic and Ionian Seas, to ensure that the marine nursery areas for different species of fish are accurately identified and protected and to provide the necessary financial support for the creation of artificial reefs;
Amendment 48 #
2014/2214(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)
Paragraph 3 c (new)
3c. Stresses that the development of aquaculture and mariculture can play an important role not only in the recovery of species diversity but also in the economic growth of the Adriatic and Ionian region;
Amendment 35 #
2014/2158(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas competition policy is an essential tool to enable the EU to have a dynamic, efficient and innovative internal market and to be competitive on the global stage, as well as to overcome the economic and financial crisis;
Amendment 49 #
2014/2158(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the successful development of SMEs under conditions of free competition is one of the most essential preconditions for job creation, growth, innovation and investment;
Amendment 165 #
2014/2158(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Recognises the role of competition policy in the pursuit of a digital single market; believes that the priorities set out in the report ‘Priorities towards a Digital Single Market in the Baltic Sea Region’ should become ambitionEUʼs legislative framework needs to adjust rapidly to developments in the digital market in order to prevent the emergence of monopolies for the entire EUconcerted practices;
Amendment 211 #
2014/2158(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
Amendment 21 #
2014/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas, according to the Commission services’ spring 2014 forecast, the average inflation rate in the euro area was 1.3 % in 2013, down from 2.5 % in 2012; whereas inflation in the euro area has continued to be on a downward path since the beginning of 2014, reaching a lowthe alarming rate of 0.3 % in September;
Amendment 64 #
2014/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses its concern regarding the continuous fall in the inflation rate in the euro area since 2011 and the inflation rate differentials between Member States; stresses that the important gap observed today, with the ECB’s aim of keeping inflation rates below but close to 2% in the medium term, could lead to a disanchoring in medium- to longer-term inflation expectations;
Amendment 77 #
2014/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Considers that it is of utmost importance to create conditions for a rebound in investment in the euro area; calls on the ECB, in this context, to pursue its actions in order to maintain favourable financing conditions and to reduce the financial fragmentation that remains highly penalising for private borrowers in many Member States; calls on the Member States to carry out the structural reforms required in order to re-create a favourable business environment, and in particular to act on the country-specific recommendations;
Amendment 92 #
2014/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Considers that the transmission mechanism is not functioning properly, and that the monetary policy tools used by the ECB since the beginning of the crisis, while providing a welcome relief in distressed financial markets, have not been fully effective in fighting against financial fragmentation, stimulating growth or improving the situation on the labour market; encourages the ECB to ensure that its policies are better attuned to the real economy, in particular with regard to SMEstresses, in this connection, the need for the Member States to carry out appropriate structural reforms in accordance with the European Semester recommendations;
Amendment 74 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas economic governance in the Economic and Monetary Union necessarily, on the basis of solidarity, operates in accordance with national disciplines and the maximising of sustainable growth in all parties to the Stability and Growth Pact;
Amendment 75 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A b (new)
Recital A b (new)
Ab. whereas the Stability and Growth Pact is the organic text underpinning the entire structure of the European Semester; whereas its spirit of pacta sunt servanda and its interpretation, in particular in relation to the flexibility criteria, may not derogate from the fundamental requirements of solidarity and responsibility;
Amendment 105 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas, on the one hand, according to the Commission’s autumnwinter forecast, investment in the euro area decreased by 3.4 after two consecutive years of negative growth, gross domestic product (GDP) in the euro area is expected to be 1.7% in 2012, by5 and 2.4 1% in 20136, and by 17 % since the pre-crisis period, with the expected rebound rate in 2014 (0.6 %) and that anticipated for 2015 (1.7 %) being very weak; whereas a lack of investment can be just as detrimental to future generations as excessive public debtwhereas, on the other hand, the combined impact of the fall in fuel prices, low interest rates and a monetary policy of quantitative easing are paving the way to accelerated economic recovery;
Amendment 168 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Believes that the current economic situation calls for urgent, comprehensive and decisive measures to face the threat of deflation or very lowstimulate inflation, low growth and high unemployment;
Amendment 192 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Highlights the fact that the current economic governance framework does not allow for a proper debateBelieves that it is too early to determine the true impact onf the economic perspective ofgovernance framework on the euro area or on an aggregate fiscal stance and does not address the different economic and fiscal situations on an equal footing;
Amendment 219 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
Amendment 245 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses that the current situation calls for closer and inclusive economic coordination (to increase aggregate demand, improve fiscal sustainability and allow for fair and sustainable structural reforms and related investments) and for swift reactions so as to correct the most obvious fault lines in the economic governance framework;
Amendment 268 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Warns that the accumulation of procedures makes the economic governance framework coStresses the importance of simplex and not transparent enough, which is detrimental to the ownership and acceptance by parliaments, social partners and citizens of guidelines, recommendations and reforms stemming from this frameworkconomic governance procedures;
Amendment 283 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Notes the absolute necessity of subjecting the collection and publication of statistical information gathered by the Member States to regular quality audits and of taking corrective measures where necessary to ensure that the measurement of social and economic indicators is accurate, transparent and sustainable;
Amendment 323 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Welcomes the fact that in its interpretative communication on flexibility, the Commission acknowledges that the way in which the current fiscal rules are interpreted is crucial in bridging the investment gap in the EU and implementing growth-enhancingincludes investment flexibility and emphasises the Member States’ responsibility to implement the appropriate structural reforms;
Amendment 376 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Believes that the communication rightly broadens the scope of the investment clause, allowings for flexibility in the preventive arm of the SGP to accommodate investment programmes by the Member States, in particular as regards expenditure on projects under structural and cohesion policy, including the Youth Employment Initiative, trans-European networks and the Connecting Europe Facility, and co- financing under the EFSI; believes that this approach must be urgently reassessed to be symmetrically applied to the corrective arm of the SGPpoints out that a Member State subject to the corrective arm of the SGP may also contribute to the European Fund for Strategic Investments; maintains that this contribution must not under any circumstances hold back the implementation of structural reforms by the Member States;
Amendment 389 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Believes thatStresses the structural reform clause under the preventive arm and the means of considering structural reform plans under the corrective arm constitute a step forward as regards ensuring the more efficient implementation of reforms by Member States; calls for further clarification as to the types of structural reforms eligible under this new scheme; believes that a direct link to the cost, timeframe impact and value of structural reforms should also be explicit in the corrective arm of the SGP; recalls the need for every Member State to implement the appropriate structural reforms, as proposed by the Commission in the country-specific recommendations;
Amendment 398 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Believes that structural reforms should have a positive socioeconomic return and contribute to increasedrationalisation of administrative capacity;
Amendment 432 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Believes that more room for flexibility and soft laws exists under the SGP and in the European Semesthe Member States have a responsibility to respect the SGP, and stresses that the SGP was drawn up by consensus among the EU Member Staters; invites the Commission, therefore, to build on thise flexibility and to propose rule changes where neededpermitted by the existing rules;
Amendment 449 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Invites the Commission and the Council to better articulate the fiscal and macroeconomic frameworks, notably in the corrective arm of the SGP, to allow for earlier debate among stakeholders, taking into account the need to increase convergence between euro area Member States and the role of national parliaments and social partners regarding the design and implementation of structural reformtake into account the need to increase convergence between euro area Member States;
Amendment 464 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Insists that the Annual Growth Survey (AGS) and euro area recommendation must be better designed and put to better use to allow for a global economic debate, notably as regards convergence in the euro area; proposes that the country-specific recommendations (CSRs) should be established on the basis of striking a better balance between the AGS and the macroeconomic imbalance procedure (MIP), and suggests that the euro area recommendation should be made compulsory following a proper debate with the European Parliament, with incentives being offered so as to encourage the implementation thereof; requests that the excessive deficit procedure (EDP) recommendation be joined together with the CSRsStresses the importance of a global economic debate, notably as regards convergence in the euro area;
Amendment 476 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. Calls on the Member States to base their national budgets solely on the macroeconomic forecasts compiled by the Commission for the European Semester;
Amendment 483 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
Amendment 494 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Encourages the Finance Committees of the national parliaments to systematically invite the European Commissioners responsible for economic governance to a public debate in their chambers before the draft budgets of the Member States are adopted;
Amendment 510 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Asks the Commission to make the three-pillar strategy (investment, fiscal rules and structural reforms), presented in the AGS 2015, more concrete under the euro area recommendation and in the CSRs and to strengthen its approach by building a fourth pillar on taxation by preparing a fiscal convergence roadmap in collaboration with the European Parliament, taking account of the work done by the Special Committee on tax rulings and other measures similar in nature or effect;
Amendment 525 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
Amendment 551 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Calls for a public meeting to be held between the Finance Ministers of the Member States and the European Parliament’s Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs every third quarter before the adoption of the national budgets of the Member States;
Amendment 558 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Calls on the Commission to explore ways in which to better align the preventive and corrective arms of the SGP, in particular regarding investment allowing temporary deviation from the MTO, or the adjustment path towards it, within the existence of a safety margin under the preventive armNotes the work done by the Commission in interpreting the flexibility within the rules relating to the SGP and its balanced approach to investment;
Amendment 565 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Asks the Commission to take into accountcontinue to analyse all relevant factors, including real growth and inflation, when evaluating the economic and fiscal situations of Member States under the EDP;
Amendment 573 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
Amendment 622 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Acknowledges, based on the current situation, that the economic governance framework must be corrected and completed in both the medium and long term to allow for the EU and the euro area must be able to meet the challenges of convergence, long-lasting investment and reliance;
Amendment 668 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
Amendment 704 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Recalls that a ‘genuine Economic and Monetary Union’ (EMU) cannot simply be limited to a system of rules but also requires an increased euro area fiscal capacity;
Amendment 724 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
Paragraph 36
36. Asks the Commission to come forward with an ambitious roadmap which takes into account the need for economic goto bring about convernagence reforms, as outlined in this report, and which should be presented to Parliament by the end of May 2015, ahead of the June European Councilof the fiscal policies of the Member States with the aim of completing Economic and Monetary Union;
Amendment 748 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37 – indent 1
Paragraph 37 – indent 1
– a ‘taxation union’, starting with measures to bring about convergence of the fiscal policies of the Member States,
Amendment 761 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37 – indent 2
Paragraph 37 – indent 2
– a social dimension, including a minimum wage mechanism and a minimum unemployment benefit scheme for the euro area and in-depth reforms to favour mobility under which convergence of the social policies of the Member States would be advocated,
Amendment 794 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37 – indent 4
Paragraph 37 – indent 4
– a euro area fiscal capacity notably to finance counter cyclical actions, structural reforms or part of debt reduction;
Amendment 75 #
2014/2144(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Calls on the Commission to implement a tax convergence mechanism with a view to putting a stop to unfair tax competition; emphasises that the introduction of a tax snake could be a first step towards achieving that aim;
Amendment 237 #
2014/2144(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Emphasises that country-specific recommendations must be accepted and implemented by the MSs, in particular in the budgetary sphere;
Amendment 256 #
2014/2144(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22a. Expresses concern at the degree of tax pressure on SMEs, and draws attention once again to the key role they play as drivers of growth and employment in the EU;
Amendment 266 #
2014/2144(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
Amendment 291 #
2014/2144(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Underlines the fact that MSs’ taxation policy on environmental taxes should be aligned with the EU 2020 strategy; recognises that an increase in environmental taxes has the potential to generate revenues and jobs; calls on the Commission to come forward with appropriate legislative proposalsform an integral part of the EU 2020 strategy;
Amendment 4 #
2014/2075(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Notes DG MARE's reservation with regard to an error rate exceeding 2% of some Member States' declared expenditure and, in the case of twoone Member States, to, a report not considered to be reliable and to a failure to submit a report; deplores the situation relating to the two Member States concerned; notes, however, that the position has improved in response to the Commission's instructions to theat Member States concerned;
Amendment 45 #
2014/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes the fact thatcertain signs of economic recovery in the EU is under way; reiterates, however, that this recovery is fragile and uneven, and must be sustained in order to deliver more growth and jobs in the medium term;
Amendment 113 #
2014/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Stresses the importance of speeding up the process of harmonising Member States' fiscal and social policies in order to create an effective internal market, which is a necessary precondition for restoring the European economy;
Amendment 147 #
2014/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Recalls, however, that Member States’ track record of implementing the CSRs is very low; believes that there is an inconsistency between European commitment and national implementation of the CSRs by Member States, certain Member States being reluctant to adopt the appropriate reforms within the required time frame; stresses the importance of ‘national ownership’ by the relevant governments of EU-level commitments;
Amendment 160 #
2014/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Notes the fact that, according to the Commission, only 10 % of the CSRs for 2013 have been fully implemented; notes, furthermore, that 45 % of CSRs have seen limited or no progress, particularly in certain Member States which, in view of the size of their economies, could damage the European economy as a whole;
Amendment 179 #
2014/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Calls on the Commission, as guardian of the Treaty, to make full use of all measures provided for in EU law to support the enforcement of the implementation of the CSRs, so that all Member States adopt within the required time frame economic and financial policies tailored to their situation, without any option of exemption from them;
Amendment 210 #
2014/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Encourages Member States to overcome domestic political oppositionConsiders that the priority of the Member States should be to modernise their economies, social security systems and health care, in order to avoid placing an excessive burden on future generations;
Amendment 242 #
2014/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Stresses, once again, its call on Member States to simplify their tax systems so as to restore a favourable environment for undertakings in all Member States without exception, and reiterates its call to shift taxes from labour to consumption to make the use of resources more efficient and sustainable; calls on the Commission to take urgent action and develop a comprehensive strategy based on concrete legislative measures to fight tax fraud and tax evasion;
Amendment 333 #
2014/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Stresses the fact that a solid and stable, stable and transparent financial system is crucial for future growth;
Amendment 30 #
2014/0285(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) It is appropriate to establish a multi- species fisheries plan taking into account the dynamics between the stocks of cod, herring and sprat, and also considering the by-catch species of the fisheries for these stocks, namely the Baltic stocks of plaice, brill, flounder and turbot. The objective of this plan should be to aim at achieving and maintaining maximum sustainable yields for the stocks concernedre-establish and maintain populations of the species concerned above the levels that are capable of producing the maximum sustainable yields, in accordance with Article 2(2) of Regulation (EU) 1380/2013.
Amendment 53 #
2014/0285(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19 a (new)
Recital 19 a (new)
(19a) To encourage the effectiveness and innovational aspects of the plan, joint recommendations and subsequent delegated acts shall aim to ensure the inclusion of bottom-up and results-based approaches.
Amendment 57 #
2014/0285(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
Recital 25
(25) As regards the time-frame, it is expected that for the stocks concerned maximum sustainable yield should be reached by 2015. It should be maintained from there on if possible, if not by 2020 at the latest, in accordance with Article 2(2) of Regulation (EU) 1380/2013.
Amendment 63 #
2014/0285(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2
Article 1 – paragraph 2
2. The plan shall also apply to by-catches of plaice, flounder, turbot and brill in ICES Subdivisions 22-32 caught when fishing for the stocks concerned.
Amendment 71 #
2014/0285(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) achievre-establishing and maintaining maximum sustainable yield for the stocks concernepopulations of the stocks concerned above the biomass levels that are capable of producing the maximum sustainable yield, and
Amendment 79 #
2014/0285(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) ensuring the conservation of the stocks of plaice, brill, flounder and turbothelping ensure, through management of by-catches of plaice, brill, flounder and turbot, the conservation of the stocks of these species, in line with the precautionary approach.
Amendment 116 #
2014/0285(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. When scientific advice states that the conservation of any of the Baltic stocks of plaice, flounder, turbot or brill is under threat, the Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 15 on specific conservation measures concerning by-catches of the stock under threat and regarding any of the following:
Amendment 171 #
2014/0285(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 10 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Any deviations by the Commission from the joint recommendations shall be presented to the European Parliament and to the Council and should be able to be scrutinised;
Amendment 175 #
2014/0285(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 1
1. By way of derogation from Article 17(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009, the prior notification obligation laid down in that Article shall apply to masters of Union fishing vessels of eighttwelve metres overall length or more retaining on board at least 300 kg of cod or two tons of pelagic stocks.
Amendment 184 #
2014/0285(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14
Article 14
The Commission shall ensure an evaluation of the impact of this plan on the stocks covered by this Regulation and on the fisheries exploiting those stocks, in particular to take account of changes in scientific advice, sixthree years after the entry into force of the plan and, thereafter, every six years. The Commission shall submit the results of these evaluations to the European Parliament and Council.
Amendment 39 #
2014/0213(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Regulation (EU) No 1343/2011
Article 16 d – paragraph 1
Article 16 d – paragraph 1
1. For the harvesting of red coral, the only permitted gear shall be a hammer used manually by professional fishermen as recognised by the Member State.
Amendment 41 #
2014/0213(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Regulation (EU) No 1343/2011
Article 16 d – paragraph 2
Article 16 d – paragraph 2
2. The use of Remotely Operated under- water Vehicles for the exploitation of red coral shall be prohibitedauthorised until 31 December 2015. It shall be prohibited from that date. That prohibition shall cover, as from 1 January 2015, the use of Remotely Operated under-water Vehicles which may have been authorized by Member States in zones under national jurisdiction exclusively for observation and prospection of red coral on the basis of paragraphs 3(a) or 3(b) of recommendation GFCM/35/2011/2.
Amendment 47 #
2014/0213(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Regulation (EU) No 1343/2011
Article 16 g - paragraph 3
Article 16 g - paragraph 3
3. Vessels using purse seines for small pelagic species or surrounding nets without purse line for pelagic species shall not encircle, to the extent practicable, avoid encircling sea turtles.
Amendment 55 #
2014/0213(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Regulation (EU) No 1343/2011
Article 16 l – paragraph 2
Article 16 l – paragraph 2
2. Vessels equipped with trawl nets and purse seines, irrespective of the vessel’s length overall, are classified as fishing actively for small pelagic stocks when sardine and/anchovy account for at least 50% of the catch in live weight in any given fishing triplanded between 1 January and 31 December of the previous year.
Amendment 60 #
2014/0213(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU) No 1343/2011
Article 17 a
Article 17 a
Masters of fishing vessels authorised to harvest red coral shall have on board a logbook in which are reported the daily catches of red coral and fishing activity by area and depths, including the number of fishing days and diving. That information shall be communicated to the competent national authorities without delayin the deadlines provided for by the rules in force.
Amendment 22 #
Amendment 23 #
Amendment 1268 #
2014/0100(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part III – point 3.2.1 – point a
Annex II – part III – point 3.2.1 – point a
a) the growing areas are either of high ecological status as defined by Directive 2000/60/EC75 or of a quality equivalent to production areas classified A or B under Regulation 854/2004, and are not unsuitable from a health point of view; __________________ 75 Directive 2006/113/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on the quality required of shellfish waters (OJ L 376, 27.12.2006, p. 14)..
Amendment 1270 #
2014/0100(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part III – point 3.2.2 – point b
Annex II – part III – point 3.2.2 – point b
b) to ensure that a wide gene-pool is maintained, the collection of juvenile seaweed in the wild shall take place on a regular basis to supplementmaintain and increase the diversity of indoor culture stock;
Amendment 1272 #
2014/0100(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part III – point 3.4.4
Annex II – part III – point 3.4.4
3.4.4. If seaweed is harvested from a shared or common harvest area, documentary evidence produced by the competent authority designated by the Member State shall be available that the total harvest complies with this Regulation. .
Amendment 1 #
2013/2098(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Points out that regional quality branding is important for local territories and rural economies, as it highlights the connection to a specific and exceptional territory in terms of the origin of products and services; is of the opinion that at a time of globalised economies, regional quality brands can serve as significant promoters of regional, territorial and local identity, as well as contribute to regional development and territorial marketing, and help improve the competitiveness and attractiveness of rural territories;
Amendment 11 #
2013/2098(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Emphasises the value of cooperation between regional quality brands that is based on interaction between the resources shared by several regional brands and on synergies between neighbouring regional brands;
Amendment 28 #
2013/2098(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Believes that in order to provide for the increased success of regional quality brands, the exchange of experience, networking and partnerships are essential, as is the historic, cultural and symbolic heritage of a territory; recognises the role of representative bodies, such as associations, at regional, national and European level which provide for the promotion of regional brands and enhance their visibility; calls for greater attention to be paid to regional branding initiatives as a possible common theme in European territorial cooperation and European funding initiatives.
Amendment 36 #
2013/2045(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Stresses the importance of lifelong training in facilitating professional readjustment; stresses in this connection the effectiveness of European programmes, which must be upheld and consolidated over the next financial programming period;
Amendment 41 #
2013/2045(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Calls on the Member States to promote within the their respective educational systems preparation for careers which are currently undervalued in school and university curricula but nevertheless have great employment potential in the Member States;
Amendment 33 #
2013/2042(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Emphasises the key role played by European Investment Bank (EIB) loan schemes in financing projects of European interest, and calls for greater synergy to be established between such schemes and the Structural Funds;
Amendment 35 #
2013/2042(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
Amendment 3 #
2013/2017(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Recalls that the budget, via the new European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF), the financial instrument of the future IMP, is an essential instrument for achieving the ambitious targets of the new CFP; recalls that the main aspects of the reform are the achievement of the maximum sustainable yield, the ban on discardsgradual introduction of the landing obligation and regionalisation;
Amendment 8 #
2013/2017(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses that the measures funded under the 2014 budget must focus on the sustainability of the fisheries sector and on growth, on employment, including of new recruits, and on growth in coastal areas; recalls in this context the targets of the Europe 2020 strategy;
Amendment 8 #
2013/2006(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Expresses strong concern about the consequences of the financial and economic downturn and the growing inequalities in the EU, especially among its regions as regards productivity, competitiveness and prosperity; points out that withoutit is vital to take strong policy measures and the allocation ofe adequate financial resources in support of a new industrial ‘revolution’ in the EU, based on new technologies (nanotechnologies, biotechnologies, and microelectronics); maintains that failing such action, the sharp decline will have a serious negative impact not only on the EU’s output, but also on social and territorial cohesion, and that the ‘technology gap’ between the EU and other high-tech hubs (the United States and the BRICS countries) will grow dangerously wider;
Amendment 21 #
2013/2006(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses the need to set out clear industrial competitiveness policy strategies in the National Reform Programmes, through a more focused approach which includes the setting of priorities in relation to: facilitating access to finance; support for R&D and education; administrative simplification; the reduction of labour taxation; improvement of infrastructure; greater involvement of all stakeholders at regional and local level and strong support for SMEs and entrepreneurs; believes that a more coordinated approach between different levels of government and stakeholders will be achieved by including the proposed territorial pacts in the partnership agreements; points out that clusters are the ideal place in which to bring these protagonists together and coordinate their activities;
Amendment 32 #
2013/2006(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Agrees with the Commission and the Council that competitiveness gains in the internal market, but also in trade with third countries, should be an absolute priority; underlines the need for, and the importance of, the drawing-up of European standards that are widely applied and defended by the EU on the global market, so that innovative measures implemented by European enterprises do not penalise them, but instead gradually become a global standard, not least by virtue of the reciprocity principle;
Amendment 49 #
2013/0436(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2 a (new)
Recital 2 a (new)
(2a) The current wording of Article 15(6) of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 concerning the possibility of incorporating technical measures strictly linked to the landing obligation into the discard plans to allow for increased selectivity and for unintended catches of marine organisms to be reduced as far as possible needs to be clarified.
Amendment 65 #
2013/0436(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Chapter -1 – Article -1 (new)
Chapter -1 – Article -1 (new)
Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013
Article 15 – paragraph 6
Article 15 – paragraph 6
Chapter -1 Basic regulation Article -1 Amendment to Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 is amended as follows: In Article 15, paragraph 6 is replaced by the following: "6. Where no multiannual plan, or no management plan in accordance with Article 18 of Regulation (EC) No 1967/2006, is adopted for the fishery in question, the Commission shall be empowered to adopt, in accordance with Article 18 of this Regulation, delegated acts in accordance with Article 46 of this Regulation, laying down on a temporary basis and for a period of no more than three years a specific discard plan containing the specifications referred to in points (a) to (e) of paragraph 5 of this Article and, where necessary, the technical measures described in points (a) to (e) of Article 7(2) of this Regulation, provided that these measures allow selectivity to be improved and unintended catches to be avoided or reduced as far as possible. Member States may cooperate, in accordance with Article 18 of this Regulation, in the drawing up of such a plans with a view to the Commission adopting such acts or submitting a proposal in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure."
Amendment 226 #
2013/0436(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point 8
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point 8
Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009
Article 49a – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 49a – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Paragraph 2 shall not apply within a limit of 10% by live weight of the total catches retained on board of each of the following species: sardine, anchovy, herring, horse mackerel and mackerel. The percentage of undersized sardine, anchovy, herring, horse mackerel and mackerel shall be calculated by live weight of all marine organisms on board after sorting or on landing. These catches shall, in the case of species subject to quota, be counted against quotas. The percentage may be calculated on the basis of one or more representative samples. The limit of 10% shall not be exceeded during transhipment, landing, transportation, storage, display or sale.
Amendment 323 #
2013/0314(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point c
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point c
(c) where this determination is made on the basis of the value of one or more underlying assets, or prices, including estimated prices, or other values, with the exception of the prices of one or more financial instruments which have been determined under the rules of a trading venue pursuant to Directive 2014/65/EU of the European Parliament and the Council1a (MIFID) or a CCP pursuant to Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council1b (EMIR). ___________________ 1aDirective 2014/65/EU of the European Parliament and the Council of 15 May 2014 on markets in financial instruments and amending Directive 2002/92/EC and Directive 2011/61/EU (OJ L 173, 12.6.2014, p. 349). 1b Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2012 on OTC derivatives, central counterparties and trade repositories (OJ L 201, 27.7.2012, p. 1).
Amendment 559 #
2013/0314(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 20 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Decisions by the Commission determining third-country legal regimes as equivalent to the requirements resulting from this Regulation should be adopted only if the legal regime of the third country provides for an effective equivalent system for the recognition of administrators authorised under foreign legal regimes implemented.
Amendment 127 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) Asset Backed Commercial Papers (ABCPs) should be considered eligible money market instruments to the extent that they respect additional requirements. Due to the fact that during the crisis certain securitisations were particularly unstable, it is necessary to impose maturity limits and quality criteria on the underlying assets. Not all categories of underlying assets should be eligible because some were more confronted to instability than othersIn particular those securitizations where the underlying assets were associated with supporting the working capital of manufacturers and the sales of real economy goods and services, performed well and should be eligible. For this reason theABCP backed by underlying assets should be exclusively composed of short- term debt instruments that have been issued by corporates in the course of their business activity, such as trade receivables. Instruments such as auto loans and leases, equipment leases, consumer loans, residential mortgage loans, credit card receivables or any other type of instrument linked to the acquisition or financing of services or goods by consumers composed of debt instruments that have been originated by bank clients, such as corporates or their captive financial subsidiaries, in the course of their business activity, including trade receivables, or other related debt held directly or indirectly, should be eligible for MMF investment. In this regard, instruments which provide working capital to bank clients, such as trade receivables, auto loans and leases, equipment loans and leases, SME loans and consumer loans should be eligible provided they are of high quality, liquid and otherwise satisfy maximum weighted average life (WAL) requirement. ESMA should be entrusted with drafting regulatory technical standards to be submitted for endorsement by the Commission with regard to the conditions and circumstances under which the underlying exposure or pool of exposures considered to consist of eligible debt and the conditions and numerical threshould not be eligibles determining when such eligible debt is of high credit quality and liquid. ESMA should be entrusted with drafting regulatory technical standards to be submitted for endorsement by the Commission with regard to the conditions and circumstances under which the underlying exposure or pool of exposures is considered to exclusively consist of corporateconsist of debt and the conditions and numerical thresholds determining when corporate debt is of high credit quality and liquid.
Amendment 152 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 39
Recital 39
(39) It is important that the risk management of MMFs not be biased by short-term decisions influenced by the possible rating of the MMF. Therefore, it is necessary to prohibit a MMF or its manager from requesting that the MMF is rated by a credit rating agency in order to avoid that this external rating is used for marketing purposes. The MMF or its manager should also refrain from using alternative methods for obtaining a rating of the MMF. Should the MMF be awarded an external rating, either on the own initiative of the credit rating agency or following request by a third party that is independent of the MMF or the manager and does not act on behalf of any of them, the MMF manager should refrain from relying on criteria that would be attached to that external rating. For ensuring appropriate liquidity management it is necessary that the MMFs establish sound policies and procedures to know their investors. The policies that the manager has to put in place should help understanding the MMF's investor base, to the extent that large redemptions could be anticipated. In order to avoid that the MMF faces sudden massive redemptions, particular attention should be paid to large investors representing a substantial portion of the MMF's assets, as with one investor representing more than the proportion of daily maturing assets. In this case the MMF should increase its proportion of daily maturing assets to the proportion of that investor. The manager should whenever possible look at the identity of the investors, even if they are represented by nominee accounts, portals or any other indirect buyer.
Amendment 159 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 42
Recital 42
Amendment 161 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 42 a (new)
Recital 42 a (new)
(42a) As a MMF should publish a NAV that reflects all movements in the value of its assets, the published NAV should be rounded at maximum to the nearest basis point or its equivalent. As a consequence, when the NAV is published in a specific currency, for example €1, the incremental change in value should be done every €0.0001. In the case of a NAV at €100, the incremental change in value should be done every €0.01.
Amendment 164 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 43
Recital 43
Amendment 169 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 43 a (new)
Recital 43 a (new)
(43a) External support provided to a MMF with the intention of ensuring either liquidity or stability of the MMF or de facto having such effects increases the contagion risk between the MMF sector and the rest of the financial sector. Third parties providing such support have an interest in doing so, either because they have an economic interest in the management company managing the MMF or because they want to avoid any reputational damage should their name be associated with the failure of a MMF. Because these third parties do not commit explicitly to providing or guaranteeing the support, there is uncertainty whether such support will be granted when the MMF needs it. In these circumstances, the discretionary nature of sponsor support contributes to uncertainty among market participants about who will bear losses of the MMF when they do occur. This uncertainty likely makes MMFs even more vulnerable to runs during periods of financial instability, when broader financial risks are most pronounced and when concerns arise about the health of the sponsors and their ability to provide support to affiliated MMFs. For these reasons, MMFs should not rely on external support in order to maintain their liquidity and the stability of their NAV per unit or share unless the competent authority of the MMF has specifically allowed the external support in order to maintain stability of financial markets.
Amendment 170 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 44
Recital 44
(44) As a MMF should publish a NAV that reflects all movements in the value of its assets, the published NAV should be rounded at maximum to the nearest basis point or its equivalent. As a consequence, when the NAV is published in a specific currency, for example €1, the incremental change in value should be done every €0.0001. In the case of a NAV at €100, the incremental change in value should be done every €0.01. Only if the MMF is a CNAV MMF, the MMF can publish a price that does not follow entirely the movements in the value of its assets. In this case the NAV can be rounded to the nearest cent for a NAV at €1 (every €0.01 move).
Amendment 172 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 44 a (new)
Recital 44 a (new)
(44a) Investors should be clearly informed, before they invest in a MMF, if the MMF is of a short-term nature or of a standard nature. In order to avoid misplaced expectations from the investor it must also be clearly stated in any marketing document that MMFs are not a guaranteed investment vehicle.
Amendment 174 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 45
Recital 45
Amendment 188 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 46
Recital 46
Amendment 200 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 47
Recital 47
(47) External support provided to a MMF other than a CNAV MMF with the intention of ensuring either liquidity or stability of the MMF or de facto having such effects increases the contagion risk between the MMF sector and the rest of the financial sector. Third parties providing such support have an interest in doing so, either because they have an economic interest in the management company managing the MMF or because they want to avoid any reputational damage should their name be associated with the failure of a MMF. Because these third parties do not commit explicitly to providing or guaranteeing the support, there is uncertainty whether such support will be granted when the MMF needs it. In these circumstances, the discretionary nature of sponsor support contributes to uncertainty among market participants about who will bear losses of the MMF when they do occur. This uncertainty likely makes MMFs even more vulnerable to runs during periods of financial instability, when broader financial risks are most pronounced and when concerns arise about the health of the sponsors and their ability to provide support to affiliated MMFs. For these reasons, MMFs should not rely on external support in order to maintain their liquidity and the stability of their NAV per unit or share unless the competent authority of the MMF has specifically allowed the external support in order to maintain stability of financial markets.
Amendment 202 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 48
Recital 48
(48) Investors should be clearly informed, before they invest in a MMF, if the MMF is of a short-term nature or of a standard nature and if the MMF is of a CNAV type or not. In order to avoid misplaced expectations from the investor it must also be clearly stated in any marketing document that MMFs are not a guaranteed investment vehicle. CNAV MMFs should clearly explain to investors the buffer mechanism they are applying to maintain the constant NAV per unit or share.
Amendment 214 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 50 a (new)
Recital 50 a (new)
(50a) During the three years after the entry into force of this Regulation, the Commission should analyse the experience acquired in applying this Regulation and the impacts on the different economic aspects attached to the MMFs. The debt issued or guaranteed by the Member States represents a distinct category of investment displaying specific credit and liquidity traits. In addition, sovereign debt plays a vital role in financing the Member States. The Commission should evaluate the evolution of the market for sovereign debt issued or guaranteed by the Member States and the possibility to create a special framework for MMF that concentrate their investment policy on that type of debt.
Amendment 230 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2
(2) ‘money market instruments’ means money market instruments as defined in Article 2(1)(o) of Directive 2009/65/EC and Article 3 of Directive 2007/16/EC;
Amendment 237 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 8
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 8
(8) ‘corporat"eligible debt’" means debt instruments issued by anentities or undertakings which is effectively engaged in producing or trading and/or financing the manufacturing, trading or providing goods or non-financial services;and non-financial services to the market including corporate debt. For the purpose of this definition, it should be understood, that entities such as captive finance subsidiaries are consistent with this definition and that debt instruments such as trade receivables, auto loans and leases, equipment loans and leases, SME loans and consumer loans of such undertakings are eligible provided they otherwise comply with the conditions set out in this Regulation.
Amendment 239 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 12
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 12
Amendment 245 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 12 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 12 a (new)
(12a) "Short-term MMF" means a money market fund that invests in eligible money market instruments referred to in Article 9(1);
Amendment 284 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
(da) repurchase agreements;
Amendment 287 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point d b (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point d b (new)
(db) units or shares of other MMFs;
Amendment 308 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point –a (new)
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point –a (new)
(-a) the Asset Backed Commercial Paper has a legal maturity at issuance or a residual maturity of 397 days or less;
Amendment 311 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the underlying exposure or pool of exposures consists exclusively of corporateligible debt;
Amendment 315 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the underlying corporateligible debt is of high credit quality and liquid;
Amendment 317 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) the underlying corporate debt has a legal maturity at issuance of 397 days or less; or has a residual maturityexposure or pool of exposures has a weighted average life (WAL) of 397 days or less.
Amendment 328 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) the conditions and circumstances under which the underlying exposure or pool of exposures is considered to exclusively consist of corporateligible debt;
Amendment 332 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) conditions and numerical thresholds determining when corporateligible debt is of high credit quality and liquid.
Amendment 358 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 a (new)
Article 13 a (new)
Article 13 a Eligible repurchase agreements A repurchase agreement shall be eligible to be entered into by a MMF provided that all the following conditions are fulfilled: (a) the repurchase agreement is used on a temporary basis (for a maximum of 7 business days) and not for investment purposes; (b) the cash received by the MMF as part of repurchase agreements shall not exceed 10% of its assets and shall not be invested in eligible assets; (c) the MMF shall have the right to terminate the agreement at any time upon a notice of maximum two working days;
Amendment 359 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 b (new)
Article 13 b (new)
Article 13 b Eligible MMFs 1. A MMF may acquire the units or shares of other MMFs provided that no more than 10 % of the assets of the MMF whose acquisition is contemplated, can, according to their fund rules or instruments of incorporation, be invested in aggregate in units or shares of other MMFs. 2. A MMF may acquire the units or shares of other MMFs, provided that no more than 5 % of its assets are invested in units of a single MMF. 3. Member States may provide that, where a MMF has acquired units of another MMF, the assets of the acquired MMF are not required to be combined with the assets of the acquiring MMF for the purposes of the diversification limits laid down in Article 14. 4. MMF investing in units or shares of other MMFs shall comply with the provisions set out under Articles 50(1)(e)(iv) and 55 of Directive 2014/91/UE ("the UCITS Directive"). 5. The provisions of paragraphs 1 and 2 do not apply to feeder MMFs. 6. Short-term MMFs may only invest in units of other short-term MMFs and Standard MMFs may invest in units of both Short-term MMFs and Standard MMFs. 7. UCITS MMFs may only invest in units of other UCITS MMFs and non-UCITS MMFs may invest in both UCITS and non-UCITS MMFs.
Amendment 390 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 7 a (new)
Article 14 – paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Member States may allow cumulative investment in transferable securities and money market instruments within the same group up to a limit of 20%.
Amendment 406 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – point b
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) a manager of a MMF shall adopt and implement adequate measures to ensure that the assignment of its internal ratings is based on a thorough analysis of all the information that is available and pertinent, and includes all relevant driving factors that influence the creditworthiness of the issuer;
Amendment 411 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – point d
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – point d
Amendment 432 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. A short-term MMF shall comply at all times with all of the following portfolio requirements:
Amendment 433 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – point c
Amendment 436 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – point d
Amendment 442 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 21 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Amendment 448 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point c
Amendment 452 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point d
Amendment 458 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 22 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. A standard MMF shall hold : (a) at least 10% of its assets in the form of daily maturing assets; (b) at least 15% of its assets in the form of weekly maturing assets. In cases where larger-than-expected redemption requests lead to fall below the abovementioned ratios, managers of Standard MMFs should take action to remedy the breach in a timely manner, and in doing so, should take due account of the interests of their unit-holders. Investment in units or shares of other Short-term or Standard MMFs may be included in the ratio of weekly maturing assets up to a maximum of 5% of the assets of the MMF.
Amendment 460 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 2
Article 22 – paragraph 2
Amendment 464 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 3
Article 22 – paragraph 3
Amendment 467 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 22 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 10(1)(c), a Standard MMF may invest in securitisations (i) with a legal maturity at issuance or a residual maturity of 2 years or less and (ii) the underlying pool of exposures of which has an aggregate weighted average life (WAL) of 2 years or less.
Amendment 468 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 4
Article 22 – paragraph 4
Amendment 471 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 5
Article 22 – paragraph 5
Amendment 485 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
Article 24 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
(da) the cyclical evolution of the number of shares in the fund.
Amendment 487 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 24 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The manager of the MMF shall ensure that:If the value of the units or shares held by a single investor exceeds 10% of the value of the fund, the manager of the MMF shall apply additional, more stringent, measures such as stress tests to ensure that a redemption by such an investor does not materially impact the liquidity profile of the MMF.
Amendment 488 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 24 – paragraph 2 – point a
Amendment 491 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 24 – paragraph 2 – point b
Amendment 502 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 2
Article 25 – paragraph 2
Amendment 507 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 25 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Where the stress test reveals any vulnerability of the MMF, the manager of the MMF shall take action to strengthen the robustness of the MMF, including actions that reinforce the liquidity or the quality of the assets of the MMF.
Amendment 512 #
Amendment 522 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 5
Article 26 – paragraph 5
Amendment 528 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 26 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. A MMF shall not use the amortised cost method when valuing its assets.
Amendment 533 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
The NAV per unit or share shall be calculated for each MMF, irrespective of whether it is a CNAV MMF or not.
Amendment 538 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 4
Article 27 – paragraph 4
Amendment 542 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 5
Article 27 – paragraph 5
Amendment 546 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 6
Article 27 – paragraph 6
Amendment 554 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 2
Article 28 – paragraph 2
Amendment 557 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 a (new)
Article 28 a (new)
Article 28a Accounting Treatment Units or shares of MMF should be considered as cash equivalents in compliance with the definition provided in IAS 7.
Amendment 558 #
Amendment 561 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29
Article 29
Amendment 613 #
Amendment 641 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31
Article 31
Amendment 646 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32
Article 32
Amendment 657 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33
Article 33
Amendment 669 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34
Article 34
Amendment 681 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 1
Article 35 – paragraph 1
Amendment 690 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 2
Article 35 – paragraph 2
2. MMFs other than CNAV MMFs shall not be allowed to receive external support, except under the conditions laid down in Article 36.
Amendment 693 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 2
Article 35 – paragraph 2
2. MMFs other than CNAV MMFs shall not be allowed to receive external support, except under the conditions laid down in Article 36.
Amendment 706 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 36 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. In exceptional circumstances justified by systemic implications or adverse market conditions the competent authority may allow a MMF other than a CNAV MMF to receive external support referred to in Article 35 that is intended for or in effect would result in guaranteeing the liquidity of the MMF or stabilising the NAV per unit or share of the MMF provided that all of the following conditions are fulfilled:
Amendment 716 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 37 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 739 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 38 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Article 38 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Amendment 740 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 38 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point c a (new)
Article 38 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) the results of stress tests;
Amendment 761 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 1
Article 43 – paragraph 1
1. Within the six monthstwenty-four following the date of entry into force of this Regulation, an existing UCITS or AIF that invests in short term assets and has as distinct or cumulative objectives offering returns in line with money market rates or preserving the value of the investment shall submit an application to its competent authority together with all documents and evidence necessary to demonstrate the compliance with this Regulation.
Amendment 771 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 3
Article 43 – paragraph 3
Amendment 787 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 4
Article 43 – paragraph 4
Amendment 795 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
By three years after the entry into force of this Regulation, the Commission shall review the adequacy of this Regulation from a prudential and economic point of view. In particular the review shall consider the operation of the CNAV buffer and the operation of the CNAV buffer to those CNAV MMFs that, in future, might concentrate their portfolios on debt issued or guaranteed by the Member States. The review shall:
Amendment 16 #
2013/0191(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Citation 1
Citation 1
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Articles 43(2) and Article, 349 and 168(4)(b) thereof,
Amendment 18 #
2013/0191(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) By Decision 2012/419/EU3, the European Council amended the status of Mayotte with regard to the Union with effect from 1 January 2014. Therefore, from that date Mayotte will cease to be an overseas country and territory to become an outermost region within the meaning of Articles 349 and 355(1) TFEU. In view of the change in legal status of Mayotte, Union law will apply to Mayotte from 1 January 2014. It is appropriate to provide for certain specific measures justified by the particular situation of Mayotte in a number of areas. __________________ 3, in particular its island status and remoteness, in a number of areas. __________________ OL L 204, 31.7.2012, p.131. 3 OJ L 204, 31.7.2012, p. 131.
Amendment 20 #
2013/0191(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) As regards Council Regulation (EC) No 850/98 of 30 March 1998 for the conservation of fishery resources through technical measures for the protection of juveniles of marine organism4, given Mayotte’s status as an outermost region within the meaning of Article 349 TFEU, the waters around Mayotteit should be included within the scope of that Regulation and the use of purse-seines on tuna and tuna-like schools of fish inside the area within 24100 miles from the baselines of the island should be prohibited in order to preserve the shoals of large migratory fish in the vicinity of the island of Mayotte. __________________ 4 OJ L 125, 27.04.1998, p. 1.
Amendment 22 #
2013/0191(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) First, an important part of the fleet flying the flag of France and operating from the French Department of Mayotte is composed by vessels of less than 910 meters which are dispersed around the island, have no specific landing sites and still need to be identified, measured and equipped with minimum safety implements in order to be included in the register of Union fishing vessels; as a consequence, France will not be able to complete this register until 31 December 201620. France should, however, install a provisional fleet register guaranteeing minimum identification of the vessels of this segment in order to avoid proliferation of informal fishing vessels.
Amendment 26 #
2013/0191(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) As regards Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 establishing a Community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy, amending Regulations (EC) No 847/96, (EC) No 2371/2002, (EC) No 811/2004, (EC) No 768/2005, (EC) No 2115/2005, (EC) No 2166/2005, (EC) No 388/2006, (EC) No 509/2007, (EC) No 676/2007, (EC) No 1098/2007, (EC) No 1300/2008, (EC) No 1342/2008 and repealing Regulations (EEC) No 2847/93, (EC) No 1627/94 and (EC) No 1966/20069 , it appears that France will not be in a position to comply with all Union control obligations for the segment "Mayotte. Pelagic and demersal species. Length < 910m" of the fleet of Mayotte by the date on which Mayotte becomes an outermost region. The vessels of that segment, dispersed around the island, have no specific landing sites and still need to be identified. In addition, it is necessary to train fishermen and controllers and to set up the appropriate administrative and physical infrastructure. It is therefore necessary to provide for a temporary derogation from certain rules concerning the control of fishing vessels and their characteristics, their activities at sea, their gear and their catches at all stages from the vessel to the market in respect of that segment of the fleet. However, in order to attain at least some of the most important objectives of Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009, France should establish a national control system allowing it to control and monitor the activities of that segment of the fleet and to comply with the international reporting obligations of the Union. __________________ 9 OJ L 343, 22.12.09, p.1. OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 1.
Amendment 29 #
2013/0191(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Regulation (EC) No 850/98
Article 34a
Article 34a
Restrictions on fishing activities in the 24- 100-mile zone around the island of Mayotte
Amendment 31 #
2013/0191(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Regulation (EC) No 850/98
Article 34a
Article 34a
Vessels shall be prohibited from using any purse-seine on tuna and tuna-like schools of fish inside the areas within 24100 miles of the coasts of the island of Mayotte, measured from the baselines from which territorial waters are measured.”
Amendment 33 #
2013/0191(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1
Regulation (EC) No 104/2000
Article 4 – paragraph 3a
Article 4 – paragraph 3a
Until 316 December 201620, paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 shall not apply to products offered for retail sale to the final consumer in Mayotte.
Amendment 35 #
2013/0191(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002
Article 15 – paragraph 5 (new)
Article 15 – paragraph 5 (new)
5. By way of derogation from paragraph 1, France shall be exempted until 31 December 201620 from the obligation to include in its register of Union fishing vessels those vessels which are less than 910 meters in overall length and operate from Mayotte.
Amendment 37 #
2013/0191(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002
Article 15 – paragraph 6 (new)
Article 15 – paragraph 6 (new)
6. Until 31 December 201620, France shall keep a provisional register of fishing vessels which are less than 910 meters in overall length and operate from Mayotte. That register shall contain, for each vessel, at least its name, its overall length and an identification code.
Amendment 42 #
2013/0191(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009
Article 56
Article 56
However, Article 4 shall apply to Mayotte from 1 January 20219. Animal by-products and derived products generated in Mayotte as an outermost region before 1 January 20219 shall be disposed of in accordance with Article 19(1)(b).
Amendment 47 #
2013/0191(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009
Article 2a – paragraph 1
Article 2a – paragraph 1
1. Until 31 December 20168, Article 5(3) and Articles 6, 8, 41, 56, 58 to 62, 66, 68 and 109 shall not apply to France in respect of fishing vessels which are less than 910 meters in overall length and operate from Mayotte, their activities and their catch.
Amendment 50 #
2013/0191(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009
Article 2a – paragraph 2
Article 2a – paragraph 2
2. By 1 January 20145, France shall establish a national scheme of control applicable to fishing vessels which are less than 910 meters in overall length and operate from Mayotte. That scheme shall comply with the following requirements:
Amendment 53 #
2013/0191(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009
Article 2a – paragraph 3
Article 2a – paragraph 3
(3) By 30 September 20145 France shall present to the Commission an action plan setting out the measures to be taken in order to ensure the full implementation of Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 from 1 January 20178 concerning fishing vessels which are less than 910 meters in overall length and operate from the French departmentoutermost region of Mayotte. The action plan shall be the subject of a dialogue between France and the Commission. France shall take all necessary measures to implement that action plan.
Amendment 56 #
2013/0191(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 1
This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union1 January 2014.
Amendment 218 #
2013/0105(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Pending the adoption of the delegated acts, the vehicles or combinations of vehicles equipped with aerodynamic devices to the rear, which meet the requirements referred to in paragraph 2 and were tested in accordance with paragraph 3 may circulate if their length exceeds the length laid down in Annex I, point 1.1 by no more than two metres. This transitional measure shall apply from the date of entry into force of this Directive. Specialised vehicles, such as vehicle transporters, which by their inherent and open design cannot benefit from aerodynamic devices to the rear, may use these additional two metres to optimise their efficiency by other means such as optimal loading with the use of front- and rear-overhangs.
Amendment 339 #
2013/0105(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 16 – point a a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 16 – point a a (new)
(aa) The following point is added: loaded vehicle transporters: 20.75m
Amendment 44 #
2013/0074(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) The geographical scope of marine waters and coastal zones overlaps in the coastal and territorial waters of Member States. The tools of maritime spatial planning and integrated coastal management are complementary, as they respectively focus on mapping existing and potential human activities for the purpose of preparing maritime spatial plans in marine waters and on the identification of measures for integrated management of these human activities in coastal zones. The joint coherent application of Maritime Spatial Plans and Integrated Coastal Management Strategies will improve the land-sea interface planning and management. The outermost regions, given their substantial economic dependence on the land-sea interface and on optimal use of their maritime space, should also be included in the scope of the Directive.
Amendment 46 #
2013/0074(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 11 a (new)
Recital 11 a (new)
(11a) In order to improve maritime governance and prevent conflict in relation to maritime spatial planning, a European coastguard corps should be established by stepping up cooperation and coordination, at the appropriate levels, among the authorities that provide coastguard services within the Union, with a view to improving sea and ocean safety and security, notably through the enforcement of existing maritime law.
Amendment 51 #
2013/0074(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 14 a (new)
Recital 14 a (new)
(14a) Good practices in coastal management and in relation to the law of the coast should be shared.
Amendment 54 #
2013/0074(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) Maritime spatial planning and integrated coastal management should apply the ecosystem-based approach as referred to in Article 1(3) of Directive 2008/56/EC so as to ensure that the collective pressure of all activities is kept within levels compatible with the achievement of good environmental status and that the capacity of marine ecosystems to respond to human-induced changes is not compromised, while enabling the sustainable use of marine goods and services by present and future generations and allowing them to invest and be economically competitive.
Amendment 61 #
2013/0074(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) A variety of measures under different policies apply in coastal zones. In order to achieve the objectives of this Directive, Member States should prepare an inventory of these measures and analyse the need for additional actions, such as actions to prevent erosion and manage accretion, adapt to the effects of climate change, combat coastal and marine litter, develop green infrastructure and help to prevent natural disasters and to combat the spread of algae. These should be applied in a coordinated and integrated way. In doing this, Member States should consider all relevant coastal activities and pay particular attention to cross-sectoral and land-sea interactions between these activities.
Amendment 66 #
2013/0074(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1
1. This Directive establishes a framework for maritime spatial planning and integrated coastal management incorporating Union-level sea basin strategies and macro-regional strategies where applicable and aiming at promoting the sustainable growth of maritime and coastal economies and the sustainable use of marine and coastal resources.
Amendment 71 #
2013/0074(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1
1. The provisions of this Directive shall apply to marine waters and coastal zones, including those of the outermost regions.
Amendment 73 #
2013/0074(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2
Article 2 – paragraph 2
2. This Directive shall not apply to activities the sole purpose of which is defence or national security, except in relation to the establishment of a European coastguard corps. Each Member State shall, however, endeavour to ensure that such activities are conducted in a manner compatible with the objectives of this Directive.
Amendment 89 #
2013/0074(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Maritime spatial plans and integrated coastal management strategies shall apply an ecosystem-based approachapproach based on the sustainable development of coastal activities, on investment and on the preservation of ecosystems, to facilitate the co-existence and prevent conflicts between competing sector activities in marine waters and coastal zones, and shall aim to contribute to:
Amendment 96 #
2013/0074(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) promoting the development of maritime transport and, providing efficient and cost- effective shipping routes across Europe, including port accessibility and transport safety, connecting island regions and fostering land-sea interconnection;
Amendment 100 #
2013/0074(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) fostering the sustainable development and growth of, as well as investment in, the fisheries and sustainable aquaculture sector, covering both small-scale and industrial fisheries, including employment in fisheries and connected sectors;
Amendment 102 #
2013/0074(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) preserving shellfish and oyster growing areas, too many of which have been reduced or placed at risk by other blue growth activities.
Amendment 108 #
2013/0074(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
(ea) enabling the coastguard services of the various Member States to cooperate with a view eventually to establishing a European coastguard corps.
Amendment 112 #
2013/0074(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) identify the trans-boundary effects of maritime spatial plans, maritime security activities and integrated coastal management strategies on the marine waters and coastal zones under the sovereignty or jurisdiction of third countries in the same marine region or sub- region and related coastal zones and deal with them in cooperation with the competent authorities of these countries in accordance with Articles 12 and 13;
Amendment 125 #
2013/0074(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point e
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point e
(e) fishing areas and the potential for developing them;
Amendment 130 #
2013/0074(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point g a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point g a (new)
(ga) tourism and bathing sites.
Amendment 138 #
2013/0074(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) agriculture and, industry and tourism;
Amendment 140 #
2013/0074(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point f a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point f a (new)
(fa) the various functions of national coastguards, with a view eventually to establishing a European coastguard corps.
Amendment 158 #
2013/0074(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 3
Article 15 – paragraph 3
3. The Commission shall, no later than two years after the publication of this Directive in the Official Journal of the European Union, submit a progress report to the European Parliament and Council outlining the progress made in implementing ithis Directive.
Amendment 57 #
2013/0015(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Citation 1
Citation 1
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union , and in particular Articles 4(2)(c), 91(1), 170 and 171 thereof,
Amendment 58 #
2013/0015(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) In order to enable citizens of the Union, economic operators and regional and local authorities to benefit to the full from the advantages deriving from the establishing of an area without internal frontiers and attaining the objective of territorial cohesion, it is appropriate, in particular, to improve the interlinking and interoperability of the national rail networks as well as access thereto, implementing any measures that may prove necessary in the field of technical standardisation.
Amendment 36 #
2013/0007(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 a (new)
Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009
Article 8 – paragraphs 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 (new)
Article 8 – paragraphs 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 (new)
Amendment 40 #
2013/0007(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 - point -a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 - point -a (new)
Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009
Article 14 – paragraph 3
Article 14 – paragraph 3
(-a) paragraph 3 is replaced by the following: "3. The permitted margin of tolerance in estimates recorded in the fishing logbook of the quantities in kilograms of fish retained on board shall be 10 20% for all species. By way of derogation from Article 14(3) this requirement shall not apply for 20% of the total catch weight in kilograms of fish where the catch contains more than 80% of one or more pelagic or industrial species."
Amendment 42 #
2013/0007(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 a (new)
Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
(9a) in Article 17, paragraph 1 is replaced by the following: "1. Masters of Community fishing vessels of 12 metres’ers length overall or more engaged in fisheries on stocks subject to a multiannual plan and carrying more than 1 tonne of such fish, which are under the obligation to record fishing logbook data electronically in accordance with Article 15, shall notify the competent authorities of their flag Member State at least fourtwo hours before the estimated time of arrival at port of the following information:."
Amendment 45 #
2013/0007(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13
Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009
Article 23
Article 23
Amendment 49 #
2013/0007(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 24 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 24 a (new)
Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009
Article 44 – paragraph 3a (new)
Article 44 – paragraph 3a (new)
(24a) in Article 44 the following paragraph is added: "3a. By way of derogation from Article 44(1) this requirement shall not apply where the catch contains more than 80% of one or more pelagic or industrial species."
Amendment 56 #
2013/0007(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 35 – point a a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 35 – point a a (new)
Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009
Article 60 – paragraphs 3, 4, 5
Article 60 – paragraphs 3, 4, 5
aa) paragraphs 3, 4 and 5 are replaced by the following: "3. By way of derogation from paragraph 2, Member States may permit. fisheries products towhich have been weighed on aboard the fishing vessel on systems approved by the competent authorities of the Member State before being placed in storage shall not be subject to a sampling plan as referred to in paragraph 1. 4. Registered buyers, registered auctions or other bodies or persons which are responsible for the first marketing of fisheries products in a Member State shall be responsible for the accuracy of the weighing operation and this weight shall be used for the completion of landing declarations, transport document, sales notes, take-over declarations and official catch statistics, unless, in accordance with paragraph 3, the weighing takes place on board a fishing vessel, in which case it shall be the master’'s responsibility. 5. The figure resulting from the weighing shall be used for the completion of landing declarations, transport document, sales notes and, take-over declarations. and official catch statistics."
Amendment 60 #
2013/0007(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 46 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 46 a (new)
Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009
Article 92 – paragraphs 1, 2, 4, 6 and 7 (new)
Article 92 – paragraphs 1, 2, 4, 6 and 7 (new)
Amendment 5 #
2012/2323(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Maintains that the alignment of fisheries policy necessitated by the Treaty of Lisbon must not lead the Commission to assume powers exceeding the bounds of that Treaty; points out that the authorisation granted to the Commission to adopt delegated acts is not meant to be ‘open-ended’, but rather must be limited in time by agreement (as a rule, powers of this kind are delegated for three years);
Amendment 5 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 4
Citation 4
Amendment 6 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 6
Citation 6
Amendment 10 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph A
Paragraph A
A. whereas certain petitions have been deposited requesting that the establishment of the European Parliament in more than one place be discontinued; either that the European Parliament should no longer have its seat in Strasbourg or that Parliament’s seat should continue to be located in Strasbourg in accordance with Protocol No 6 annexed to the Treaty on European Union;
Amendment 11 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 10
Citation 10
Amendment 12 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph A – point 1 (new)
Paragraph A – point 1 (new)
(1) whereas, on the basis of Article 341 TFEU, the Protocol on the location of the seats of the institutions and of certain bodies, offices, agencies and departments of the European Union forms an integral part of the Treaties and thus of EU primary law, having been ratified, as part of the Treaty of Amsterdam, by all the Member States in accordance with their respective constitutional rules;
Amendment 13 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph A – point 2 (new)
Paragraph A – point 2 (new)
(2) having regard to the ruling handed down by the Court of Justice of the European Union on 13 December 2012 in joined Cases C-237/11 and C-238/11 opposing France and Parliament, which annuls Parliament’s decision of 9 March 2011;
Amendment 14 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph A a (new)
Paragraph A a (new)
Aa. whereas the European Parliament has had its seat in Strasbourg since 1952, a situation confirmed by the Edinburgh European Council in 1992 and by the Treaty of Amsterdam in 1997, and not altered by the Lisbon Treaty;
Amendment 15 #
Amendment 16 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph A b (new)
Paragraph A b (new)
Ab. whereas the real annual cost of retaining the Strasbourg seat in 2010 was EUR 51.5 million, i.e. 0.04 % of the annual budget of the European Union or 10 cents per citizen per year;
Amendment 17 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph A b (new)
Paragraph A b (new)
Ab. having regard to the requirements set out in the Treaty, which, following the adoption of the Treaty of Amsterdam in 1997, has formally laid down for Parliament an arrangement involving a seat in Strasbourg and two other sites in Brussels and Luxembourg;
Amendment 18 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph A c (new)
Paragraph A c (new)
Ac. whereas the gross cost of holding plenary sessions in Strasbourg is EUR 7 445 000 per part-session, and whereas 80 % of these costs are fixed and would be incurred irrespective of where a given part-session is held (equipment, publications, translation, etc.);
Amendment 19 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph A c (new)
Paragraph A c (new)
Ac. whereas the seats of some European institutions were chosen on account of their symbolic significance, one such example being Strasbourg, the city which symbolises the process of Franco-German reconciliation which is at the root of the European peace project;
Amendment 20 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph A d (new)
Paragraph A d (new)
Ad. whereas mobility is an intrinsic aspect of the work of an MEP, requiring at least a large number of journeys between the European Parliament, the MEP’s Member State of origin and the constituency in which the MEP was elected;
Amendment 21 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph A d (new)
Paragraph A d (new)
Ad. whereas, in accordance with the sole article of Protocol No 6 annexed to the TFEU, the European Parliament has its seat in Strasbourg, the Council has its seat in Brussels, the Commission has its seat in Brussels, the Court of Justice of the European Union has its seat in Luxembourg, the Court of Auditors has its seat in Luxembourg, the Economic and Social Committee has its seat in Brussels, the Committee of the Regions has its seat in Brussels, the European Investment Bank has its seat in Luxembourg, the European Central Bank has its seat in Frankfurt and the European Police Office (Europol) has its seat in The Hague;
Amendment 22 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph A e (new)
Paragraph A e (new)
Ae. having regard to Parliament’s Environmental Statement for 2010, issued in May 2011, and in particular pages 68 to 70;
Amendment 23 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas the protocols on the seats of the institutions are governed by mutual respect for the respective powers of the Member States and of Parliament;
Amendment 23 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph A f (new)
Paragraph A f (new)
Af. having regard to the document drawn up by Parliament’s Secretariat entitled ‘Replies and follow-up to the discharge for 2010’;
Amendment 24 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph A g (new)
Paragraph A g (new)
Ag. having regard to the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 13 December 2012 in Cases C-237/11 and C-238/11;
Amendment 26 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph B
Paragraph B
B. whereas one of these petitions (0630/2006) does not bears the signatures of more than one million citizens of the EU; one million signatures required for compliance with Rule 201(2) (Rule 191(2) when the petition was deposited) of Parliament’s Rules of Procedure, and whereas, moreover, its originators are MEPs seeking to circumvent the Treaties;
Amendment 29 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph B a (new)
Paragraph B a (new)
Ba. whereas, pursuant to the former Rule 191(2) and the current Rule 201(2) of Parliament’s Rules of Procedure, petitions to Parliament ‘shall show the name, nationality and permanent address of each petitioner’, which ‘petition’ 0630/2006 clearly does not do;
Amendment 30 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas Article 232 TFEU allowrequires Parliament to adopt its own rules of procedure and to determine the length of plenary sessionby a majority of its Members;
Amendment 30 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph B b (new)
Paragraph B b (new)
Bb. whereas petitions and the more recently introduced European Citizen’s Initiative must not be used for polemical purposes by representatives of EU citizens;
Amendment 32 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph B c (new)
Paragraph B c (new)
Bc. whereas the city of Strasbourg is associated in people’s minds with the European Parliament, and whereas the seating capacity for visitors is much greater in the Strasbourg than in the Brussels Chamber, which represents an asset for the seat of European democracy;
Amendment 34 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the ECJ has stated that the location of the seat is not to hinder the well-functioning of Parliament; whereas it has further stated that there are disadvantages and costs engendered by the plurality of working locations, but also that any improvement of the current situation requires a Treaty change and, thus, the consent ofresponsibility for remedying this lies neither with Parliament nor with the Court, but, rather, by exercising their exclusive power to determine the seats of the institutions, with the Member States;
Amendment 36 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas on two occasions, in 1997 and 2012, the Court of Justice of the European Union pointed out that the fact that Parliament’s seat is in Strasbourg is determined by the TFEU; whereas it has also confirmed Protocol No 6 in clarifying the conditions for the application thereof; whereas it has fully acknowledged the power of Parliament to determine its own internal organisational arrangements, since Parliament may adopt appropriate measures to ensure its proper functioning and proper conduct of its proceedings, but the question of determining its seat does not come within that remit;
Amendment 37 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas Parliament has undergone a complete transformation, from a consultative body with 78 seconded members that – mostly for practical reasons – shared its facilities with the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe in Strasbourg, into a fully fledged, directly elected Parliament with 754 members thatcomprises 754 Members elected by direct universal suffrage and is today co-legislator on equal terms with the Council;
Amendment 38 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
Ea. whereas Strasbourg has been the meeting place of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe since 1949 and then, from 1952, played host to the Parliamentary Assembly of the European Coal and Steel Community;
Amendment 39 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E b (new)
Recital E b (new)
Eb. whereas the seat of the European Parliament in Strasbourg was confirmed by the Edinburgh European Council in 1992 and the Amsterdam Treaty in 1997 and then incorporated in the Lisbon Treaty in 2009;
Amendment 40 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas this is most clearly illustrated by the growth of its legislative capacity, as reflec is illustrated inby the increase in the number of co-decision procedures (now ordinary legislative procedures) from 165 in 1993- 1999 to 454 in 2004-2009, to an even greater number in the current legislature;
Amendment 42 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas the increase in legislative activity and responsibility is reflected in the fact that the number of statutory staff in Brussels increased by 377 % (from 1 180 to 5 635 staff members) from 1993 to 2013, by far exceeding the 48 % increase in the number of MEPs in the same periodincrease in staff at Parliament’s three places of work;
Amendment 42 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph C
Paragraph C
C. whereas since 2006 attempts by the Petitions Committee to consider this issue on a parliamentary level have repeatedly been obstructnot yet succeeded despite the widespread interest in the issue amongst MEPs;
Amendment 43 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
I. whereas the structure of Parliament’s calendar (fixed during the Edinburgh Summit in 1992) predates all changes to its rolehas not been called into question, since it was confirmed in Protocol No 6 annexed to the Treaty of Lisbon, and the increase in Parliament’s powers arising from the adoption of the Treaties of Maastricht, Amsterdam, Nice and Lisbon has therefore been taken into account;
Amendment 43 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph C – subparagraph 1 (new)
Paragraph C – subparagraph 1 (new)
whereas it appreciates that some Members of the European Parliament have difficulties of access to certain institutions or agencies because of certain problems in road, rail or air services, but does not consider that this should be the subject of a report or petition, in view of the difficulties encountered in everyday life by many fellow citizens, which would give the impression that Members of the European Parliament are out of touch with the realities facing the people of Europe;
Amendment 46 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I a (new)
Recital I a (new)
Ia. whereas all the countries which have joined the European Union have ratified Protocol No 6;
Amendment 47 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
Amendment 49 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital L
Recital L
L. whereas the fact of geographical distance between the official seats of the co- legislative bodies – 435 km – isolates Parliament not only fromreflects the multi- centre principle with regard to the seats of the European institutions and, during part-sessions, the attention of the Council and the Commission, but also ofrom other stakeholders, such as NGOs, civil society organisations and Member State representations, and ofrom one of the world’s largest international journalistic communities, is fully focused on the work of Parliament;
Amendment 49 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph C a (new)
Paragraph C a (new)
Ca. whereas petitions are not an instrument for evading the Treaties but an instrument for use by European citizens to improve EU legislation which creates obstacles in their everyday life or to provide them with assistance so as to support them if their rights as citizens are disregarded;
Amendment 51 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital M
Recital M
Amendment 53 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph C b (new)
Paragraph C b (new)
Cb. whereas the concept of mobility is inherent in the work of Members of the European Parliament to enable them to come closer to European citizens, whereas the Committee on Petitions regularly invites petitioners to comment on their petitions by inviting them to the European Parliament in Brussels and whereas this work of contact with citizens should not be confined to one direction;
Amendment 56 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph C c (new)
Paragraph C c (new)
Cc. whereas, if a debate is initiated concerning the seat of the European Parliament, it will inevitably lead to discussion of the distribution of the seats of the European Institutions, which is laid down in the Treaty, and whereas the budgetary discharges of the European agencies could be affected by it;
Amendment 59 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital M – footnote 5
Recital M – footnote 5
Amendment 64 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital N
Recital N
Amendment 66 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. WelcomNotes the decision by the Committee on Constitutional Affairs to draw up a report on the location of the seats of the European Union’s institutions, bearing in mind that the adoption of such a report lies outside the remit of the European Parliament, as the Treaties do not provide for it;
Amendment 68 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital O
Recital O
Amendment 69 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Considers that the only possible way of amending the ‘Protocol on the location of the seats of the institutions and of certain bodies and departments of the European Communities and of Europol’ is by means of a Treaty revision pursuant to Article 48 TEU, which requires an initiative by a Member State or the European Commission;
Amendment 70 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Recalls that only the Member States have the power to amend the Treaties, the substance of which is binding on the Institutions and their members, and that a vote on this subject can only be carried unanimously;
Amendment 71 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Considers, however, that it is time to stop the polemics concerning the cost of the Strasbourg seat; calls therefore for the figures provided by official sources within the European Parliament to be quoted clearly in the annexes to the own- initiative report of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs, including pages 68-70 of the Environmental Declaration of the European Parliament of May 2011 concerning the ‘environmental impact of the Strasbourg seat’ and page 40 of the document of the European Parliament’s Secretariat entitled ‘REPLIES AND FOLLOW-UP TO THE DISCHARGE FOR 2010’ on the annual cost of the Strasbourg seat;
Amendment 72 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital P
Recital P
P. whereas Parliament, since its suggestion in 1958 to be sited in proximity to the Council and the Commission, has via numerous reports, declarations and statements alwaysoften expressed its wish for a more practical and efficient working arrangement;
Amendment 72 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Recalls that, on this basis, twelve monthly plenary part-sessions, including the budgetary part-session, must be held at the Strasbourg seat, while additional part-sessions are held in Brussels;
Amendment 73 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Does not considers that a majority exists within the Council in favour of altering the seat of any European Institution, bearing in mind that this would send an undesirable message to citizens, which would be interpreted as expressing a desire on the part of the Member States to make the European Union’s decision-making bodies more remote from the European citizen;
Amendment 74 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital Q
Recital Q
Amendment 74 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. Stresses that the additional part- sessions entail a substantial additional cost, which could be reduced by extending ordinary part-sessions in Strasbourg;
Amendment 75 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. Notes the intention of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs to draw up a report which will make it possible to recall that the European Parliament has its seat in Strasbourg;
Amendment 76 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 d (new)
Paragraph 1 d (new)
1d. Recalls that European Citizens’ Initiatives (ECIs) have the purpose of securing the adoption of a legal act of the Union which does not amend primary law, whereas any call for amendment of the ‘Protocol on the location of the seats of the institutions and of certain bodies and departments of the European Union’ would entail amendment of a primary legal act, which is not compatible with the regulation;
Amendment 79 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 86 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
Amendment 89 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Agrees with the principle that the European Parliament would be more effective, cost-efficient andConsiders efficiency, cost-effectiveness and the principle of respectful of for the environment if it were located in a single place; and notes that the continuation of the monthly migration between Brussels andnot to be connected with the place in which Parliament sits, but with its needs; points out that according to figures from the European Parliament’s services, the annual cost of Parliament’s seat in Strasbourg hwas become a symbolic negative issue amongst most EU citizens which is detrimental to Parliament’s reputationEUR 51.5 million in 2010, or 0.04% of the annual EU budget, which represents a cost of 10 cents per EU citizen per year, and hence considers the arguments on Parliament’s cost to be exaggerated;
Amendment 90 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 (new)
emphasises that the gross cost of holding part-sessions in Strasbourg is EUR 7 445 000 per part-session, and that 80% of these costs are fixed and would be incurred irrespective of where the part-session is held, be they for equipment, publications or translation, etc.;
Amendment 92 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Emphasises the environmental example set by the European Parliament’s seat in Strasbourg, which reduced its CO2 emissions by 57% between 2006 and 2010 by taking special measures, meaning that these now represent 3.6% of all Parliament’s CO2 emissions;
Amendment 94 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Respects the historical reasons for the location of its plenary sessions in Strasbourg and the Treaty requirements that necessitate the system of a single seat and three places of work;
Amendment 94 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Considers it inappropriate in the European Year of Citizens to show these selfsame European citizens that the idea is to distance them from EU institution decision-making centres, and also believes that prevailing Euroscepticism would use this is a reason to criticise an over-concentration of decision-making bodies in one set place;
Amendment 95 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Emphasises that European integration necessarily entails mobility and that this applies to all national and European political representatives and officials, and that mobility is an intrinsic aspect of the work of MEPs, as representatives of the citizens of the European Union;
Amendment 95 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Considers that deciding the seats of EU institutions lies outside the remit of the European Parliament; points out that the ECB in Frankfurt is building new premises for itself, that the Council in Brussels will soon have new buildings, and that investments have been made in the European Parliament in Strasbourg in recent years to make it a parliament worthy of the centre of European democracy;
Amendment 96 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. Considers that decentralisation of the legislative authority away from Brussels strengthens its independence;
Amendment 96 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Points to the economic and social importance of the European Parliament for the Strasbourg region;
Amendment 97 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 d (new)
Paragraph 1 d (new)
1d. Considers that the choice of the EU institutions’ seats has always been guided by a desire to bring the Union as close to ordinary people as possible and not to concentrate it in one place;
Amendment 97 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 c (new)
Paragraph 2 c (new)
2c. Points to the tradition of geographical diversity in the siting of EU institutions;
Amendment 98 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 c (new)
Paragraph 2 c (new)
2c. Emphasises that almost 95% of the EU budget is intended for investment and hence for the public, adding that the European Union, with such a small and deficit-less operating budget for 500 million inhabitants, stands as an example in these times of crisis;
Amendment 99 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 d (new)
Paragraph 2 d (new)
2d. Stresses that concentrating EU powers in the city of Brussels would adversely effect the way the European public views the EU;
Amendment 100 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 d (new)
Paragraph 2 d (new)
2d. Points to the environmental example set by the European Parliament’s seat in Strasbourg, which reduced its own CO2 emissions by 57% between 2006 and 2010, meaning that these now represent 3.6% of all Parliament’s CO2 emissions;
Amendment 101 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 101 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 e (new)
Paragraph 2 e (new)
2e. Emphasises that Strasbourg has come to be viewed by the public as the European capital of democracy and human rights owing to the institutions that are based there, among them the European Parliament;
Amendment 102 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 e (new)
Paragraph 2 e (new)
2e. Adds that the carbon footprint for travel for committee, political group and delegation meetings, which increased by 23.8% between 2006 and 2010, is significantly larger (6 350 tonnes of CO2 in 2010) than that for Parliament’s seat in Strasbourg (4 199 tonnes of CO2 en 2010);
Amendment 103 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 f (new)
Paragraph 2 f (new)
2f. Emphasises that the public associates the city of Brussels with the European Commission, while the city of Strasbourg continues to be associated with the European Parliament;
Amendment 104 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 f (new)
Paragraph 2 f (new)
2f. Considers that the success of the open days held every year at the European Parliament’s seat in Strasbourg, the 100 000 visitors each year outside part-sessions and the 10 000 students from the Euroscola Programme indicate that the European public have in no way rejected the seat of the European Parliament in Strasbourg;
Amendment 105 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 g (new)
Paragraph 2 g (new)
2g. Expresses concern at the steady increase (+23.8% between 2006 and 2010) in the number of committee, political group and delegation meetings held outside the European Parliament’s places of work;
Amendment 106 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Emphasises that the Committee’s report was prepared under the ordinary own-initiative procedure and there is thus no obligation to implement the proposals, and further that the matter of the EU institutions’ seats is governed directly by the Treaties and is therefore subject to the political will of the Member States acting unanimously;
Amendment 106 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 g (new)
Paragraph 2 g (new)
2g. Points out that holding part-sessions in Brussels rather than Strasbourg would result in a saving of EUR 1.5 million, as is specified in paragraph 28 - ‘Costs of using Strasbourg as the seat of the EP’ of the document drawn up by Parliament’s Secretariat entitled ‘Replies and Follow-up to the Discharge for 2010’;
Amendment 107 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Recalls that the Court of Justice of the EU has held that Parliament, during the proceedings before the Court, did not adduce reasons based on the exercise of its power of internal organisation sufficient to show – despite the continuous increase in its powers – that it had the power to alter the timetable of part-sessions; stresses, therefore, that the European Parliament likewise does not now have the power to decide where its seat should be;
Amendment 107 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 h (new)
Paragraph 2 h (new)
2h. Notes that the carbon footprint for travel in connection with these meetings was 6 350 tonnes of CO2 en 2010, while for the seat in Strasbourg it was 4 199 tonnes that year;
Amendment 108 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 i (new)
Paragraph 2 i (new)
2i. Notes that economic and environmental costs could be rationalised by limiting the number of meetings held outside the European Parliament’s official places of work;
Amendment 118 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Points out that this own-initiative report must not be used as a means of disregarding the EU Treaties, which provide that the seat of the European Parliament shall be in Strasbourg and that 12 part-sessions per year shall be held there;
Amendment 120 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Observes that, if a debate were initiated concerning the seat of the European Parliament, it would inevitably lead to discussion of the distribution of all the seats of the European Institutions, which is laid down in the Treaty;
Amendment 120 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Respects the historic reasons for the location of its plenary sessions in Strasbourg and the Treaty requirements that necessitate the two-seat system; nevertheless insists that such an arrangement cannot continue in perpetuity and that Parliament itself must be able to state a preference for its future;
Amendment 122 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Respects the historic and symbolic reasons for the location of its plenary sessions in Strasbourg and the Treaty requirements that necessitateestablish the two-seat system; nevertheless insists that such of the European Parrangement cannot continue in perpetuity and that Parliament itself must be able to state a preference for its futureliament as being in Strasbourg and stipulate that the European Parliament must hold its twelve monthly plenary sessions there, as the ECJ confirmed in its judgment of 13 December 2012;
Amendment 124 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 – point 1 (new)
Paragraph 3 – point 1 (new)
(1) Adds that all new European agencies and institutions should be created in the new Member States;
Amendment 126 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Points out that Croatia, as the 28th Member State of the Union as of 1 July 2013, is bound to seek the siting of a future EU agency or institution on its territory;
Amendment 130 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Underscores the symbolic and historical importance of the European Parliament’s location in Strasbourg as part of the process of European reconciliation;
Amendment 132 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Points out that Parliament’s initiatives on determining for itself the matter of its seat – which is in Strasbourg – were set aside by the Court of Justice in its ruling of 13 December 2012 and that, therefore, any action on Parliament’s part to establish the seats of the EU institutions is in breach of the very Treaties which it sees itself as defending in its capacity as the democratic voice of Europe’s citizens;
Amendment 134 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Recognises the educational and civic value of Parliament’s Strasbourg seat, which attracts 100 000 visitors a year outside part-session periods, as well as 10 000 students on the Euroscola programme;
Amendment 137 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Points out that the European Union has developed in a polycentric way, with the EU institutions and agencies located, insofar as possible, throughout all the Member States, so as to bring decision making closer to the people and avoid an unwelcome concentration of power;
Amendment 138 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)
Paragraph 3 c (new)
3c. Recognises that efforts are needed to improve working conditions during ordinary part-sessions in Strasbourg;
Amendment 140 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)
Paragraph 3 c (new)
3c. Points out that it is fundamentally important to Europe’s citizens that decisions are taken in more than one place;
Amendment 145 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Amendment 146 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Amendment 154 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 – point 1 (new)
Paragraph 4 – point 1 (new)
(1) Considers that the so-called petition No 0630/2006 is not in fact a petition because it does not meet the criteria for admissibility of petitions to Parliament under Rule 201 of its Rules of Procedure (formerly Rule 191(2)) inasmuch as it does not show the nationality and permanent address of each petitioner, and that, by implication, electronic signatures on a petition are not admissible and there can be no guarantee as to the real or virtual level of support for this initiative;
Amendment 158 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Considers, in the light of the foregoing, that the first-named petitioner in petition No 0630-2006 is the only one to meet the admissibility criteria and that this means the so-called petition has received just one signature;
Amendment 160 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Finds it regrettable that this debate should focus on a matter which concerns 0.04% of the EU budget at a time when people want to see an overall Union budget capable of responding adequately to the financial difficulties that Member States are experiencing;
Amendment 161 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 c (new)
Paragraph 4 c (new)
4c. Asks Parliament’s Legal Service to specify whether such a report on the location of the seats of the EU institutions is lawful;
Amendment 162 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 d (new)
Paragraph 4 d (new)
4d. Considers that petitions about the seats of the EU institutions should be forwarded to the Member States, which alone are empowered to take decisions in the matter;
Amendment 163 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 e (new)
Paragraph 4 e (new)
4e. Considers that the own-initiative report by the Committee on Constitutional Affairs can have no legal impact;
Amendment 164 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 f (new)
Paragraph 4 f (new)
4f. Points out that Parliament may be consulted on the question of the seats of the European institutions only prior to the convening by the Council of an intergovernmental conference and that there are no plans for such a conference.
Amendment 1 #
2012/2297(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 (new)
Paragraph -1 (new)
-1. Maintains that the fisheries sector constitutes an integral part of Blue Growth and that sustainable fishing employment must be treated as a priority within that strategy, not least in view of the fact that the EU depends on fishery and aquaculture products imported from non-member countries;
Amendment 3 #
2012/2297(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Highlights the role of sea-basin strategies and macroregional strategies in fostering balanced, integrated regional development and encouraging inclusive blue growth; calls for such strategies to be effectively rolled out and for appropriate financial and administrative resources to be targeted on their implementation;
Amendment 18 #
2012/2297(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Stresses that the fisheries sector is an integral part of blue growth and that employment in sustainable fisheries should be considered a priority, particularly given the EU's increasing dependence on imports of fisheries and aquaculture products from non-EU countries;
Amendment 18 #
2012/2297(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to pursue a coherent maritime spatial planning policy and draw up integrated coastal zone management plans;
Amendment 20 #
2012/2297(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Considers that a successful blue economy requires secure EU maritime borders, with a view to ensuring the protection of the marine environment, fisheries controls and law enforcement; points, therefore, to the importance of setting up a European coastguard to coordinate operations and surveillance at sea;
Amendment 23 #
2012/2297(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Underlines the role of aquaculture in promoting regional development in coastal areas; notes that 90 % of aquaculture businesses in the EU are SMEs, providing 80 000 jobs; calls for innovative and sustainable methods to be supported via the EMFF, to promote the development of aquaculture in deep water alongside offshore wind farms;
Amendment 24 #
2012/2297(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses the importance of the future European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF) in supporting the sustainable development of fisheries and aquaculture and for economic diversification in the fishing communities dependent on those sectors;
Amendment 32 #
2012/2297(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Highlights the added-value of the European Strategy for the Atlantic in terms of maritime spatial planning, accessibility of territories and the competitiveness of maritime industries, and calls on the Commission, the Member States and the regional authorities to draw on its methodology in order to make the best use of coastal areas and their hinterland;
Amendment 30 #
2012/2261(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Calls on the Commission to link this plan of action to regional policy, the Union’s integrated maritime policy and the Connecting Europe Facility, so as to maximise its leverage effect;
Amendment 44 #
2012/2261(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Calls on the Commission to consider whether a specific funding line for implementation of the measures and objectives laid down for this strategy should be created in cooperation with the European Investment Bank (EIB), drawing on the experience gained with the FEMIP1; so as to avoid further complicating matters through the adoption of new budgetary instruments; calls on the Commission also to consider the possibility of using project bonds and public-private partnerships as eminently suitable financing instruments;
Amendment 7 #
2012/2260(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Underlines that the principle of local and regional self-government, explicitly recognised in the Lisbon Treaty, as well as the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality, have to be the cornerstones of any future policy developmeduly taken into account in the Single Market;
Amendment 8 #
2012/2260(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Recommends that local and regional authorities and their umbrella associations in all Member States are invitedshould be able to make suggestions on how to best achieve the full realisation of the Single Market and that all public institutions should be encouraged to set up a public consultation and discussion process to this aim;
Amendment 20 #
2012/2260(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
Amendment 15 #
2012/2256(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on Member States to prioritise, on the expenditure and revenue sides of the budget, growth-friendly policies, particularly in the areas of education, research, innovation, ICTs, infrastructure and energy, and ensure the efficiency of such expenditures and revenues;
Amendment 25 #
2012/2256(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Takes the view that, in order to strengthen growth, competitiveness and productivity, enhanced coordination of economic policies and far-reaching structural reforms are needed.
Amendment 9 #
2012/2235(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. mindful of the danger posed by the derogation on rules of origin provided for in Article 6(6) of Protocol II on rules of origin annexed to the interim partnership agreement between the European Community and the Pacific States, resulting in unfair competition in the European market for fishery products;
Amendment 36 #
2012/2235(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Calls on the Commission not to grant any furtherto refuse any derogation on rules of origin in the EPA negotiations with the Pacific ACP countries, without the granting oat allows tariff preciprocal benefits to the EU fishing industry, such as access to fisheries resources in those countries’ EEZferences for the entry into the market of fresh or processed fishery products;
Amendment 4 #
2012/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the industrial sector plays a significantleading role in the European Union (EU), accounting for approximately 16% of the EU’s gross domestic product (GDP); whereas the Commission estimates that for every 100 jobs created in industry, between 60 to 200 new jobs can be created in the rest of the economy;
Amendment 23 #
2012/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 – point 3 a (new)
Paragraph 5 – point 3 a (new)
• the development of broadband infrastructure, which adds to an area’s attractiveness;
Amendment 42 #
2012/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Points to the importance of capitalising on the European Investment Bank’s financial engineering schemes established under the cohesion policy, bearing in mind their powerful leverage effect;
Amendment 5 #
2012/2099(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the cohesion policy investments in the area of energy could contribute to the realisation of both policies by promoting growth in underdeveloped regions and local job creation, and ensuring security of energy supply across the whole EU;
Amendment 20 #
2012/2099(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Emphasises, in view of the crisis’ negative effect of increasing local and regional disparities in Europe, the need for strong EU support for cohesion; believes that European energy projects could contribute to regional development through investments in decentralised energy sources, energy efficiency and other measures which support growth and jobs;
Amendment 65 #
2012/2099(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Notes that, for projects to be properly implemented, regional and local authorities should be consulted on partnership agreements in such a way as to give them a real opportunity to influence their goals, the content of expenditure and their implementation;
Amendment 7 #
2012/2009(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point a
Paragraph 1 – point a
(a) considersuggests that transferable fishing concessions are the only possible solution to the problem of overcapacity, for which there is as yet no precise definitioncould be one conceivable solution to overcapacity if the latter was truly quantifiable and had been quantified, which is not currently the case;
Amendment 11 #
2012/2009(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
(aa) indicates clearly that withdrawing the licence or capacity of a vessel does not affect the fishing quotas, nor therefore the preservation of the resource (paragraph 27);
Amendment 12 #
2012/2009(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point a b (new)
Paragraph 1 – point a b (new)
(ab) states that there is no clear link between fishing capacity and fishing opportunities and that this therefore 'complicates the identification of suitable policies to reduce fishing overcapacity' and 'makes it difficult to assess the performance of those policies' (paragraph 73);
Amendment 13 #
2012/2009(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point a c (new)
Paragraph 1 – point a c (new)
(ac) expresses scepticism about a fishing rights transfer scheme and calls on the Commission to explain what role transferable fishing rights could have in reducing capacity (paragraph 77);
Amendment 14 #
2012/2009(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point a d (new)
Paragraph 1 – point a d (new)
(ad) recommends that Member States should fulfil their obligation to keep the fishing fleet registers up to date so that the Commission may find a balance between fleet capacity and fishing opportunities, which is currently impossible (paragraph 77);
Amendment 31 #
Amendment 35 #
2012/2009(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 – points a a and a b (new)
Paragraph 3 – points a a and a b (new)
(aa) the report by the Court of Auditors should not pass political judgment nor prejudge the methods for distributing fishing opportunities or fleet management tools that would be used to achieve the CFP objectives, which should be decided by the legislator; (ab) the recommendations based on the concept of overcapacity, which is not defined, are contradictory;
Amendment 36 #
2012/2009(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 – point b
Paragraph 3 – point b
Amendment 43 #
2012/2009(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 – point c
Paragraph 3 – point c
(c) fishing effort and fishing capacity are two distinct concepts; for this reason, reducing fishing capacity is only one of the parameters for achieving a genuine reduction in fishing effort.
Amendment 45 #
2012/2009(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 – introductory part
Paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. Takes the view that, in order to achieve the objective of a real reduction in fishing effort, provision should be made for the following additional measures:
Amendment 53 #
2012/2009(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 – point d a (new)
Paragraph 4 – point d a (new)
(da) ensuring widespread application of multiannual management plans;
Amendment 55 #
2012/2009(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 – point d b (new)
Paragraph 4 – point d b (new)
(db) improving the checks and respecting the capacity ceilings that are in place;
Amendment 5 #
2012/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) The due diligence obligation should apply to all users irrespective of their size, including to micro-enterprises and small and medium-sized companies. Excluding these actors from the system would entirely undermine its effectiveness. It would also run against the international obligations of the Union under the Nagoya Protocol. However, the Regulation should offer a range of measures and tools to enable micro-enterprises and small and medium- sized companies to comply with their obligations at low cost, without this affecting their competitiveness, and with high legal certainty.
Amendment 6 #
2012/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 2
2. The Commission shall make public, including on the internet, a list of the competent authorities. The Commission shall keep the list up to date; particular attention shall be paid to the outermost regions, bearing in mind the significance and fragility of the genetic resources found on their territories, and with a view to preventing any abusive exploitation.
Amendment 15 #
2012/0236(COD)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 1
Article 1 – point 1
Regulation (EC) 1342/2008
Article 4 – paragraph 2
Article 4 – paragraph 2
2. WhenMember States shall calculating ae days present within an area Member States shall use the same method used to establish the effort baseline referred to in Article 12(2)(a)in accordance with Article 26 of Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 establishing a Community fisheries control system.
Amendment 22 #
2012/0236(COD)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 4
Article 1 – point 4
Regulation (EC) No1342/2008
Article 11 a – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 11 a – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) during that trip the fishing vessel concerned has only oneuses a regulated gear on board and that gear is listed in accordance with paragraph 2.
Amendment 25 #
2012/0236(COD)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 4
Article 1 – point 4
Regulation (EC) No1342/2008
Article 11 a – paragraph 1 – c a (new)
Article 11 a – paragraph 1 – c a (new)
(c a) the fishing activities of the vessel or group of vessels result in cod catches of less than 1.5% of the total catches measured by weight.
Amendment 27 #
2012/0236(COD)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 4
Article 1 – point 4
Regulation (EC) No1342/2008
Article 11 d – titre
Article 11 d – titre
Amendment 28 #
2012/0236(COD)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 4
Article 1 – point 4
Regulation (EC) No1342/2008
Article 11 d – introduction
Article 11 d – introduction
Exclusions from the fishing effort regime that were already in force prior to [__ - will be filled with concrete date]…* shall continue to apply for as long as the conditions under which those exclusions were granted remain fulfilled. Member States shall provide annually to the Commission any relevant information enabling it to establish that those conditions remain fulfilled. ______________ * OJ: insert the date of entry into force of this regulation.
Amendment 32 #
2012/0236(COD)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 7
Article 1 – point 7
Regulation (EC) No1342/2008
Article 14 – paragraph 5
Article 14 – paragraph 5
5. Where the scientific data indicate that more than 10 % of the total cod catches for a particular effort group consist of discards, or where the quota allocation does not correspond to the expected catches and is likely to result in cod discards, for a particular gear, large volumes of cod are discarded throughout the management period, the Member State concerned shall take immediate measures to minimise cod discards.
Amendment 39 #
2012/0232(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) During the Fisheries Consultations between the Union and Norway of 28 June 2012 common technical and control measures were specified to be applied in the Skagerrak, the list of species to be covered by an obligation to land all catches and the timetable by which these species should be progressively included in the obligation to land.
Amendment 41 #
2012/0232(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) An obligation to lanrecord on board all catches of stocks subject to catch limits needs to be established, except for species or fisheries where there is scientific evidence of high survival rates of discarded fish or where the burden to fishermen of having to extract the unwanted species from the catch for separate treatment is unreasonably high. [Art. 3].
Amendment 43 #
2012/0232(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) The system of lanrecording all catches requires substantial changes to the present fisheries and the management of the fisheries concerned. Therevessels to be equipped fore, the obligation to land should be introduced progressivelyis purpose.
Amendment 44 #
2012/0232(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) For the protection of juvenile fish, the functioning of the fisheries market and to ensure that no unjust profit can be gained from catching fish under a minimum conservation reference size, the handling of such catches should be limited to fdish meal, pet food or other non-human consumption products, ortribution for charitable purposes.
Amendment 48 #
2012/0232(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) For the proper monitoring of fishing activities with special regard to verifying that the obligation to land all catches of stocks subject to catch limitations is complied with at sea, it is necessary to operate a Remote Electronic Monitoring (REM) system on vessels operating in the Skagerrak, it is necessary to step up control at sea by the Member States concerned and by Norway.
Amendment 50 #
2012/0232(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) In order to facilitate more selective fishing under an obligation to land all catches, it is appropriate to exempt the vessels operating in the Skagerrak fromthe objective of significantly reducing unwanted catches, it is appropriate to allow fishermen to invest in more selective gear and maintain the effort regime set out in Chapter III of Regulation (EC) No 1342/2008 of 18 December 2008 establishing a long- term plan for cod stocks and the fisheries exploiting those stocks and repealing Regulation (EC) No 423/2004 for vessels operating in the Skagerrak.
Amendment 51 #
2012/0232(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) It is required to provide a level of flexibility for fishermen to adapt to the new regime in the Skagerrak. Accordingly, the permitted flexibility in the year-to year quota uptake established in Regulation (EC) No 847/96 of 6 May 1996 introducing additional conditions for year-to-year management of TACs and quotas should not be deemed as overfishingnecessary for Member States to present and implement a plan aimed at significantly reducing unwanted catches.
Amendment 52 #
2012/0232(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
Amendment 53 #
2012/0232(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
Recital 19
Amendment 54 #
2012/0232(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
Amendment 56 #
2012/0232(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – title
Article 3 – title
Obligation to land allrecord all catches on board and significantly reduce unwanted catches
Amendment 57 #
2012/0232(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1
1. By way of derogation from Article 19(1) of Regulation (EC) No 850/98 all catches of the fish stocks listed in Annex I shall be brought and retaincorded on board the fishing vessels and landed in accordance with the timeline set out in that Annex, except if the discarded fish of such stocks have high survival rate or where the burden to fishermen of having to extract the unwanted species from the catch for separate treatment is unreasonably highmay be thrown back into the sea after having been recorded.
Amendment 61 #
2012/0232(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2
Article 3 – paragraph 2
2. Notwithstanding paragraph 1, and by way of derogation from Article 19(1) of Regulation (EC) 850/98 when fishing with gears having a mesh size equal to or less than 32 mm all catches of stocks, including stocks to which the obligation to land does not apply, shall be brought and retained on board the fishing vessels and landAs from 1 January 2013, all records of unwanted catches in the Skagerrak shall be forwarded to the Commission so that their composition can be analysed.
Amendment 62 #
2012/0232(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3
Article 3 – paragraph 3
3. Paragraph 1 shall not apply to fishing with pots or creelsThe Member States concerned shall significantly reduce unwanted catches of commercial stocks as defined in Annex I, notably by introducing selectivity measures as set out in Article 6 of this Regulation.
Amendment 63 #
2012/0232(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 4
Article 3 – paragraph 4
4. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts to amend Annex I on the basis of advances in scientific information or where the burden to fishermen proves to be disproportionate to the benefits. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance Article 16On 31 December each year, each Member State concerned shall submit to the Commission an annual report on the measures implemented in order to achieve the objective of significantly reducing unwanted catches.
Amendment 66 #
2012/0232(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. If the Member States concerned do not submit a plan for significantly reducing unwanted catches, the Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in order to establish a plan for significantly reducing unwanted catches in the Skagerrak, without introducing a landing obligation.
Amendment 67 #
2012/0232(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Amendment 68 #
2012/0232(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2
Article 4 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall ensure that quota is available for fishing vessels operating in the Skagerrak for any stocks subject to the obligation to land what they may catch, taking account of the likely catch composition of the vesselfishing vessels flying their flag and operating in the Skagerrak are equipped to record their catches.
Amendment 69 #
2012/0232(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3
Article 4 – paragraph 3
Amendment 71 #
2012/0232(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1
1. Where a minimum conservation reference size is set for a stock subject to Article 3, the saledistribution of catches of that stock below the minimum conservation reference size shall be restricted for reduction to fish meal, pet food or other non-human consumption products only, or forto charitable purposes.
Amendment 78 #
2012/0232(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10
Article 10
Amendment 80 #
2012/0232(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – title
Article 11 – title
Remote Electronic Monitoringcording on board
Amendment 82 #
2012/0232(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shallmay operate a Remote Electronic Monitoring (REM) system for monitoring of fishing activities of the fishing vessels flying their flag and operating in the Skagerrak.
Amendment 86 #
2012/0232(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2
Article 11 – paragraph 2
Amendment 91 #
2012/0232(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3
Article 11 – paragraph 3
Amendment 94 #
2012/0232(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 4
Article 11 – paragraph 4
Amendment 100 #
2012/0232(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Amendment 101 #
2012/0232(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19
Article 19
Amendment 102 #
2012/0232(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20
Article 20
Amendment 107 #
2012/0232(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – table – title
Annex I – table – title
List of species to be progressively included in the obligation to land.for which unwanted catches are to be significantly reduced
Amendment 109 #
2012/0232(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – point 1 – point a
Annex III – point 1 – point a
(a) requirements of full catch sampling at sea and in port, where appropriate;
Amendment 110 #
2012/0232(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – point 1 – point d
Annex III – point 1 – point d
Amendment 112 #
2012/0232(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – point 1 – point e
Annex III – point 1 – point e
(e) reference fleet for the main fisheries in Skagerrak, eithein particular by the use of REM or observers;
Amendment 113 #
2012/0232(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – point 2 – introductory part
Annex III – point 2 – introductory part
2. For the purposes of control and inspection to verify the level of compliance with Articles 6, 7 and 87, the national control and inspection measures shall include reference at least to the following:
Amendment 115 #
2012/0232(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – point 3
Annex III – point 3
Amendment 2 #
2012/0229(NLE)
Proposal for a recommendation
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Declines to cConsents to conclusion of the Protocol;
Amendment 6 #
2012/0229(NLE)
Proposal for a recommendation
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 24 #
2012/0201(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) In order to apply certain provisions of Regulation (EC) No 1100/2007, it would be appropriate to delegate to the Commission the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be delegated to the Commission, in respect of taking measures to address a significant decline of average market prices for eels used for restocking, as compared to those of eels used for other purposes. It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level. The Commission, when preparing and drawing up delegated acts, should ensure a simultaneous and timely transmission of relevant documents to the European Parliament and to the Council.
Amendment 39 #
2012/0201(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – subparagraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – subparagraph 1
Regulation (EC) nº 1100/2007
Article 7 – paragraph 6
Article 7 – paragraph 6
6. In the event of a significant decline of average market prices for eels used for restocking, as compared to those of eels used for other purposes, the Member State concerned shall inform the Commission within a reasonable time limit. The Commission, by means of delegated acts adopted in accordance with Article 12a and in order to address the situation, may temporarily reduce the percentages of eels used for restocking as referred to in paragraph 2.
Amendment 47 #
2012/0201(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – subparagraph 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – subparagraph 2
Regulation (EC) nº 1100/2007
Article 12a – paragraph 2
Article 12a – paragraph 2
2. The delegation of powers referred to in Article7(6) shall be conferred for an indeterminate period of time period of three years starting from [OJ: please insert the date of entry into force of this regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the three-year period.
Amendment 54 #
2012/0184(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
Amendment 107 #
2012/0184(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – indent 7
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – indent 7
Amendment 131 #
2012/0184(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Amendment 184 #
2012/0184(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 1
Amendment 95 #
2012/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) The Union is committed to implement the Resolutions adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations, in particular Resolutions 61/105 and 64/72, which call on States and Regional Fisheries Management Organisations to ensure the protection of vulnerable deep-sea marine ecosystems from the destructive impact of bottom fishing gears, as well as the sustainable exploitation of deep-sea fish stocks.
Amendment 98 #
2012/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2 a (new)
Recital 2 a (new)
(2a) The development and adoption of the measures recommended by NEAFC to protect deep water vulnerable marine ecosystems against the adverse effects of bottom fishing gear, in accordance with resolutions 61/105 and 64/72, have been widely supported by the Union, and have been recognised by the General assembly of the United Nations as a very significant step towards achieving the goal of protecting vulnerable marine ecosystems and their biodiversity.
Amendment 101 #
2012/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2 c (new)
Recital 2 c (new)
(2c) FAO guidelines on the management of deep-sea fisheries in the High Seas adopted in 2008, that the Union committed to respect and which define the concrete implementation of resolution 61/105 of the United Nations General Assembly, invite coastal States to apply the principles and methods they contain in their national courts. Given the example provided by the relevance of the measures recommended to the flag States by the NEAFC for waters beyond national jurisdiction, there is no reason for the coastal States in the NEAFC regulated area not to apply these measures in their own waters. It is therefore appropriate to provide that the measures recommended by NEAFC to protect vulnerable marine ecosystems in deep water against the adverse effects of bottom fishing gears shall apply 'mutatis mutandis' in EU waters, instead of any other modality.
Amendment 103 #
2012/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) In order to maintain necessary reductions in fishing capacity achieved so far in deep-sea fisheries, and to focus management measures on the most relevant part of the fleet for deep sea fisheries, it is appropriate to provide that fishing for deep-sea species is subject to a fishing authorisation which limits the capacity of vessels eligible to land deep-sea species. With a viewfish deep-sea species in a targeted manner. It is however necessary that fishing licenses are also delivered for bycatch fishing of deep-sea species, considering that all these fishing activities are likely to focus management measures on the part of the fleet most relevant for deep-sea fisheries, the fishing authorisations should be issued according to target or by- catch fisherycur in areas where deep water vulnerable marine ecosystems may be present, and that they should be protected against the adverse effects that may have these activities, including those using bottom gears. However, the Council and Parliament Regulation (EU) No xxx/2013 from xxx 2013 on the common fisheries policy defines a goal of eliminating discards that also apply to deep-sea species. The novelty of this new requirement should be taken into account so that vessels incidentally capturing deep-sea species and which are not currently subjected to a licensing regime for fishing, are not totally deprived of the opportunity to continue their traditional fishing activities.
Amendment 108 #
2012/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
Amendment 113 #
2012/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7 a (new)
Recital 7 a (new)
(7a) Deep-sea fishing should be allowed only if catches of deep-water species can be kept within limits enabling stocks to be maintained at maximum sustainable yield levels based on the scientific advice available.
Amendment 114 #
2012/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7 b (new)
Recital 7 b (new)
(7b) The adverse effects of deep-sea fishing on vulnerable marine ecosystems should be eliminated by freezing the fishing footprint and banning deep-sea fishing in areas outside the footprint, as defined in this Regulation.
Amendment 115 #
2012/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
Amendment 124 #
2012/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) Moreover, vessels which haveo wish to change gear in order to be able to stay in the fishery should be eligible for receiving financial assistance from the European Fisheries Fund provided that the new gear reduces the impact of fishing on non- commercial species and provided also that the national operational programme allows contributing to such measures.
Amendment 130 #
2012/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) Vessels targetfishing deep-sea species with otherin a targeted or accessory manner with bottom gear should not extend their range of operation according to their fishing authorisation within Union waters, unless expansion can be assessed as not carrying a significant risk of negative impact on vulnerable marine ecosystems. Similarly, wherever their area of activity may be, when finding indices of the presence of vulnerable marine ecosystems, they should avoid these locations in the future, pending whether these indices reflect a proved presence of vulnerable marine ecosystems.
Amendment 136 #
2012/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) Scientific advice concerning certain fish stocks found in the deep-sea indicates that these stocks are particularly vulnerable to exploitation, and that fishing for these stocks should be limited or reduced as a precautionary measurehowever there have been quantified improvements in some stocks such as the roundnose grenadier, blue ling and black scabbardfish. Fishing opportunities for deep-sea stocks should not go beyond those levels which are scientifically advised as precautionary. In the case of advice being absent for lack of sufficient information about stocks or species, no fishing opportunities should be allocated.
Amendment 139 #
2012/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12 a (new)
Recital 12 a (new)
(12a) Regulation (EU) No xxx/2013 from the Council and the European Parliament from xxx 2013 on the common fisheries policy defines the rules which should govern the determination of opportunities in respect of the precautionary principle and aiming at quickly achieving maximum sustainable yield. There is no need to consider different ways from those defined as general, especially in spite of their particularly vulnerability to exploitation, several stocks of deep-water species with a major commercial interest are already recognised by ICES as being operated in accordance with the principle of maximum sustainable yield. The Commission may propose a framework for deep-sea species by-catch through a system of TACs and quotas, if it considers it necessary for their preservation.
Amendment 142 #
2012/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 establishing a Community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy14 lays down control and enforcement requirements concerning multiannual plans. Deep-sea species, by nature vulnerable to fishing, should receive the same attention in terms of control as other conservation species for whichDeep-sea species, by nature vulnerable to fishing, should be covered by a multiannual management plan has been agreedlaid down in the [common fisheries policy regulation].
Amendment 152 #
2012/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) to keep by-catches to a minimum.
Amendment 163 #
2012/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point d
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point d
(d) ‘deep-sea species’ means the species listed in Annex I and Ia (new);
Amendment 167 #
2012/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point e
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point e
(e) ‘most vulnerable species’ means the deep-sea species indicated in the third column ‘Most vulnerable (x)’ of the table in Annex Ia (new);
Amendment 171 #
2012/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point j
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point j
(j) ‘maximum sustainable yield’ means the maximum catchhighest theoretical equilibrium yield that maycan be takencontinuously taken on average from a fish stock iundefinitely.r average environmental conditions without affecting significantly the reproduction process;
Amendment 177 #
2012/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. 'existing fishing areas' means fishing areas where fishing operations have been conducted since the entry into force of Council Regulation 2347/2002 of 16 December 2002 establishing specific access requirements and associated conditions applicable to fishing for deep- sea stocks;
Amendment 180 #
2012/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 c (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 2 c (new)
2c. 'exploratory fishing' means fishing operations conducted in new fishing areas;
Amendment 181 #
2012/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 d (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 2 d (new)
2d. 'fishing vessel' means a Union vessel operating in the waters defined in Article 2 or a third country vessel operating in Union waters;
Amendment 183 #
2012/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 a (new)
Article 3 a (new)
Article 3a Protection of vulnerable marine ecosystems by means of the ‘move-on rule’ In the event that a vessel encounters a vulnerable marine ecosystem while fishing in existing fishing areas, it shall notify its flag state, which shall notify the Commission. The vessel shall cease fishing immediately and move at least two miles away from the point at which it encountered the ecosystem.
Amendment 192 #
2012/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3
Article 4 – paragraph 3
3. Fishing activities carried out in Union waters not targeting deep-sea species but catching deep-sea species as a by-catch, carried out by a Union fishing vessel, shall be subject to a fishing authorisation, which shall indicate deep-sea species as by-catch.
Amendment 194 #
2012/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 5
Article 4 – paragraph 5
Amendment 198 #
2012/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1
The aggregate fishing capacity measured in gross tonnage and in kilowatt of all fishing vessels holding a fishing authorisation issued by a Member State, allowing the targeted catch of deep-sea species, whether as target or by-catch species, as defined in Article 4 (2) shall at no time exceed the aggregate fishing capacity of vessels of that Member State which have landed 10 tonnes or more of deep-sea species during any of the two calendar years preceding the entry into force of this Regulation2009-2011, whichever year provides the higher figure.
Amendment 205 #
2012/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Each application for a fishing authorisation allowing for the catch of deep-sea species whether as target or by- catch specithin areas of existing fishing activities, and for its renewal shall be accompanied by a description of the area where it is intended to conduct fishing activities, the type of gears, the depth range at which the activities will be deployed, and of the individual species targetedrelevant species.
Amendment 214 #
2012/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 a (new)
Article 6 a (new)
Article 6a Procedure for identification of areas of existing fishing activities The Commission shall identify areas of existing fishing activities in line with the provisions of Article 3 of the NEAFC recommendations on regulating bottom fishing, as quoted in Annex 2 a (new) of this Regulation.
Amendment 219 #
2012/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. In addition to the requirements set out in Article 6, each application for a fishingn authorisation for targeted deep sea fisheries, as referred to in Article 4(1),fishing deep-water stocks that allows for the use of bottom gears in Union waters as rdeferred toined in Article 2(a), shall be accompanied by a detailed fishing plan specifyingor in waters under NEAFC jurisdiction as referred to in Article 2(c), shall:
Amendment 221 #
2012/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the locations of the intended activities targeting deep-sea species in the deep-sea métier. The location(s) shall be defined by coordinates in accordance with the World Geodetic System of 1984list the bottom-sea gear that will be used;
Amendment 224 #
2012/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the locations, if any, of activities in the deep-sea métier during the last three full calendar years. Those location(s) shall be defined by coordinates limit the authorised fishing accordance with the World Geodetic System of 1984 and they shall circumscribe the fishing activities as closely as possible.tivities to existing fishing areas;
Amendment 227 #
2012/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) provide for the respect of measures currently applying in the NEAFC framework;
Amendment 242 #
2012/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point 1 (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point 1 (new)
(1) Applications for fishing authorisations in waters defined at Article 2 point b) shall fulfil the conditions set out in Regulation (EC) No 734/2008 of 15th July 2008 on the protection of vulnerable marine ecosystems in the high seas from the adverse impacts of bottom fishing gears.
Amendment 243 #
2012/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point 2 (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point 2 (new)
(2) Existing fishing areas, as defined under article 3 and provisions for identification, as set out in article 6a(new), correspond to: (a) in Union waters: fishing areas for which there is evidence of fishing activity in the period since the entry into force of Council Regulation 2347/2002 of 16th December 2002 establishing specific access requirements and associated conditions applicable to fishing for deep sea stocks. (b) in Union waters under NEAFC jurisdiction: existing fishing zones that are defined and established in the NEAFC framework, as mentioned in Annex IIb(new).
Amendment 244 #
2012/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point 3 (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point 3 (new)
Amendment 245 #
2012/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point 4 (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point 4 (new)
(4) In addition to the requirements in paragraph 5, by-catch authorisations, as defined in Article 4 (3) shall require the reporting of all species in Annex I, whether retained or discarded.
Amendment 246 #
2012/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point 5 (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point 5 (new)
(5) Fishing activities conducted in the framework of fishing authorisations referred to in Article 4 may be subject to the introduction of quantitative limits on the total amount of catches of the species included in Annex Ia (new) if such a limit is necessary
Amendment 251 #
2012/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9
Article 9
Amendment 263 #
2012/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Article 10 – paragraph 1
1. Fishing opportunities shall be fixed at a rate of exploitation of the deep-sea species concerned that is consistent with maximum sustainable yield, in accordance with article 16(2) of the [common fisheries policy regulation].
Amendment 269 #
2012/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) where the best scientific information available does not identify exploitation rates corresponding to the precautionary approach to fisheries management due to lack of sufficient data concerning a certain stock or species, nothe fishing opportunities may be allocated for the fisheries concernedfor the relevant fishing management period may not be fixed higher than the rates provided within the ICES approach for data limited stocks.
Amendment 278 #
2012/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 1
1. The Council, acting in accordance with the Treaty, may decide to switching from the fixing of annual fishing opportunities for deep-sea species in terms of both fishing effort limits and catch limits to the fixing of only fishing effort limits for specific fisheries shall be decided in accordance with the Treaty.
Amendment 295 #
2012/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1
Article 14 – paragraph 1
1. This Regulation shall be construed as a 'multiannual plan' for the purposes of Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009the [common fisheries policy regulation].
Amendment 296 #
2012/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2
Article 14 – paragraph 2
2. Deep-sea species shall be regarded as the 'species being ‘subject to a multiannual plan' and the 'stocks subject to a multiannual plan' for the purposes of Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009the [common fisheries policy regulation].
Amendment 300 #
2012/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) draw a new line in the paper logbook after each haulfishing operation; or,
Amendment 304 #
2012/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) failurerefusal to take on board a scientific observer or to allow sampling of catches for scientific purposes as specified in Article 19 of this Regulation.
Amendment 306 #
2012/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 19 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Member States shall establish a programme of observer coverage to ensure the collection of reliable, timely and accurate data on the catch and bycatch of deep-sea species, encounters with vulnerable marine ecosystems and other relevant information for the effective implementation of the provisions of this regulation. Vessels using bottom trawls or botom-set gillnets with a fishing authorisation to catch deep-sea species, whether as target or by-catch shall carry 100% observer coverage. The rest of the vessels with an authorisation to catch deep-sea species shall carry 10% observer coverage.
Amendment 313 #
2012/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 2
Article 20 – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts as referred to in Article 13 shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminateperiod of three years from the date of entry into force of this Regulation. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power no later than nine months before the end of the three year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of timean identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council oppose such extension no later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 316 #
2012/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – point e a (new)
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – point e a (new)
(ea) preservation of vulnerable marine ecosystems by means of freezing the footprint and the move-on rule;
Amendment 317 #
2012/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – point e b (new)
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – point e b (new)
(eb) the number of vessels and ports in the EU directly affected by the implementation of this Regulation.
Amendment 318 #
2012/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1
Article 22 – paragraph 1
Special fishing authorisations issued in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 2347/2002 shall remain valid until their replacement by fishing authorisations allowing the catch of deep-sea species issued in accordance with this Regulation, but shall in any case no longer be valid after 30 September 20124.
Amendment 321 #
2012/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I
Annex I
Amendment 343 #
2012/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex 2 – point 3
Annex 2 – point 3
3. Discards shall be sampled in all deep-sea métiers. The sampling strategy for landings and discards shall cover all the species listed in Annex I and Ia as well as species belonging to the seabed ecosystem such as deep-water corals, sponges or other organisms belonging to the same ecosystem.
Amendment 344 #
2012/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II a (new)
Annex II a (new)
Annex IIa Identification of existing bottom fishing areas 1. The mapping of existing fishing areas within European Union waters shall be given priority. 2. A preliminary map based on VMS data and other geo reference data presently available with the European Commission and the Member States shall be developed. 3. Member States having vessels involved in bottom fishing activities in the period 2003 to 2013 shall, for the purpose of paragraph 1, submit comprehensive maps of existing fishing areas to the European Commission according to the guidelines set out in annex 3 of the NEAFC recommendation on regulating bottom fishing. 4. The comprehensive map of existing bottom fishing areas referred to in paragraphs 1 and 3 shall be revised regularly to incorporate any relevant information.
Amendment 23 #
2012/0158(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Regulation 850/98
Article 19 a – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 19 a – paragraph 1 a (new)
Amendment 24 #
2012/0158(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Regulation No 850/98
Article 19 a – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 19 a – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Marine organisms that are smaller than the minimum catch size as defined in Annex XII to Regulation (EC) No 850/98 shall be returned immediately to the sea. Their retention on board, transhipment, landing, transport, storage and offer for sale shall be prohibited.
Amendment 26 #
2012/0158(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Regulation No 850/98
Article 19 a – paragraph 2
Article 19 a – paragraph 2
Amendment 34 #
2012/0158(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Regulation No 850/98
Article 29 d – paragraph 7
Article 29 d – paragraph 7
7. By way of derogation from paragraph 1, it shall be permitted to fish with fixed nets, trawls, demersal seines or similar gears provided that:
Amendment 10 #
2011/2318(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas 853 % of fish stocks globally for which information is available are either fully exploited orand 32 % are overexploited, according to the most recent assessment by the FAO;
Amendment 19 #
2011/2318(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas quotas in RFMOs are primarily based on historical catches, which maintains preferential access for developed countries to global fish stock by the Contracting Parties, but the legitimate aspirations of neighbouring countries to develop resources exploited by the EU’s external fleet are also taken into consideration; whereas it is essential to maintain this principle within the framework of responsible fisheries;
Amendment 26 #
2011/2318(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E bis (new)
Recital E bis (new)
Ea. whereas the EU should ensure consistency between the common fisheries policy and the common trade policy;
Amendment 48 #
2011/2318(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Considers that the size of the EU market forin fisheries products and the geographical range of activities by EU-flagged and EU- owned vessels impose a high level of responsibility on the Union for ensuring that its fisheries’ footprint is ecologically sustainable, providing high quality seafood to consumers in Europe and other countries where European fish are marketed, and contributing to the social and economic fabric of coastal fishing communities both inside the EU and elsewhere;
Amendment 53 #
2011/2318(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Believes that fishing by EU interests or destined for the EU market inside and outside Union waters by EU or non-EU vessels should be based upon the same standards in terms of ecological and social sustainability and transparency;
Amendment 61 #
2011/2318(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Reiterates its belief in the need for coherence between the fisheries policy of the Union and its policies with respect to development and, the environment and trade; notes that such coherence requires coordination both within the Commission itself and between the Commission and the governments of the individual Member States;
Amendment 68 #
2011/2318(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Recalls that the IPOA-Capacity (International Plan of Action for the Management of Fishing Capacity) committed the EU, no later than 2005, to develop and implement a system for the management of fishing capacity; notes thatwould like the Commission to explain why it appears to be pursuing contradictory approaches to the management of capacity by proposing a freeze in certain RFMOs while proposing to remove the main regulatory limits to capacity within the EU’s internal and external fleets;
Amendment 73 #
2011/2318(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Urges the Commission to support clearly defined principles and objectives for environmentally, economically and socially sustainable fisheries on the high seas and in waters under national jurisdiction at the upcoming United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20) in Brazil in June 2012;
Amendment 85 #
2011/2318(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Believes that the EU should launch an initiative at UN level to set up a global catch documentation scheme as a key tool to combat IUU fishing, compatible with what has been put in place for the European fleet;
Amendment 90 #
2011/2318(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Considers that the EU should be active within the UN system to explore means for the global community to address the need for more integrated global ocean governance, regarding both living marine resources and other resources as well as pollution and the impacts of climate change on the oceans, and social standards and working conditions;
Amendment 94 #
2011/2318(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 bis (new)
Paragraph 10 bis (new)
10a. Coastal State Agreements 10a. Would like to see enhanced cooperation with the coastal States on the sustainable use of resources; calls on the Commission to put forward a mechanism for resolving disputes when conflicts arise regarding the management of the coastal States’ stocks;
Amendment 97 #
2011/2318(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Considers that bilateral fisheries agreements, or Sustainable Fisheries Agreements (SFA) as the Commission proposes to call them, negotiated between partners and equitably implemented, should be of benefit to both parties, providing economic resources, technical and scientific expertise and support for improved fisheries management and good governance to the third country, while allowing the continuation of fishing activities by EU vessels that provide a modest but important supply of fish toare a significant source of supply for the EU and ofor ther markets of certain developing countries, for both fresh and tinned products;
Amendment 112 #
2011/2318(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Welcomes the intention of the Commission to include several provisions in future bilateral agreements, including respect for the principle of limiting access to resources that are scientifically demonstrated to be surplus to the coastal State’s own catch capacity, a human rights clause in line with Article 61 of the Unclos, a human rights clause, in line with international agreements on human rights, and the exclusivity clause, though the latter needs to be made more flexible and consistrengthened and made consistent acrost across agreements; proposes that the exclusivity clause should be included in the fisheries protocols and not the sustainable fisheries agreements;
Amendment 128 #
2011/2318(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Considers that the Fishing Authorisations Regulation should be amended so that EU-flagged vessels which have temporarily left the register of a Member State to seek fishing opportunities elsewhere are not allowed togiven priority in benefiting from fishing opportunities under the SFA if they subsequently return to an EU register;
Amendment 142 #
2011/2318(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Encourages the Commission in its endeavours to obtain complete and reliable data from the coastal Stateand to develop the capacity of the coastal States to provide information on the total amount of fishing occurring in itstheir waters, so as to prevent over- exploitation;
Amendment 148 #
2011/2318(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Reaffirms that EU vessels should not compete with local fishermen for the same resources in the same fishing grounds and on the local markets;
Amendment 162 #
2011/2318(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Fully supports the concept of decoupling compensation for access to fisheries resources from sectoral support for development; strongly insists that shipowners should pay a fair and market- based portion of the formerportion of the fees paid, in line with the market and competition situation, and that improved oversight of the latter is badly needed in this sphere, including the possibility of suspension of payments in cases of failure to fulfil commitments by the coastal State;
Amendment 169 #
2011/2318(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Insists that the Commission closely monitor the implementation of bilateral agreements, with annual reports being sent to Parliament and the Council, as well as evaluations performed by external, independent experts to be sent to the co- legislators prior to the negotiation of new protocols, all of which should be in the public domain, subject to individual and commercial data protection rules;
Amendment 197 #
2011/2318(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Considers that the EU should work towards an improved system of decision- making in RFMOs to avoid the ‘lowest common denominator’ approach that results from consensus, possibly by making more frequent use of voting;
Amendment 201 #
2011/2318(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Insists on the rapid expanevision of the coverage of RFMOs so that all high seas fisheries are effectively managed withRFMO agreements, where this has not yet been done, to integrate the ecosystem approach into ensure resource conservation; notes that this may require a combination of new RFMOs where none exist as well as an increase in the competence of existing RFMOsmanagement and conservation; in addition, recalls its support for the creation of new RFMOs to supplement the network of existing RFMOs and make it comprehensive;
Amendment 207 #
2011/2318(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Believes that RFMOs must develop management systems that provide for an equitable and fair resource allocation based upon transparent environmental and social criteria, rather than the simplistic as well as the criterion of historical catches, while ensuring that management and conservation measures are fully implemented by all members;
Amendment 218 #
2011/2318(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
31. Is firmly opposed to the EU supportingTakes the view that the adoption of rights-based management systems in RFMOs which wouldshould not jeopardise the livelihood of dependent fishing communities and should be the basis for effective fisheries management;
Amendment 234 #
2011/2318(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Believes that information on private agreements between EU shipowners and third countries, as well as joint ventures in third countries, including the number and type of vessels operating under such agreements and joint ventures, as well as their catches, should continue to be provided by the Member State to the Commission and made publicly available, subject to individual and commercial data protection rules, as laid down by Regulation 1006/2008;
Amendment 242 #
2011/2318(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
35. Calls upon the Commission and the Member States to give serious consideration to methods for preventdiscouraging EU-flagged vessels from being deregistered unless they are to be reflagged to States in good standing in all relevant RFMOs and to make every effort to ensure that there is fair competition between EU flags and the flags of non-EU States, which is the best way of combating deflagging; to this end, calls for a solution to be found to the legal vacuum that exists when a fisheries partnership agreement (FPA) is in force, but the protocol for this FPA has expired and the new protocol is being negotiated, to avoid tempting shipowners to deflag;
Amendment 248 #
2011/2318(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37
Paragraph 37
Amendment 254 #
2011/2318(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38
Paragraph 38
38. Is firmly opposed to the establishment of second registers for fishing vessels within the Member States and cCalls on the Commission to publish a legal analysis of the various registers already in use in the Member States and to assess them in economic, environmental and social terms;
Amendment 259 #
2011/2318(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39
Paragraph 39
Amendment 272 #
2011/2318(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42 – indent 1
Paragraph 42 – indent 1
– be preceded by environmental and social impact assessments, for both non-EU and EU countries, and of the networks already created by pre-existing agreements,
Amendment 1 #
2011/2310(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 7
Citation 7
– having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the Commission communication entitled ‘Developing a Maritime Strategy for the Atlantic Ocean Area’ (ECO/306),
Amendment 5 #
2011/2310(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas a macro-regional strategy would be particularly well-suited to the Atlantic area; , for the purposes of: – promoting synergies among the various instruments and levels of action involved in spatial planning policies; – involving stakeholders (private sector, regional and local public authorities, civil society organisations) in designing and implementing spatial planning policies;
Amendment 8 #
2011/2310(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the strategy should cover all of Europe's Atlantic regions, including the coastal regions of the English Channel and the Irish Sea, the outermost regions and the overseas countries and territories, and should take into account the interactions between Atlantic regions and North Sea regions;
Amendment 17 #
2011/2310(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Considers an EU-wide integrated marine and maritime data management system to be of crucial importance with a view to taking advantage of maritime opportunities; calls on the Commission to continue its efforts to improve data management and accessibility;
Amendment 21 #
2011/2310(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Believes that fisheries, in particular small-scale and coastal fisheries, must play a key role in maritime planning policies; takes the view that the regionalisation of the common fisheries policy should result in the introduction of an ecosystem-based management approach tailored to the needs of the Atlantic area, and in this connection considers that the Commission should be required to engage in prior consultations with the Regional Advisory Councils (RACs) in the context of the implementation of the common fisheries policy and the management plans;
Amendment 25 #
2011/2310(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls for an improvement in risk prevention and risk management capacities in the Atlantic in connection with maritime and land-based accidents, natural disasters and criminal activities; calls, in this connection, for a European coastguard service to be established;
Amendment 32 #
2011/2310(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Believes that the motorways of the sea and cabotage help to provide access to the Atlantic regions, increase trade, stimulate port- based economic activity, encourage tourism and reduce CO2 emissions; calls for them to be eligible for support under the Connecting Europe Facility;
Amendment 35 #
2011/2310(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Regrets that there is no corridor covering the whole of the Atlantic corridorarea in the Commission proposals on the core network of trans-European transport networks and that too few Atlantic ports are proposed in this core network;
Amendment 37 #
2011/2310(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Considers that the strategy should encourage marine and maritime research and give businesses easier access to the findings of that research, with a view to improving scientific knowledge of the marine environment, encouraging innovation in maritime industries and allowing sustainable exploitation of marine resources;
Amendment 47 #
2011/2310(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Emphasises the importance of fisheries and aquaculture in the Atlantic regions, and is in favour of public support for the updating and modernisation of fishing vessels; is opposed to the Commission’s proposal to establish transferable fishing concessions, because this scheme would lead to fishing rights being concentrated in the hands of a small number of operators and, as a result, to the disappearance of many fishing businesses;
Amendment 53 #
2011/2310(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Emphasises the need to involve regional and local public authorities, the Atlantic Member States, private sector bodies and civil society organisations in drafting and implementing the action plan;
Amendment 58 #
2011/2310(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22a. Draws attention to the important role the European Investment Banks, project bonds and public-private partnerships could play in providing funding for the investment required under the strategy;
Amendment 64 #
2011/2310(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Calls for the partnership contracts and operational programmes to be closely geared to the corresponding priorities of the macro-regional strategies in order to ensure the best possible coordination of objectives and means;
Amendment 65 #
2011/2310(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)
Paragraph 24 a (new)
24a. Takes the view that technical support should be provided under the transnational strand of the European territorial cooperation objective for implementation of the action plan, inter alia to facilitate the pooling of good practice and networking;
Amendment 69 #
2011/2310(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 b (new)
Paragraph 24 b (new)
24b. Considers multiregional, multi-fund operational programmes and integrated territorial investment (ITI) to be particularly useful means of facilitating implementation of the action plan;
Amendment 73 #
2011/2310(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)
Paragraph 26 a (new)
26a. Points out that an Atlantic Forum has been set up for 2012 and 2013 under a preparatory action proposed by Parliament, in order to involve all stakeholders in the drafting of the action plan; stresses that, as the instigator of the forum, Parliament has a leading role therein;
Amendment 6 #
2011/2292(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Firmly rejects the Commission’s proposal to establish transferable fishing concessions because this scheme would lead to fishing rights being concentrated on a small number of operators and thus to the disappearance of many small-scale fishing industries;
Amendment 9 #
2011/2292(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Stresses the need to encourage young people to take up careers in fishing and to support fishermen through vocational training;
Amendment 9 #
2011/2292(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas small-scale fishing (includ, comprising artisanal fishing and some types of inshore fishing), has specific characteristics and problems that set it apart from large-scale fishing;
Amendment 12 #
2011/2292(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Ca. whereas the artisanal or coastal fleet is vital for maintaining and creating employment in coastal regions and helps ensure the self-sufficiency of the European Union in terms of food, as well as the development of coastal areas and the supply of fishery products to the European market;
Amendment 16 #
2011/2292(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas the coastal and artisanal fishing sector has ageing vessels that should be made safer and modernised, or even replaced with new vessels that are more energy efficient and comply with safety standards;
Amendment 24 #
2011/2292(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. CallRequests therefore on the Commission to ensure that the future European Maritime and Fisheries Fund earmarks a specific percentage forsupport artisanal fishing, shellfish farming and extensive aquaculture, and thatincludes a specific programscheme to support small-scale fishing, geared to coastal communities that depend on fishing, is established, givencouraging ing priority access toarticular these resources to those who fish and shellfish in the most environmentally and socially sustainable mannernewal and modernisation of fishing vessels.
Amendment 38 #
2011/2292(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas its structural weaknesses mean small-sccoastal or artisanale fishing is more exposed to certain types of external shock (such as the rapid increase in fuel prices) and to rapid changes in the availability of resources than the elements of the fleet considered more competitive;
Amendment 67 #
2011/2292(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Rejects a definition of small-sccoastal or artisanale fishing that is restrictive and detached from reality; considers that the definition of small-scale fishing should cover a range of criteria, in addition to the strict boat-size criterion, including, inter alia, the impact of fishing techniques on the marine ecosystem, time spent at sea and the characteristics of the economic unit exploiting the resources;
Amendment 103 #
2011/2292(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Rejects the mandatory implementation of TFCsBelieves that the principle of subsidiarity already allows Member States to establish a system of transferable fishing concessions in their national legislation; therefore rejects the proposal to include TFCs in the reform; argues that the decision on whether or not to adopt TFCs and on which sectors of the fleet to include in this scheme should be left to the Member States;
Amendment 112 #
2011/2292(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Considers that, once the general management objectives have been set out, the Member States should be given flexibility to decide on the management rules best suited to achieving these objectives within the framework of regionalisation, specifically as regards the right of access to fisheries resources, taking into account the specific characteristics of their fleets, fisheries and resources;
Amendment 129 #
2011/2292(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Rejects a general reduction in the capacity of a given fleet solely and obligatorily on the basis of market criteria; calls for a study on the state of the fleet capacity in the European Union before adopting any binding measures to regulate the EU fleet capacity;
Amendment 150 #
2011/2292(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 – introductory part
Paragraph 11 – introductory part
11. Calls for the rules on implementing the future EMFF to guarantee the allocation of a minimum level ofsufficient funding to small- scale, coastal or artisanal fishing, so as to finance actions in the following areas, inter alia:
Amendment 161 #
2011/2292(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 – indent 1 a (new)
Paragraph 11 – indent 1 a (new)
- the renewal of obsolete ships under certain strict conditions, in particular investing in a new fishing vessel that meets environmental and safety criteria;
Amendment 191 #
2011/2292(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Considers it urgent to promote the fairer and more adequate distribution of value added along the sector’s value chain, by reducing operating margins, increasing the prices paid to producers and limiting the prices paid by end consumers; considers that, in cases where there are serious imbalances in the chain, the Member States should adopt means of intervention, such as setting maximum operating margins for each agent in the chain;
Amendment 197 #
2011/2292(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Advocates the creation (within the framework of the EMFF or of other instruments) of specific and temporary support mechanisms to be implemented in emergencies, such as natural disasters, fishing stoppages imposed by plans for restoring stocks or sudden short-term increases in fuel prices;
Amendment 208 #
2011/2292(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Advocates the establishment and expansion of the exclusion zone (currently 12 nautical miles) and adjoining areas, in line with the continental shelf; considers that, in the case offor the outermost regions, this area should go from 100 to 200 nautical miles;
Amendment 2 #
2011/2291(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas more than 60% of thecertain fish stocks in European waters are fished beyond maximum sustainable yield, and whereas there is a lack of scientific data for numerous species;
Amendment 3 #
2011/2291(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the TAC and quota system has proved to be inefficient in managing certain fish stocks sustainably and whereas long-term management plans are key to the sustainable management of fish stocks;
Amendment 14 #
2011/2291(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls on the Commission to provide for the establishment of long-term management plans for all EU single- species fisheries; highlights the possibility of grouping fisheries according to geographical fishing regions by regionalising the common fisheries policy, whereby the specificities of the different European seas should be taken into account and a separate regime should apply to small-scale coastal fisheries; believes that there should be a possibility for investments in new landing sites and start- up packages in order to secure a new generation of fishermen entering into small-scale fisheries;
Amendment 25 #
2011/2291(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses the need for a balance between the ecological and the economic and social situation in each fishery and emphasises that it is very important that European fishermen accept harvest control rules, and therefore calls for wide participation by representatives of Regional Advisory Councils (RACs) and other relevant stakeholders when establishing management plans; considers that in the future RACs should play a much greater role in this process; thereby calls for proper regionalisation; proposes that the RACs submit a mandatory opinion to the Commission on all the management plans prior to the proposal;
Amendment 30 #
2011/2291(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Underlines the direct link between discards, unwanted by-catch and overfishing, and the need to develop an efficient no-discards policyneed to develop an efficient policy to significantly reduce discards at EU level whereby the Community Fisheries Control Agency (CFCA) should have greater powers to ensure a fair system of rules and sanctions, i.e. the principle of equal treatment; argues that a discard bansignificant reduction in discards should be fishery-based and not relate to different fish stocks; stresses that selected fishing gear and other devices which reduce or eliminatsignificantly reduce by-catches of non- targeted species, as well as other sustainable fishing methods, should be promoted; underlines the importance of addressing the management of mixed fisheries to this end;
Amendment 40 #
2011/2291(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Urges the Commission to address immediately the issue of the lack of reliable and available data necessary for sound scientific advice; calls on the Commission to establish a system whereby Member States which do not fulfil their data collection and transmission obligations are sanctioned; stresses that adequate financial means have to be allocated to relevant scientific research in the Member States; urges the Commission at the same time to set up a framework for decision-making in data-poor situations, both regarding management plans and TACs and quota decisions;
Amendment 51 #
2011/2291(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. CallIs onf the Commission to establish a definition of overview that the priority is not to reduce the capacity, at EU level accommodating regional definitions, ws indicated by the Commission, but actually to preserve the re local specificities are taken into account; further calls on the Commission to redefine fishing capacity in such a way that both the vessel’s fishing capacity and its actual fishing effsource and the activity of fishing; reiterates that there is no proven link between the reduction in the capacity of the fleet and the reduction in catches, nort are taken as a basis; stresses moreover the necessity to define small-scale fisheries in order to dissociate them from industrial fisheriny proven link between the concentration of quotas and the reduction in catches;
Amendment 55 #
2011/2291(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Urges the Commission to consider the diversity of the fishing fleet of each fishing basin and not to apply fleet management measures which risk destroying the activity of fishing; calls on the Commission to review its judgment on the concept of capacity; proposes to adapt the management rules, the level of TACs and quotas, as well as the control to the characteristics of the fishing fleets and not the reverse;
Amendment 57 #
2011/2291(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
Amendment 65 #
2011/2291(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
Amendment 71 #
2011/2291(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Opposes the introduction of a system of transferable fishing concessions of any kind, proposes the status quo and, if relevant, the introduction of catch and fishing effort limitations;
Amendment 73 #
2011/2291(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Underlines that the TFC system cannot be considered as the only measure to tackle overfishing and overcapacity but that it should be available as one of the various additional management measures available to a Member State whereby the Commission, together with the two co- legislators, is to set the broader framework, control and monitor national application, and report to the legislators periodically on the results of this system; sStresses that selective fishing gear and other technical measures, such as closure of specific zones or the exclusion of certain fishing activities, should be further promoted as complementary measures;
Amendment 80 #
2011/2291(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
Amendment 94 #
2011/2291(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Calls on the Commission to re- exammaintaine the principle of relative stability under the parameters for guaranteeing preferential share-out of coastal communities and equal access to waters and fishery resources;
Amendment 96 #
2011/2291(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
Amendment 3 #
2011/2290(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. WBelcomieves the communication onat the reformed Common Fisheries Policy, which, taking an even-handed approach aimed at mutual reinforcement, must focus on the environmental, social, economic and cultural pillars in order to encourage sustainable development compatible with the smart, sustainable and inclusive growth called for by Europe 2020; maintains that the reformed policy must be coordinated more closely with other European policies and that the EU’s external actionfuture international sustainable fisheries agreements must be consistent with it;
Amendment 6 #
2011/2290(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the present communication recalls that the previous CFP failed to achieve its key objectives: certain stocks are overfished; the economic situation of parts of the EU fleet is fragile despite high levels of subsidy; jobs there are still few young people entering the fishing sector are unattractive; and the situation of many coastal communities depending on fisheries is precarious;
Amendment 13 #
2011/2290(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Believes that the rRegionsal Advisory Councils (RACs) must assume greater responsibility in fisheries management, without detracting from the principles of subsidiarity and regionalisation, and encourage dialogue among the various entities involved in the sector, both upstream and downstream, by providing incentives and support to establish international clusterimplementing the Common Fisheries Policy; proposes that these RACs must be consulted upstream by the Commission within the framework of implementing the Common Fisheries Policy and the management plans;
Amendment 16 #
2011/2290(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas, according to the European Commission, 75 % of the EU’s estimated fish stocks are overexploited, more than 60 % of stocks in European waters are fished beyond the Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY), and the EU is losing approximately EUR 1.8 billion per year in potential income from its failure to manage fisheries sustainably;
Amendment 28 #
2011/2290(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Points to the importance of the multifunctionality of fisheries for coastal regions; stresses the need for specific measures for certain regions, such as the outermost regions, for example support for small- scale fishing fleets and for the promotion of extensive and sustainable aquaculture; advocates support measures to restructure the labour market, support measures for training and retraining,for vocational training, young people's access to careers in fishing, the renewal and modernisation of fishing vessels and incentives for producer and interbranch organisations;
Amendment 29 #
2011/2290(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Firmly rejects the Commission’s proposal to establish transferable fishing concessions because this scheme would lead to fishing rights being concentrated in the hands of a small number of operators and thus to the disappearance of many small-scale fishing industries;
Amendment 63 #
2011/2290(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Is convinced that the reform of the CFP must establish the right instruments to support an ecosystem-based fisheries management; believes, therefore, that the multiannual management plans must take account of such an ecosystemic approach; believes that it is imperative to put an end to the institutional impasse of these multiannual management plans and that the ordinary legislative procedure should be applied;
Amendment 77 #
2011/2290(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Believes that the objective of achieving MSY based on fishing mortality (FMSY) should be established immediately, as this will in any case put the vast majority of stocks on the right track; calls on the Commission and the Member States to implement this objective in an operational manner with the aid of a realistic calendar for the sector, based on sound scientific data and taking account of the socio-economic consequences of this measure into account;
Amendment 81 #
2011/2290(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Underlines, however, the difficulties involved in implementing the MSY principle, in particular in the case of mixed fisheries or where scientific data on fish stocks are unavailable or unreliable; consequently requests an increase in the sums allocated to scientific research and data collection for the implementation of a sustainable fishing policy;
Amendment 87 #
2011/2290(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. UnderstandsConsiders that the Commission’s motivations when proposing to implement a discard ban by 2016, and considers that it is right to view such practicediscards as unacceptable in principle, particularly given their harmful impact on numerous essential evaluations relating to sustainable stock management, sound scientific advice, marine ecosystem surveillance and the financial viability of fisheries; is therefore in favour of a policy which will significantly reduce the number of discards;
Amendment 96 #
2011/2290(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Believes that a ban onsignificant reduction in the number of discards should only be put in place if accompanied by technical measures to reduce unwanted bycatch and incentives to encourage selective fishing practices, providedwhile maintaining the ecosystem balance is maintained; priority should go to avoiding unwanted catches in the first place, rather than finding ways to market them; is concerned about the emergence of a parallel discards market which would constitute a danger for the ecosystem and the European fishing sector; also stresses the importance of stakeholder engagement and careful design of the landing obligation, in order not to shift from unwanted fish in the sea to unwanted fish on land;
Amendment 111 #
2011/2290(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Notes that the existing technology for reducing or eliminating discards is not equally effective for all types ofreducing discards is not as easy to implement for multispecies fisheries as it is for single-species fisheries; in this respect, calls on the Commission to promote partnerships between scientists and fishermen and assist Member States in the development of new fishing techniques;
Amendment 113 #
2011/2290(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to consider, before implementing this measure, the option of establishing ‘pilot projects’ before 2015 in order to identify technical difficulties, such as practical problems related to landing all discards, implementing controls, and management of socio- economic consequence, allowing the development and creation of selective gear to enable a significant reduction in the number of discards, in the hope that the results could be used to help formulate measures for management plans;
Amendment 116 #
2011/2290(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Notes the difficulty of applying such a measurea significant reduction in the number of discards in the Mediterranean, given the existence of mixed fisheries, specific fishing practices and specific climatic and geological conditions; believes that further consultations are needed to tackle the difficulties linked to establishing the infrastructure for collecting and processing the bycatch as proposed by the Commission; calls for measures to reduce the catch of juveniles and discourage the market in juveniles;
Amendment 122 #
2011/2290(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Expresses its doubts over the proposals relating to the market in bycatches, and stresses that, in case of implementation, adequate safeguards should be provided in order to avoidopposition to the market in bycatches, which would lead to the emergence of a parallel market that would paradoxically encourage fishermen to increase their catch;
Amendment 128 #
2011/2290(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Believes that the discard bansignificant reduction in the number of discards should be based on a step-by-step introduction by fishery, to make it easier for the sector to adapt; stresses that the producers’ organisations should be actively involved in the gradual implementation of such a bareduction;
Amendment 137 #
2011/2290(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Asks the Commission to assist Member States in offsetting the diverse socio- economic consequences of adopting a significant reduction in the number of discards ban;
Amendment 144 #
2011/2290(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Stresses that the introduction of such a measurea significant reduction in the number of discards would imply an in-depth reform of the control and enforcement system; asks the Commission to assist Member States in this respect, in order to ensure that enforcement applies across the board in a uniform manner; believes that the Fisheries Control Agency (CFCA) should have increased powers to ensure a fair system of rules and sanctions;
Amendment 167 #
2011/2290(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Notes thatRejects the proposal to introduce ‘Transferable Fishing Concessions’ (TFCs), contained in the basic regulation, which raises concerns regarding their concentration and the creation of monopolies; stresses that in a number ofthe safeguards countries transferable fishing rights have allowed fishing capacity to be reduced, which is commendable; emphasises, however, that adequate safeguards would need to be introduced in order toavene the principle of free enterprise and do not allow the protection of small- scale and coastal fishing, which is the most economically endangered part of the industry but also that providing most of the jobs and economic activity in coastal regions;
Amendment 189 #
2011/2290(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Believes that such a measurepriority access should be offer priority accessed to those who fish in a socially and environmentally responsible way; believes that TFCs should not be the only measure proposed for reducing overcapacthe principle of subsidiarity, and that a Member State should be exempted from the obligation to introduce TFCs if it achieves the necessary capacity reductionlready allows the Member States to introduce a system of transferable fishing concessions in their national legislation if they so wish; believes that the inclusion of TFCs in the basic regulation is therefore useless; recalls that the capacity reduction of certain fisheries can be achieved without their use;
Amendment 204 #
2011/2290(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Considers that prior to the mandatory introduction of TFCs the Commission should undertake fleet assessments in order to obtain credible results vis-à-vis the precise situation of overcapacity at EU level, thus making it possible to propose appropriate and targeted instruments for its reduction if necessary;
Amendment 216 #
2011/2290(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Believes strongly that the reformed CFP must not be removed from the socio- economic context in which it exists; considers that the fisheries and aquaculture sectors must be seen as important direct and indirect sources of job creation in our maritime regions, which underpin their economy as a whole, while also contributing to food safety in the EU;
Amendment 229 #
2011/2290(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Welcomes the Commission’s proposal for a ‘Blue Growth initiative on sustainable growth from the oceans, seas and coasts’; considers that greater professional mobility in the sector, the possibility (subject to strict conditions) of renewing and modernising the fishing fleet, diversification of jobs, and identification of tools making it possible to match skills, qualifications and education programmes to the needs of the sector are important for the growth of the maritime, fisheries and aquaculture industries;
Amendment 260 #
2011/2290(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Believes that as far as regionalisation is concerned, the key response is good governance, which means a bottom-up approach; stresses that clear and simple rules must be established at the appropriate level, thus increasing compliance; also strongly believes that the Regional Advisory Councils (RACs) promote dialogue and cooperation between stakeholders and should contribute actively to the establishing of Long Term Management Plans; recalls the role of the co-legislators in adopting these plans;
Amendment 6 #
2011/2288(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Highlights that the EU’s cohesion policy makes an important contribution to the European economy and is the CommunityEU budget’s largest source of investment;
Amendment 17 #
2011/2288(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses that in most European countries, large firms generate a substantive part of the business sector value added, and insists that for geographically targeted support, the size of the enterprise should not matter asbe the only criterion ashould be the quality and required sustainability of the project is also a relevant criterion;
Amendment 41 #
2011/2288(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Underlines that high taxes and public debt are among the key concerns identified by companies investing in Europe; would be particularly concerned by any effort to harmonise corporation tax conditions inevitably giving rise to higher fiscal burden in somebelieves that every effort should be made to coordinate corporation tax conditions in order to reduce tax competition among Member States, and would deny individual regions to remain fiscally competitiveregions, without such coordination giving rise to higher fiscal burden in some Member States;
Amendment 1 #
2011/2196(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses the importance of regional airports in the context of air transport and their role in ensuring territorial, economic and social cohesion in the Union by connecting regions; points out that existing public service obligations should be maintained in order to guarantee the accessibility of regions, such as the outermost regions, peripheral and island regions, that face geographical handicaps; notes the importance of airports, especially of regional airports, which are sometimes the only effective link between a region and the rest of Europe;
Amendment 36 #
2011/2196(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Takes the view that the building and expansion of regional airports and related infrastructure should be properly supported by national and regional authorities and receive appropriate financing under the TEN-T Networks, the Cohesion Fund and the ERDF, for all categories of regions throughout the 2014-2020 programming period;
Amendment 45 #
2011/2196(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Member States and regional and local authorities to ensure that, in accordance with a specific territorial assessment, airports are included in regional spatial development plans or taken into account in regional development strategies. and, where appropriate, in existing and future macro-regional strategies;
Amendment 47 #
2011/2195(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. Wwhereas the Treaty stipulates that its provisions and common policies are to be applied to the outermost regions (ORs) in a differentiated manner and provides, under Article 349 of the TFEU, for special treatment and a specific framework for these regions, conferring on them ‘outermost region status’;
Amendment 87 #
2011/2195(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Criticises the fact that, within the additional ERDF funding, the amounts to be allocated to the ORs have been reduced in the proposals for the financial period from 2014 to 2020 and considers that the financial arrangements for the implementation of EU 2020 should provide for access to EU funding that is at least equal to that available for the current financial framework; proposes that other criteria be used for the allocation of funding with a view to a more equitable distribution between these regions, as a fixed component to be uniformly allocated amongst themonsiders unacceptable and unjustified, the planned reduction of at least 40 % of the specific additional allocation for ORs proposed for the financial period from 2014 to 2020; is also concerned about the Commission’s proposal providing for at least 50 % of the specific additional allocation to be allocated to actions contributing to the diversification and modernisation of the economies of the outermost regions, to the extent that this affects the flexibility of the ORs required to address their disadvantages referred to in Article 349 of the TFEU; considers that the financial arrangements for the implementation of EU 2020 should provide for access to EU funding that is at least equal to that available for the current financial framework;
Amendment 100 #
2011/2195(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Is in favour of maintaining the special treatment of the ORs as regards state aid and calls for the removal of discrimination between ORs, given that an unequal increase, based on their GDP, results in an imbalance for all of them;Recalls that under Article 107, paragraph 3, subparagraph a) of the TFEU, all ORs are granted state aid derogation given their structural, economic and social situation; is in favour of maintaing the current level of aid for investments in large enterprises and small and medium sized enterprises in ORs and for the possibilty of granting operating aid within a flexible regulatory framework.
Amendment 105 #
2011/2195(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Stresses the need to improve access to funding for businesses in ORs in particular by setting up a dialogue with the EIB Group and by supporting the creation of local investment funds in each OR as well as the development of regional capital investment markets.
Amendment 120 #
2011/2195(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Draws attention to the marine dimension of the ORs and the importance of the fishing sector in regional development policy and jobs for local populations in view of their Exclusive Economic Zone, the potential of which should be reflected in concrete measures for a genuine marine economy and duly taken into account in the integrated European maritime policy;
Amendment 122 #
2011/2195(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8 a. Recalls that the Atlantic ORs have a duty to take part in the Atlantic Strategy currently being developed, basing their participation on issues of accessibility and the marine economy.
Amendment 140 #
2011/2195(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Urges the Commission to establish a specific programme in the field of energy, land and sea transport and information and communications technology, similar to the POSEI arrangements, which will need to be in keeping with other European funds in these fields;
Amendment 170 #
2011/2195(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Points out that other EU regions can choose to become ORs, if they meet the eligibility criteria for ORs laid down by Article 349 of the TFEU, opting for whichever status is most appropriate to their situation, and draws the attention of the current ORs to the decisive role they can play in promoting and consolidating their status;
Amendment 4 #
2011/2194(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. believes that it is necessary to correlate environmental, heath and spatial planning policies and to improve cooperation between regions and, at a cross-border level and in regard to macro-regional strategies, in order to achieve a balance in development between urban and peri-urban areas, wooded and rural areas; considers that it would be useful to implement measures that help to avoid a change in the intended purpose of land, particularly with a view to the production of eco-fuels;
Amendment 4 #
2011/2179(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 20 a (new)
Citation 20 a (new)
- Having regard to the Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the regions ‘Developing a Maritime Strategy for the Atlantic Ocean Area’ COM(2011) 782 final,
Amendment 45 #
2011/2179(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Calls for the operational programmes to be closely geared to the corresponding priorities of the macro- regional strategies in order to ensure the best possible coordination of objectives and means;
Amendment 6 #
2011/2107(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses that greater coordination is needed, plus synergies, between the future ‘Common Strategic Framework’ for regional policy and the future ‘Common Strategic Framework’ for research and innovation programmes; calls on the Commission to set out how this is to be achieved in practice;
Amendment 59 #
2011/2107(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Believes that the number of enterprises participating in the next framework programme should be higher; is of the opinion that the establishment of an accessible and transparent system would make it easier for project developers to take part in EU programmes;
Amendment 16 #
2011/2096(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Points out that transport networks play a leading role in spatial planning policies; notes that major transport infrastructure such as high-speed railways helps make regions less isolated while also boosting local development networks; highlights the importance of implementing specific regional projects linked to the construction of major infrastructure, involving as many partners as possible (local, regional and national authorities, private operators, civil society, etc.);
Amendment 10 #
2011/2071(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Points out that regional policy has a consolidated methodology for an integrated approach and a wrell-designediable guidance system for mobilising investments on the ground which could support economic coordination in an appropriate manner;
Amendment 17 #
2011/2071(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Stresses that it is important for many Member States to improve their competitiveness so as to correct macroeconomic imbalances;
Amendment 34 #
2011/2068(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Emphasizes that resource efficiency should be addressed at regional and local level, – taking into account the particularities and different development levels of European regions – and regional and local authorities and private- and voluntary-sector partners should be directly involved in the planning and implementation of relevant measures; this would lead to a greater feeling of responsibility for the goals of resource efficiency at all levels;
Amendment 49 #
2011/2068(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Calls on the Commission to promote the pooling of good practice within the EU as regards the management of regional funds, which play a key role in the use of resources;
Amendment 50 #
2011/2068(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Points out that decision-takers at national and regional level must be fully aware of the importance of decouplingstriking an appropriate balance between economic growth fromand resource use; calls on every Member State and region to make further efforts in the efficient use of resources.;
Amendment 19 #
2011/2067(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Endorses the more effective use of funds for the development of new skills and the creation of new jobs, including in the burgeoning 'green economy’; this involves principally the European Social Fund (ESF), the European Fund for Regional Development (EFRD), the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD), the Lifelong Learning programme and the Progress programme; stresses the importance of synergies between the various European funds;
Amendment 31 #
2011/2067(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Supports policies designed to promote job creation taking into account the needs of small and medium-sized enterprises, which provide two thirds of all jobs in the private sector; stresses the importance of private sector funding for training and job creation;
Amendment 4 #
2011/2051(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Takes the view that Europe and its regions need a new, strong CAP that will boost development and improve competitiveness on the international market, will be more market-oriented, will provide farmers with a decent income, will ensure quality products for consumers and will take account of public goods including food security, biodiversity conservation, sound water and forest management and sustainable development based on education and knowledge, as well as driving cohesion;
Amendment 28 #
2011/2051(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses that the direct payments scheme should be retained in order to continue to ensure, in a context of price volatility, competitiveness, economic stability, decent farm incomes and the sustainable development of the EU farm sector, as well as EU food and environmental security, thus ensuring that other policies and strategies, including the Europe 2020 strategy, may be properly implemented; considers, in this connection, that objective and transparent criteria need to be drawn up to ensure the provision of an appropriate level of direct support throughout the EU and to move away from the criteria used to date for allocating funding under the direct payments scheme;
Amendment 52 #
2011/2051(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Notes that the potential of regions and rural areas is not confined to the natural resources that enable them to play a social and economic role, given that such areas are first and foremost a place where the food required in order to ensure food security is produced and that they provide key raw materials for industry and renewable energy generation, as well as constituting a source of environmental, ecological, landscape and tourism assets and non-material assets including traditions and cultural features such as culinary heritage in the form of regional products; points out that farming is the cornerstone of the rural economy and that farmers play a leading role in ensuring the vitality of this economy and in rural land development;
Amendment 18 #
2011/2048(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Observes that, although important, the needs of cost reduction, legal certainty and simplification in public procurement rules must be carefully weighed against the impact of any changes on local and regional authorities, as well as on SMEs, an impact that should be clearly identified and assessed from the outset in order to avoid imposing excessive burdens on the competent authorities;
Amendment 48 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Recital F a (new)
Fa. whereas, however, a significant threshold effect exists between regions with comparable levels of development but benefiting from very different levels of aid – growth regions exceeding the threshold of 75% of average per capita GDP for the EU in receipt of more financial support than stagnating regions above that threshold – and whereas this represents a real problem in terms of fairness between Europe’s regions,
Amendment 50 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas a comprehensive European cohesion policy continues to be essential, given the significant imbalances between regional economies and in social terms and the geographical disadvantages of certain regions (particularly the outermost regions), as well as specific structural problems and geographical disadvantathe need to adapt to new challenges, and it is also a requirement under the Lisbon Treaty,
Amendment 73 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Recognises, too, that European funding adds value where projects supported at regional level contribute to the achievement of pan-European objectives in the fields of economic growth, research, environmental protection, resource management, sport, demographic change, energy supply sustainability, social cohesion or cross-border development and this would not have been realised without the European stimulus;
Amendment 92 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Recognises the special needs of regions particularly disadvantaged by virtue of their geographical situation or natural environmeor demographic situation or specific constraints; reiterates its call for special forms of preference to continue to apply in respect of those types of region, mentioned in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, which are particularly disadvantaged (outermost regions, northernmost regions with very low population density and island, mountain and cross-border regions), and in particular the additional specific allocation granted to the outermost regions under the ERDF;
Amendment 139 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Sees macroregional strategies as affording a major opportunity to harness forms of trans-regional potential and adopt a joint approach to shared challenges stemming from the natural environment, e.g. in relation touch as environmental protection; considers that better coordination of existing support mechanisms can create scope for more targeted use of the EU structural funds;
Amendment 144 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Doubts whetherStresses that specific operational programmes for functional geographic, including multi-regional operational programmes, can yield additional benefits by meeting the shared chal lentitges of functional territories such as metropolitan regions or, sea or river basins will yield additional benefits; is particularly aware, in relor mountain regions; considers that, in accordance with the partnership principle, the implementation tof such programmes, of the absence of political bodies (including democratically elected bodies) with a sufficiently wide- ranging remit to implement them; calls instead is a shared responsibility which should be preserved; calls for closer coordination of macroregional or natural-environment strategies at inter-governmental levels;
Amendment 216 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Emphasises that the trans-European transport networks play a decisive role in European regional cohesion and that development of TEN infrastructure, Motorways of the Sea and designated E- roads must therefore be stepped up and access to them improved, especially in border regions; suggests that ‘infrastructure’ be accorded more importance as a category of project eligible for support in connec and outermost regions,; suggests that certain crossborder ‘infrastructure’ shall be considered as priority projects eligible to funds of the objective 1, 2 and 3 calls for a obligatory right to make the first proposal of the regional level for this type of action and equal participation withof the third objective of European Territorial Cooperation; border regions and local authorities in the planning;
Amendment 227 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Emphasises that the core components of the EU 2020 strategy (innovation, education and training, energy, environment, employment, competitiveness, skills and combating poverty) are already integral to the cohesion and structural policies; takes the view that the EU 2020 challenges can be integrated very easily into the system of three objectives (Convergence, Regional Competitiveness and Employment, and European Territorial Cooperation), which has proved its effectivenessarchitecture of the cohesion policy;
Amendment 272 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Calls for Objective 2 (Regional Competitiveness and Employment), which is based on a cross-cutting approach, to be upgraded; rejects any cut in funding for regions currently eligible for Objective 2; stresses that the proven system of innovation clusters and competition for funding needs to be developed further;
Amendment 281 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Takes the view that a general new funding category based onCalls for the establishment of a specific arrangement for regions with per capita GDP/PE between the 75% and 90% rates would be at odds with the tried andof the EU average, in the form of a new intermediate category, or at least a specific arrangement within Objective 2 enabling thested principles of EU cohesion policy (to support the weakest and pool the inherent potential of the wealthier regions, taking a cross- cutting approach), and therefore rejects this intermediate categorye regions to enjoy appropriate treatment; considers that this specific arrangement, being funded from the savings expected to result from several regions leaving Objective 1, should be budget-neutral, but should on no account lead to a cut in funding for regions currently eligible for Objective 2;
Amendment 313 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Draws attention to the synergies achievable through integrated approaches, notably linking the ESF and the ERDF, and calls for the option of cross-financing between these funds – specifically with a view to integrated development planning – to be facilitated; calls, furthermore, for better synergies between the EDF and the ERDF;
Amendment 399 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37
Paragraph 37
37. Calls for the funding under investment partnerships to be made conditional on the implementation of reforms by the Member State, for Member States to be called upon to implement reforms, in order to ensure that it is used efficiently in areas directly related to cohesion policy; considers it fair for such conditions to include, in particular, full implementation of existing EU legislation (e.g. on price regulation, tendering procedures, transport, the environment and health) in order to prevent irregularities and ensure effectiveness; rejects, however, the imposition of conditions requiring Member States to undertake fundamental social and economic reform;
Amendment 499 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 51
Paragraph 51
51. Calls, in respect of Member States that are falling significantly short of the EU stability criteria requirements and also have a poor record on the use of monies from the structural funds, for a proposal for the automatic application of more stringent rules in order to monitor the use of such monies in accordance with the law and the relevant objectives; calls, at the same time, for unnecessary controls to be done away with in those Member States that have a satisfactory fund management system; considers that the ‘contract of confidence’ and ‘single audit’ principles should be implemented wherever possible;
Amendment 506 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 52
Paragraph 52
52. Calls on the Member States/regions to designate authorities that will assume exclusive responsibilityle for the proper administration of monies from the structural funds;
Amendment 40 #
2011/2034(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. INotes that the ERDF makes a massive contribution to the funding of energy – and other – infrastructure projects; insists on the integrity of cohesion policy and calls on the Commission to refrain from creating new sectoral funds, e.g. for energy or climate; encourages the Commission to learn from experience with cohesion policy when establishing measures for energy policy, in particular with regard to project selection;
Amendment 6 #
2011/2023(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Calls for the establishment of a European civil protection force capable of intervening swiftly and effectively at regional and local level, as part of the effort to achieve territorial cohesion in the EU;
Amendment 12 #
2011/2020(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. NotWelcomes the creation of a budget line for the IMP, but points out that the volume of appropriations proposed for that line is too small to cover this new policy’s main objectives; reaffirms that the traditional CFP budget allocations must not in any way be sacrificed to fund the IMP and that an appropriate balance needs to be struck in the use of the appropriations held in reserve for headings 1 and 2 of the multiannual financial framework;
Amendment 14 #
2011/2020(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Firmly rejects the severe cuts in the fisheries policy area that are provided for in the Council's position on the 2012 budget; deplores the Council’s willingness to make drastic cuts to EU support for this sector, which, considering its importance to societyin terms of spatial planning, food security and market supply for the European Union as a whole, is grossly underfunded;
Amendment 10 #
2011/2019(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Reiterates Parliament's view on the need for further simplification of the relevant rules and procedures of implementation, without prejudice to the need of transparency and accountability; is aware, in this context, of the need to harmonise the rules on shared-management funds as part of the revision of the Financial Regulation, but is nevertheless concerned about the new, superfluous administrative formalities proposed by the Commission;
Amendment 59 #
2011/2010(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Insists that new EU legislation should not result in the dilution of protection offered by existing IGS in Member States, and that consumers should not face any losses as a result of regulatory failure to adequately supervise insurers or intermediaries; calls consequently on the Commission to ensure that a European framework for IGS compensates policyholders for losses in full and without exception for all types of insurance products in the event of insurer bankruptcy, insurer or intermediary mis-selling, or fraud, within a set period of time, consistent throughout Member States;
Amendment 17 #
2011/0434(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) It is necessary that the adoption of such measures be preceded by an evaluation of their expected environmental, trade, economic and social effects and that this be communicated to the European Parliament and to the Council as soon as it is available in the Commission.
Amendment 20 #
2011/0434(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) it fails to cooperate with the Union in the management of a stock of common interest in full accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea or of the United Nations Agreement for the Implementation of the Provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982 relating to the Conservation and Management of Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks of 4 August 1995, or it does not comply with historical catches when stocks are shared between coastal states under bilateral agreements, and
Amendment 26 #
2011/0434(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 3
Article 6 – paragraph 3
3. Prior to adopting measures pursuant to Article 4, the Commission shall provide the third country concerned with a reasonable opportunity to respond to the notification in writing and to remedy the situation within four months of receiving the notification.
Amendment 22 #
2011/0405(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2
Article 1 – paragraph 2
2. Union support under this Regulation shall be used for the benefit of partner countries and canshould also be used for the common benefit of EU and partner countries.
Amendment 30 #
2011/0405(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point f a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point f a (new)
(fa) tightening controls at the European Union’s external borders.
Amendment 31 #
2011/0405(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 4 – point f a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 4 – point f a (new)
4a. Such support shall imply no commitment whatsoever on the Union’s part in respect of any application for membership from the countries concerned.
Amendment 153 #
2011/0380(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) support for fishermen facing temporary cessation of activities and cyclic losses linked to random problems.
Amendment 154 #
2011/0380(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a a (new)
(aa) renewal and modernisation of the fishing fleet;
Amendment 158 #
2011/0380(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Citation 1
Citation 1
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 42, Article 43(2), Article 91(1), Article 100(2), Article 173(3), Article 175, Article 188, Article 192(1), Article 194(2) and, Article 195(2) and Article 349 thereof,
Amendment 162 #
2011/0380(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) construction of new fishing vessels, decommissioning or importation of fishing vessels;
Amendment 165 #
2011/0380(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point c
Amendment 194 #
2011/0380(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 a (new)
Article 22 a (new)
Article 22a Action Plan for small-scale coastal fishing 1. Member States shall annex to their operational programme an action plan for small-scale coastal fishing. In keeping with the objectives of this Regulation and [CFP Regulation], this action plan shall set out a strategy for the development, competitiveness and sustainability of small-scale coastal fishing. 2. The Commission shall approve the action plan referred to in paragraph 1 together with the operational programme, in accordance with Article 21.
Amendment 200 #
2011/0380(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 32 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. In order to facilitate diversification and job creation outside fishing, the EMFF may support:job creation, the EMFF may support business start-ups in the fisheries sector and the development of ancillary activities connected to fishing.
Amendment 202 #
2011/0380(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 32 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The EMFF may contribute to individual premiums for fishermen under 40 years of age who have worked for at least five years as fishermen or have equivalent professional training and who acquire for the first time part or full ownership of a small-scale coastal fishing vessel.
Amendment 203 #
2011/0380(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 a (new)
Article 32 a (new)
Article 32a Investment in fleet renewal 1) The EMFF may support investment in the purchase of fishing vessels, whether new or used, in return for the scrapping of obsolete vessels or their reassignment to non-fishing activities. 2) The support shall be granted to the owners of fishing vessels. 3) The support must guarantee a higher level of on-board safety, energy efficiency and fishing-gear selectivity. It must not serve to increase fishing capacity. 4) The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 150 in order to lay down the criteria to be used to determine whether the vessels referred to in paragraph 1 are obsolete.
Amendment 204 #
2011/0380(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34
Article 34
Amendment 220 #
2011/0380(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Article 39 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
(aa) the replacement or modernisation of the main or ancillary engines, in order to reduce the emission of pollutants or greenhouse gases and to increase vessels’ energy efficiency without increasing their capacity;
Amendment 221 #
2011/0380(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 2
Article 39 – paragraph 2
2. Support shall not contribute to the replacement or modernisation of main or ancillary engines. Support shall only be granted to owners of fishing vessels and not more than once during the programming period for the same fishing vessel.
Amendment 231 #
2011/0380(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 1
Article 41 – paragraph 1
1. For the purpose of increasing the quality of the product landed, increasing energy efficiency, contributing to environmental protection or improving safety and working conditions, the EMFF may support investments improving fishing port infrastructure or landing sites, including investments in facilities for wasThe EMFF may support investments improving fishing port infrastructure, landing sites and fish markets. The investments shall relate in particular to: (a) the improvement of the quality and freshness of the product landed; (b) the improvement of landing, processing, storage and auction conditions; (c) measures to reduce unwanted catches and measures to make best use of unwanted catches of commercial stocks, if any are landed, and to valorise underused components of fish caught; (d) energy efficiency; (e) environmental protection, particularly the collection, storage and treatment of waste and marine litter collection; (f) the improvement of safety and working conditions; (g) the provision of fuel, ice, water and electricity; (h) equipment for the repair and maintenance of fishing vessels; (i) construction, modernisation and extension of quays, to improve safety during landing or loading; (j) computerised management of fishing activities; (k) the networking of fishing ports, landing sites and marine litter collection. fish markets.
Amendment 232 #
2011/0380(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 a (new)
Article 42 a (new)
Article 42a Aid for the temporary cessation of fishing activities 1. The EMFF may help finance aid for the temporary cessation of fishing activities for fishermen and owners of fishing vessels in the following cases: (a) in the framework of a multiannual plan as defined in Article 9 of the [CFP Regulation]; (b) in the event of the emergency measures adopted by the Commission referred to in Article 13 of the [CFP Regulation]; (c) in the event of a biological recovery period as decided in accordance with the [CFP Regulation]; (d) in the event of application of the measures referred to in Article 39 during the period of engine replacement. 2. A recurrent seasonal suspension of fishing shall not be taken into account for the grant of allowances or payment under this article. 3. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 150, specifying the procedures for implementation of this article.
Amendment 239 #
2011/0380(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35
Recital 35
(35) Conscious of the potential that diversification offers for small scale coastal fishermen and their crucial role in coastal communities, tThe EMFF should help diversificationcreate jobs by covering business start-ups and investments for the retrofitting of their vesselsin the fisheries sector and the development of complementary activities linked to fishing activity, in addition to the relevant training to acquire adequate professional skills in the relevant field outside fishing activities.
Amendment 248 #
2011/0380(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35 a (new)
Recital 35 a (new)
(35q) In order to ensure generation renewal in the fisheries sector it is important for the EMFF to encourage young people to enter fishing, in particular through incentives for young fishermen who are acquiring a vessel for the first time.
Amendment 302 #
2011/0380(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40 a (new)
Recital 40 a (new)
(40a) In order to guarantee that the Member States respect the fishing capacity ceilings established in Annex II [of the Regulation on the common fisheries policy], the Commission should be authorised to suspend all or part of the payments and commitments for the operational programmes of Member States that fail to respect their capacity ceilings, following a review conducted 3 years after the entry into force of this Regulation.
Amendment 525 #
2011/0380(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 a (new)
Article 3 a (new)
Amendment 720 #
2011/0380(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 a (new)
Article 11 a (new)
Amendment 736 #
2011/0380(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Amendment 878 #
2011/0380(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 3
Article 18 – paragraph 3
3. For the section of the operational programme referred to in Article 20(1)(n), the Commission shall adopt by means of implementing acbe conferred with the power to adopt delegated acts, as referred to in Article 150, in order to adopt the priorities of the Union for enforcement and control policy by 31 May 2013 at the latest.
Amendment 910 #
2011/0380(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1 – point h a (new)
Article 20 – paragraph 1 – point h a (new)
(ha) a detailed description of the measures concerning the preparation and implementation of production and marketing plans benefiting from support under Article 69;
Amendment 952 #
2011/0380(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 22 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
For this purpose, the Commission shall adopt a decision, by means of implementing act,be authorised to adopt delegated acts, as referred to in Article 150, in order to detailing the changes in the priorities of the Union in the enforcement and control policy mentioned in Article 18(3) and the corresponding eligible operations to be prioritised.
Amendment 973 #
2011/0380(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 1
Article 25 – paragraph 1
1. To implement Chapters I and II of Title VI and Article 92, the Commission shall, by means of implementing acts,e authorised to adopt delegated acts, as referred to in Article 150, in order to adopt an annual work programme in accordance with the objectives set out in those Chapters. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 151(3).
Amendment 1892 #
2011/0380(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 69 – paragraph 1
Article 69 – paragraph 1
1. TIn accordance with Article 20(1)(ha), the EMFF mayshall support the preparation and implementation of production and marketing plans referred to in Article 32 of [Regulation (EU) No on the common organisation of the markets in fishery and aquaculture products].
Amendment 1925 #
2011/0380(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 70 – paragraph 1 – point c – introductory part
Article 70 – paragraph 1 – point c – introductory part
(c) the financial assistance per year shall not exceed the following percentages2% of the average annual value of the marketed production at first sale of the members of producer organisation in the period 2009-2011. In the case that members of producer organisation did not have any marketed production in 2009- 2011, the average annual value of marketed production in the first three years of production of such member shall be taken into account: – 1% in 2014 – 0,8 % in 2015 – 0,6 % in 2016 – 0,4 % in 2017 – 0,2 % in 2018.
Amendment 1942 #
2011/0380(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 71 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 71 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The EMFF may support marketing measures for fishery and, aquaculture and inland fishery products which aim at:
Amendment 2087 #
2011/0380(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 78 – paragraph 2 – point j a (new)
Article 78 – paragraph 2 – point j a (new)
(ja) operational costs incurred in delivering strengthened control for stocks subject to specific control and inspection programmes established in accordance with Article 95 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009;
Amendment 2089 #
2011/0380(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 78 – paragraph 2 – point j b (new)
Article 78 – paragraph 2 – point j b (new)
(j b) operational costs linked to the implementation of an action plan established in accordance with Article 102(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009.
Amendment 2285 #
2011/0380(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 105 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 105 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
The Commission shall exercise the empowerment in full respect of the principle of proportionality and taking into account the risk that the non-compliance with the respective CFP rules constitutes a serious threats to the sustainable exploitation of living marine biological resources that restores and maintains populations of harvested species abovet levels which can produce the MSY, the sustainability of the stocks concerned or the conservation of the marine environment.
Amendment 2338 #
2011/0380(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 114 – paragraph 7
Article 114 – paragraph 7
7. The Commission may, by means of implementshall be authorised to adopt delegated acts ing acts,cordance with Article 150, in order to adopt rules aiminged at reaching athe uniform application of paragraphs 1, 2, 3 and 4. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 151(3) to 4.
Amendment 51 #
2011/0300(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
4. 'project of common interest' means a project, which is necessary to implement the energy infrastructure priority corridors and areas set out in Annex I and which stimulates growth and employment in the regions concerned;
Amendment 510 #
2011/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point d a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point d a (new)
(da) local development, diversification and services in rural areas;
Amendment 1545 #
2011/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 10
Article 36 – paragraph 10
10. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 90 concerning the further specification of the characteristics of pilot projects, clusters, networks, short supply chains and local markets that will be eligible for support, as well as concerning the conditions for granting aid to the types of operation listed in paragraph 2. A minimum amount shall be set in each national or regional programme to support the cooperation undertaken by each local action group.
Amendment 1794 #
2011/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 55 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 55 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. In accordance with Article 70, beneficiaries may request an advance from the competent paying agency if that option is included in the rural development programme. The amount of the advance may be as much as 50% of the public support related to the running and animation costs.
Amendment 1926 #
2011/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 65 – paragraph 2
Article 65 – paragraph 2
2. The EAFRD contribution shall be calculated on the basis of the amount of eligible publicFor each priority axis, the Commission decision shall determine whether the co- financing rate for the priority axis will be applied to: (a) total eligible expenditure, including public and private expenditure; (b) public eligible expenditure.
Amendment 1930 #
2011/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 65 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 65 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
The rural development programmes shall establish a single EAFRD contribution rate applicable to all measuresco-financing rate for a priority axis may be varied. Where applicable, a separate EAFRD contribution rate shall be established for less developed regions, and for outermost regions and the smaller Aegean islands within the meaning of Regulation (EEC) No 2019/93. The maximum EAFRD contribution rate shall be:
Amendment 1955 #
2011/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 65 – paragraph 4 – point a
Article 65 – paragraph 4 – point a
(a) 80% for the measures referred to in Articles 15, 28 and 36, both for the LEADER local development referred to in Article 28 of Regulation (EU) No [CSF/2012] and for operations under Article 20(1)(a)(i). It may be increased to 90% for the programmes of less developed, the outermost regions and the smaller Aegean islands within the meaning of Regulation (EEC) No 2019/93;
Amendment 1970 #
2011/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 65 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 65 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. The maximum EARDF contribution rate shall be raised to 100% for transnational cooperation projects run by LEADER local action groups.
Amendment 2009 #
2011/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 72 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 72 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. The Member State may designate for an operational programme a managing authority which will also act as a certifying authority.
Amendment 16 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 a (new)
Article 8 a (new)
Article 8a Macro-regional strategies and sea-basin strategies The CSF Funds shall contribute to macro-regional strategies and sea-basin strategies, where Member States and regions participate in such strategies. The Commission and the Member States concerned shall ensure the Funds' coordination with these strategies at the level of the Common Strategic Framework, of Partnership Contracts and of operational programmes in order to ensure sufficient allocation from the Funds to these strategies.
Amendment 18 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12
Article 12
Amendment 19 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2
Article 17 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall assess whether the applicable ex ante conditionalities are fulfilled. Ex ante conditionalities shall not apply unless they are directly linked to implementation of the Funds.
Amendment 20 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 3
Article 20 – paragraph 3
3. Where there is evidence resulting from a performance review that a priority has failed to achieve the milestones set out in the performance framework, the Commission may suspend all or part of an interim payment ofask the Member State to put forward proposals for changes to the programmes concerned. If the Member State fails to respond to this request or to make a satisfactory response thereto within three months, the Commission may suspend all or part of a commitment for a priority of a programme in accordance with the procedure laid down in Fund-specific rules.
Amendment 21 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 23 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The implementation of multi-fund programmes (ERDF, ESF, Cohesion Fund, EAFRD, EMFF) shall be encouraged. To that end, the Commission shall take all necessary steps to make it possible for such programmes to be drawn up and implemented in accordance with the proportionality principle.
Amendment 23 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 87 – paragraph 1
Article 87 – paragraph 1
1. An operational programme shall consist of priority axes. A priority axis shall concern one Fund for a category of region and shall correspond, without prejudice to Article 52, to a thematic objective and comprise one or more investment priIn duly justified circumstances, a priority axis may cover one or more categorities of that thematic objective, in accordance with the Fund- specific rules. For the ESF, a priority axis may combine investment priorities from different thematic objectives set out in Article 9(8), (9), (10) and (11) in order to facilitate their contribution to other priority axes, in duly justified circumstancesregion and combine complementary investment priorities from different thematic objectives and from several Funds, in accordance with the specific rules governing the Funds concerned.
Amendment 24 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 110 – paragraph 4
Article 110 – paragraph 4
Amendment 213 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) The Common Strategic Framework should therefore establish the key areas of support, territorial challenges to be addressed, policy objectives, priority areas for cooperation activities, coordination mechanisms and mechanisms for coherence and consistency with the economic policies of Member States and the Union and with macro regional strategies and sea basins strategies, where Member States and regions participate in such strategies.
Amendment 222 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) Member States should concentrate support to ensure a significant contribution to the achievement of Union objectives in line with their specific national and regional development needs. Ex ante conditionalities should be defined to ensure that the necessary framework conditions for the effective use of Union support are in place. The fulfilment of those ex ante conditionalities should be assessed by the Commissionall apply only to the extent that they are directly linked to the implementation of the Funds. The European Commission shall assess the information provided by the Member States on the application of the ex ante conditionalities in the framework of its assessment of the Partnership Contract and programmes. In cases where there is a failure to fulfil an ex ante conditionality, the Commission should have the power to suspend payments to the programme.
Amendment 466 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 2 – article 8 a (new)
Part 2 – article 8 a (new)
Article 8a Macro regional strategies and sea basins strategies The CSF Funds shall contribute to macro regional strategies and sea basins strategies, where Member States and regions participate in such strategies. The Commission and the Member States concerned shall ensure the Funds' coordination with these strategies at the level of the Common Strategic Framework, of Partnership Contracts and of operational programmes in order to ensure sufficient allocation from the Funds to these strategies.
Amendment 537 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 2 – article 12
Part 2 – article 12
Amendment 586 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 2 – article 14 – paragraph 1 – point a – point v
Part 2 – article 14 – paragraph 1 – point a – point v
(v) the main priority areas for cooperation, taking account, where appropriate, of macro-regional and sea basin strategies;
Amendment 592 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 2 – article 14 – paragraph 1 – point a – point vii bis (new)
Part 2 – article 14 – paragraph 1 – point a – point vii bis (new)
vii a) the means of coordinating programmes focused on Article 14 (a(vii)) with programmes working towards the objective of European Regional Cooperation.
Amendment 593 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 2 – article 14 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Part 2 – article 14 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
(a a) arrangements to ensure alignment with macro regional and sea basins strategies, where Member States and regions participate in such strategies, in order to ensure sufficient allocation from the Funds to these strategies;
Amendment 661 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 2 – article 17 – paragraph 2
Part 2 – article 17 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall assess whether the applicable ex ante conditionalities are fulfilled. Ex ante conditionalities shall be applied only when they have a direct link to the implementation of the Funds.
Amendment 721 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 2 – article 20 – paragraph 3
Part 2 – article 20 – paragraph 3
3. Where there is evidence resulting from a performance review that a priority has failed to achieve the milestones set out in the performance framework, the Commission may suspend all or part of an interim paycall upon a Member State to propose amendments to the relevant programmes. If the Member State does not respond to this demand or does not respond in a satisfactory manner within three months, the Commission may suspend all or part of the engagements of a priority of a programme in accordance with the procedure laid down in Fund-specific rules.
Amendment 746 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 2 – article 23 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Part 2 – article 23 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The use of multi-fund programmes (ERDF, ESF, cohesion funds, EAFRD, EMFF) is encouraged. In this way the Commission undertakes to allow the preparation and implementation of such programmes with respect to the principle of proportionality.
Amendment 760 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 2 – article 24 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Part 2 – article 24 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Where Member States and regions participate in macro regional strategies or sea basins strategies, the programme shall be coordinated with these strategies, in accordance with the Partnership Contract, in order to ensure sufficient allocation from the Funds to these strategies.
Amendment 763 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 2 – article 24 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point c a (new)
Part 2 – article 24 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point c a (new)
(c a) where appropriate, indicators related to the programme's contribution to macro regional strategies and sea basins strategies.
Amendment 1101 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 2 – article 60 – paragraph 2 – point b
Part 2 – article 60 – paragraph 2 – point b
b) the total amount allocated under the programme to operations located outside the programme area is not less than 1 % but does not exceed 10 % of the support from the ERDF, Cohesion Fund and EMFF at the level of the priority, or 3 % of the support from the EAFRD at the level of the programme. These amounts may be allocated to the actions referred to in Article 87(2)(c) (v and vi);
Amendment 1338 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 87 – paragraph 1
Part 3 – article 87 – paragraph 1
1. An operational programme shall consist of priority axes. AIn duly motivated circumstances, a priority axis shallmay concern one Fund for aor more categoryies of region and shall correspond, without prejudice to Article 52, to a thematic objective and comprise one or more investment priorities of that thematic objective, in accordance with the Fund-specific rules. For the ESF, a priority axis may combine investment priorities from different thematic objectives set out in Article 9(8), (9), (10) and (11) in order to facilitate their contribution to other priority axes, in duly justified circumstanc, or combine one or more complementary investment priorities from different thematic objectives and Funds, in accordance with Fund-specific rules.
Amendment 1359 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 87 – paragraph 2 – point a – point ii bis (new)
Part 3 – article 87 – paragraph 2 – point a – point ii bis (new)
ii a) A presentation of the procedures for coordinating between the Investment for growth and jobs operational programmes, the programmes from the European territorial cooperation goal, and the programmes from the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF), the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD), the European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument (ENPI), the European Development Fund (EDF), and the Pre- Accession Instrument (IPA) for the regions concerned.
Amendment 1473 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 95 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Part 3 – article 95 – paragraph 1 – point 1
(1) an analysis of the development needs and objectives justifying the joint action plan, taking into account the objectives of the operational programmes, of macro regional strategies and sea basins strategies where they have a significant impact, and, where applicable, the country-specific recommendations and the broad guidelines of the economic policies of the Member States and of the Union under Article 121(2) and the Council recommendations which the Member States shall take into account in their employment policies under Article 148(4) of the Treaty;
Amendment 1498 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 99 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Part 3 – article 99 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Where Member States and regions participate in macro regional strategies or sea basins strategies, ITIs are consistent with these strategies.
Amendment 1529 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 101 – paragraph 3 – point c
Part 3 – article 101 – paragraph 3 – point c
(c) where appropriate, progress in implementation of anymacro regional strategies and sea basins strategies and of any other interregional and transnational actions;
Amendment 1618 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 110 – paragraph 4
Part 3 – article 110 – paragraph 4
Amendment 65 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) The ERDF should contribute to the Europe 2020 strategy, thus ensuring greater concentration of ERDF support on the priorities of the Union. According to the category of regions supported, the support from the ERDF should be concentrated on research and innovation, information and communication technologies, small and medium-sized enterprises and climate change mitigation. The degree of concentration should take into account the level of development of the region as well as the specific needs of regions whose GDP per capita for the 2007-13 period was less than 75 % of the average GDP of the EU-25 for the reference period.
Amendment 115 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1
The ERDF shall contribute to the financing of support which aims to reinforce economic, social and territorial cohesion by redressing the main regional imbalances through support for the development and structural adjustment of regional economies, including the conversion of declining industrial regions and regions lagging behind and by taking account of the particular features of regions which suffer from severe and permanent natural or demographic handicaps such as the northernmost regions with very low population density and island, outermost, cross-border and mountain regions.
Amendment 142 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) productive investment, which contributes to creating and safeguarding sustainable jobs, through direct aid to investment in small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) primarily;
Amendment 161 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point c
(c) investments in social, health, sport and educational infrastructure;
Amendment 210 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 245 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a – introductory part
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a – introductory part
(a) in more developed regions and transition regions:
Amendment 253 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a – point i
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a – point i
(i) at least 80 % of the total ERDF resources at national level shall be allocated to the thematic objectives set out in points 1, 2, 3 and 4 of Article 9 of Regulation (EU) No […]/2012 [CPR]; and
Amendment 272 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a bis (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a bis (new)
(a a) in transition regions: i) at least 60 % of the total ERDF resources at national level shall be allocated to each of the thematic objectives set in out in points 1, 2, 3 and 4 of Article 9 of Regulation EU No […]/2012 [CPR]; and ii)at least 20 % of the total ERDF resources at national level shall be allocated to each of the thematic objectives set in out in point 4 of Article 9 of Regulation EU No […]/2012 [CPR];
Amendment 283 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b – point i
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b – point i
(i) at least 50 % of the total ERDF resources at national level shall be allocated to the thematic objectives set out in point 1, 2, 3 and 4 of Article 9 of Regulation (EU) No […]/2012 [CPR] .
Amendment 302 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2
Article 4 – paragraph 2
Amendment 340 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b
(b) promoting businessand supporting business and research centre R&I investment, product and service development, technology transfer, social innovation and public service applications, demand stimulation, networking, clusters and open innovation through smart specialisation;
Amendment 362 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point c bis (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point c bis (new)
(c a) developing links and synergies between businesses, research and development centres and higher education
Amendment 372 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b
(b) developing digital and ICT products and services, e-commerce and enhancing demand for ICT;
Amendment 375 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point c
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point c
(c) strengthening ICT applications for e- government, e-learning, e-inclusion and, e- health and online culture;
Amendment 391 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – introductory part
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – introductory part
(3) enhancing the competitiveness of businesses, mainly SMEs:
Amendment 404 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point a
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point a
(a) promoting entrepreneurship, in particular by facilitating the economic exploitation of new ideas and fostering the creation of new firmsand the transfer of business ownership;
Amendment 437 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point a
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point a
(a) promoting and supporting the production, transport and distribution of renewable energy sources;
Amendment 444 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point b
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point b
(b) promoting energy efficiency and renewable energy use in businesses, in particular SMEs;
Amendment 455 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point c
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point c
(c) supporting and promoting energy efficiency and renewable energy use in public infrastructure, particularly in public buildings and in the housing sector;
Amendment 469 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point e
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point e
(e) promoting and supporting low-carbon strategies for urban areas;
Amendment 480 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point e a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point e a (new)
(e a) promoting and supporting research and innovation in low carbon technologies;
Amendment 498 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point b
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point b
(b) promoting and supporting investment to address specific risks, ensuring disaster resilience and developing disaster management systems;
Amendment 557 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point b
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point b
(b) enhancing regional and local mobility through connecting secondary and tertiary nodes to TEN-T infrastructure;
Amendment 583 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point d bis (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point d bis (new)
(d a) developing intermodal transport systems, in particular maritime and inland waterway transport and assisting ports and airports in promoting sustainable development;
Amendment 603 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 8 – point a
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 8 – point a
(a) development of business incubators and investment support for self-employment and micro-enterprises and business creation;
Amendment 608 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 8 – point a
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 8 – point a
(a) development of business incubators and investment support for self-employment and business creation and the transfer of business ownership;
Amendment 634 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 9 – point a
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 9 – point a
(a) investing in health as well as health enhancing physical activity and social infrastructure which contribute to national, regional and local development, reducing inequalities in terms of health status, and transition from institutional to community- based services;
Amendment 776 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
At least 50% of the specific additional allocation shall be allocated to actions contributing to the diversification and modernisation of the economies of the outermost regions, with a particular focus on the thematic objectives set out in points 1, 2 and 3 of Article 9 of Regulation (EU) No […]/2012 [CPR]rticle 4 does not apply to the specific additional allocation.
Amendment 778 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. All enterprises established in the outermost regions may benefit from the specific additional allocation and, by way of derogation from Article 3(1)(a), they may benefit from any productive investment financed under the ERDF.
Amendment 133 #
2011/0273(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
For transnational cooperation, the Commission shall adopt the list of transnational areas to receive support, broken down by cooperation programme and covering NUTS level 2 regions while ensuring the continuity of such cooperation in larger coherent areas based on previous programmes, by means of implementing acts, taking account of macro-regional strategies and sea-basins already existing and being drawn up. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the advisory procedure referred to in Article 30(2).
Amendment 228 #
2011/0273(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a – point iv b (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a – point iv b (new)
iv b) drawing-up and implementing macro-regional strategies and sea basin strategies (within all thematic objectives).
Amendment 245 #
2011/0273(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b
b) under transnational cooperation: development and implementation of macro-regional and sea-basin strategies (within theall thematic objective of enhancing institutional capacity and an efficient public administrations).
Amendment 274 #
2011/0273(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point c – point v
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point c – point v
v) wfor the re appropriatelevant programmes, the contribution of the planned interventions towards macro regional strategies and sea basin strategies;
Amendment 281 #
2011/0273(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point c – point v a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point c – point v a (new)
v a) priority structural projects identified within the framework of macro regional strategies and sea basin strategies.
Amendment 99 #
2011/0270(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point 4
4. Actions to promote mobility of individuals in the Union, in particular the development of a multilingual digital platform for the clearance of job vacancies and applications, and targeted mobility schemes to fill vacancies where labour market shortcomings have been identified and/or to help specific groups of workers such as young and older people.
Amendment 105 #
2011/0270(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Article 10 – paragraph 1
1. The results of the actions implemented under the Programme shall be suitably communicated and disseminated to all stakeholders in order to maximise their impact, sustainability and Union added value.
Amendment 79 #
2011/0268(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1
1. The ESF shall promote high levels of employment and job quality, support the geographical and occupational mobility of workers, and facilitate theiworker adaptation to change, encourage a high level of es to the businesses and producation and training, promote gender equality, equal opportunities and non- discrimination, enhancesystems. The ESF will also contribute to the strengthening of economic, social and territorial cohesion in the Union, the fight against poverty and social inexclusion and combat poverty, thereby contributing to the priorities of the European Union as regards strengthening economic, social and territorial cohes, promote gender equality, equal opportunities and elimination of any form of discrimination.
Amendment 92 #
2011/0268(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 3
Article 2 – paragraph 3
3. The ESF shall benefit people, including disadvantaged groups such as the long- term unemployed, people with disabilities, migrants, ethnic minorities, marginalised communities and people facing social exclusion. The ESF shall also provide support to workers, enterprises, and entrepreneurs as well as systems and structures with a view to facilitating their adaptation to new challenges and promoting good governance and the implementation of reforms, in particular in the fields of employment, education and social policies.
Amendment 112 #
2011/0268(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a – point v
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a – point v
(v) Adaptation of workers, enterprises and entrepreneurs to change, specifically in SMEs and micro-enterprises;
Amendment 119 #
2011/0268(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a – point vi
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a – point vi
(vi) Active and healthy ageing; as well as physical activity
Amendment 135 #
2011/0268(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b – point iii a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b – point iii a (new)
(iii a) Better and fairer access to contracts by professional groups and countries in order to be closer to real needs;
Amendment 144 #
2011/0268(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point c – point iv
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point c – point iv
(iv) Enhancing access to affordable, sustainable and high-quality services, including health care, health enhancing physical activity programmes of non- profit organisations and social services of general interest;
Amendment 222 #
2011/0268(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 3
Article 6 – paragraph 3
3. To encourage adequate participation of and access by non-governmental organisations to actions supported by the ESF, particularly with measures of impact, notably in the fields of social inclusion, gender equality and equal opportunities, the managing authorities of an operational programme in a region as defined in Article 82(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No […] or in Member States eligible for Cohesion Fund support shall ensure that an appropriate amount of ESF resources is allocated to capacity-building for non-governmental organisations.
Amendment 1 #
2011/0212(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) By Council Decisions 2009/102/EC of 4 November 2009, 2009/290/EC of 20 January 2009 and 2009/459/EC of 26 JuneMay 2009 Hungary, Latvia and Romania were granted such financial assistance.
Amendment 2 #
2011/0212(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) The period during which the assistance is available under Regulations 407/2010 and 332/2002to Ireland, Hungary, Latvia, Portugal and Romania is set out in the respective Council Implementing Decisions. The Council Decision granting assistancperiod during which assistance was made available to Hungary expired on 4 November 2010.
Amendment 3 #
2011/0212(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9 a (new)
Recital 9 a (new)
(9a) The period during which the assistance under the Intercreditor Agreement and the Loan Facility Agreement is available to Greece is different for each Member State participating in those instruments. For the purposes of this Regulation it is necessary for any Member State making a request to benefit from the derogation under this Regulation to clearly specify in its request the starting date, from which it considers that the derogation is justified in applying to that Member State in accordance with this Regulation.
Amendment 4 #
2011/0212(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) On 11 July 2011, finance ministers of the 17 euro-area Member States signed the Treaty establishing the European Stability Mechanism (ESM). It is foreseen that byUnder that Treaty, which is a consequence of the European Council Decision of 25 March 2013, 1,the ESM will, by 2013, assume the tasks currently fulfilled by the European Financial Stability Facility (EFSF) and the European Financial Stabilisation Mechanism (EFSM). This future mechanism should therefore already be taken into account in this Regulation.
Amendment 5 #
2011/0212(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10 a (new)
Recital 10 a (new)
(10a) In its conclusions of 23 and 24 June 2011, the European Council welcomed the Commission's intention to enhance the synergies between the loan programme for Greece and the Union funds, supporting efforts to increase Greece's capacity to absorb Union funds with the aim of stimulating growth and employment by refocusing on improving competitiveness and employment creation. Moreover, the conclusions welcome and support the preparation by the Commission, together with the Member States, of a comprehensive programme of technical assistance to Greece. This Regulation contributes to those efforts to enhance synergies.
Amendment 6 #
2011/0212(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) In order to facilitate the management of Union funding, to help accelerate investments in Member States and regions and to improve the availability of funding to the economy it is necessary to allow the, in justified cases, temporarily and without prejudice to the 2014 to 2020 programming period, an increase of interim payments from the European Fisheries Fund by an amount corresponding to ten percentage points above the actual co-financing rate for each priority axis for Member States which are facing serious difficulties with respect to their financial stability. and which have requested to benefit from this measure, resulting in a corresponding reduction in the national counterpart. Due to the temporary nature of that increase and in order to maintain the original co- financing rates as the reference point for calculation of the temporarily increased amounts, the changes resulting from application of the mechanism should not be reflected in the financial plan included in the operational programme. However, it should be possible to update operational programme in order to concentrate the funds on competitiveness, growth and employment and in order to align their targets and objectives with the decrease of total funding available.
Amendment 7 #
2011/0212(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11 a (new)
Recital 11 a (new)
(11a) The Member State making a request to the Commission to benefit from the derogation under this Regulation should clearly specify, in its request addressed to the Commission, the date from which it considers the derogation to be justified. In its request, the Member State should submit all the information necessary to enable the Commission to establish by means of data on the Member State's macroeconomic and fiscal situation; that resources for the national counterpart are unavailable. It should also show that an increase of payments resulting from the granting of the derogation is necessary to safeguard the continued implementation of operational programmes and that the absorption capacity problems persist even if the maximum ceilings applicable to co- financing rates laid down in Article 53(3) are used. The Member State concerned should also providethe reference to the relevant Council Decision or other legal act pursuant to which it is eligible for benefit from the derogation. It is necessary for the Commission to have a sufficient period, starting from the submission of the Member State's request, in which to verify the correctness of the information submitted andto raise any objection. In order to make the derogation effective and operational, there should be a presumption that a Member State's request is justified if the Commission does not raise an objection. If the Commission objects to the Member State request, it should adopt a decision to this effect, stating reasons.
Amendment 8 #
2011/0212(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12 a (new)
Recital 12 a (new)
(12a) It is necessary to ensure that there is appropriate reporting on the use of the increased amounts made available to the Member States benefiting from the temporary increase in interim payments under this Regulation.
Amendment 9 #
2011/0212(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) After the end of the period during which financial assistance has been made available, the outcomes of evaluations carried out in accordance with Article 18(2) might highlight the need to assess, inter alia, whether the reduction of the national co-funding does not lead to a significant departure from the goals initially set. Such evaluation might lead to the revision of the operational programme.
Amendment 10 #
2011/0212(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
Amendment 11 #
2011/0212(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) As the unprecedented crisis affecting international financial markets and the economic donwturn which have seriously damaged the financial stability of several Member States necessitates a rapid response in order to counter the effects on the economy as a whole, this Regulation should enter into force as soon as possible and apply retroactively. Given the exceptional circumstances of the Member States concerned, it should apply retroactively, starting either from the budgetary year of 2010 or from the starting day when the financial assistance was made available, depending on the requesting Member State's status, for the periods during which the Member States received financial assistance from the Union or from other euro-area Member States in order to address serious difficulties with respect to their financial stability,
Amendment 12 #
2011/0212(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15 a (new)
Recital 15 a (new)
(15a) Where a temporary increase in interim payments is envisaged, that temporary increase should also be considered in the context of the budgetary restraints facing all Member States, which should be reflected appropriately in the Union budget. In addition, since the main purpose of the mechanism is to address specific current difficulties, its application should be limited in time. Therefore application of the mechanism should start on 1 January 2010 and its duration should be limited until 31 December 2013.
Amendment 13 #
2011/0212(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15 b (new)
Recital 15 b (new)
(15b) Council Regulation (EC) No Regulation (EC) No 1198/2006 of 27 July 2006 laying down general provisions on the European Fisheries Fund1 should therefore be amended accordingly. ______________ 1 OJ L 223, 15.8.2006, p. 1.
Amendment 14 #
2011/0212(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Regulation (EC) No Regulation (EC) No 1198/2006
Article 76 - paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 76 - paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. The increased interim payments resulting from the application of paragraph 3 shall be made available within the shortest period of time to the managing authority and shall only be used for making payments in connection with the implementation of the operational programme.
Amendment 15 #
2011/0212(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Regulation (EC) No Regulation (EC) No 1198/2006
Article 76 - paragraph 3 b (new)
Article 76 - paragraph 3 b (new)
3 b. In the context of the annual reporting in accordance with Article 67(1), the Member States shall provide the Commission with appropriate information on the use of the derogation referred to in Article 76(3) showing how the increased amounts of support has contributed to the promotion of competitiveness, growth and jobs in the Member State concerned. This information shall be taken into account by the Commission in the preparation of the annual reporting provided for by Article 68(1).
Amendment 16 #
2011/0212(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Regulation (EC) No Regulation (EC) No 1198/2006
Article 77 - paragraph 2
Article 77 - paragraph 2
2. By way of derogation from Article 53 (3), onat the request of a Member State, payments of the final balance mayshall be increased, by an amount corresponding to ten percentage points above the co- financing rate applicable to each priority axis up to a maximum of one hundred per cent, to be applied to the amount of eligible public expenditure newly declared in each certified statement of expenditure submitted during the period in which a Member State meets one of the following conditions: conditions laid down in points (a) to (c) of Article 76(3).
Amendment 17 #
2011/0212(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Regulation (EC) No Regulation (EC) No 1198/2006
Article 77 - paragraph 2 - point a
Article 77 - paragraph 2 - point a
Amendment 18 #
2011/0212(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Regulation (EC) No Regulation (EC) No 1198/2006
Article 77 - paragraph 2 - point b
Article 77 - paragraph 2 - point b
Amendment 19 #
2011/0212(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Regulation (EC) No Regulation (EC) No 1198/2006
Article 77 - paragraph 2 - point c
Article 77 - paragraph 2 - point c
Amendment 20 #
2011/0212(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2
Article 1 – paragraph 2
Regulation (EC) No Regulation (EC) No 1198/2006
Article 77 a (new) - paragraph 1
Article 77 a (new) - paragraph 1
1. Notwithstanding Articles 76 paragraph 3, and Article 77 paragraph 2(3) and 77(2), the Union contribution through interim payments and payments of the final balance shall not be higher than the public contribution and the maximum amount of assistance from the Funds for each priority axis and objective as laid down in the decision of the Commission approving the operational programme.
Amendment 21 #
2011/0212(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2
Article 1 – paragraph 2
Regulation (EC) No 1198/2006
Article 77 a (new) - paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 77 a (new) - paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The derogation referred to in Articles 76(3) and 77(2) shall be granted upon the written request of a Member State meeting one of the conditions mentioned in points (a) to (c) of Article 76(3). The request shall be submitted within two months from the entry into force of this Regulation or within two months from the date on which a Member State meets one of the conditions mentioned in Articles 76 (3) (a) to (c).
Amendment 22 #
2011/0212(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2
Article 1 – paragraph 2
Regulation (EC) No 1198/2006
Article 77 a (new) - paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 77 a (new) - paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. In its request submitted to the Commission, the Member State shall justify the necessity of the derogation referred to in Articles 76(3) and 77(2), by providing information necessary to establish: (a) by means of data on its macroeconomic and fiscal situation, that no resources for the national counterpart are available; (b) that an increase of payments referred to in Articles 76(3) and 77(2) is necessary to safeguard the continued implementation of operational programmes; (c) that problems persist even if the maximum ceilings applicable to co- financing rates of Article 53(3) are used. (d) that it fulfils one of the conditions referred to in points (a) to (c) of Article 76(3), as justified by reference to a Council Decision or other legal act ,as well as the actual starting date from which the financial assistance was made available to the Member State. The Commission shall verified whether the information submitted justifies granting a derogation. The Commission shall raise any objection as to the information submitted within 30 days from the day of submission of the request. If the Commission decides to object to the Member State's request, the Commission shall adopt a decision, to this effect and shall state reasons. If the Commission does not raise any objection to the Member State's request, that request shall be deemed to be justified.
Amendment 23 #
2011/0212(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2
Article 1 – paragraph 2
Regulation (EC) No 1198/2006
Article 77 a (new) - paragraph 1 c (new)
Article 77 a (new) - paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. The Member State's request shall also detail the intended use of the derogation, provided for in Articles 76(3) and 77(2) and shall give information about complementary measures envisaged in order to concentrate the funds on competitiveness, growth and employment, including, where appropriate, a modification of operational programmes.
Amendment 24 #
2011/0212(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2
Article 1 – paragraph 2
Regulation (EC) No 1198/2006
Article 77 a (new) - paragraph 1 d (new)
Article 77 a (new) - paragraph 1 d (new)
1d. The derogation provided for in Articles 76(3) and 77(2) shall not apply to statements of expenditure submitted after 31 December 2013."
Amendment 25 #
2011/0212(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2
Article 2 – paragraph 2
However, it shall apply retroactively to the following Member States: in the cases of Ireland, Greece and Portugal with effect from the momentday when the financial assistance was made available to them:se Member States pursuant to Article 76(3), and in the cases of Hungary, Latvia and Romania with effect from 1 January 2010.
Amendment 26 #
2011/0212(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point a
Amendment 27 #
2011/0212(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point b
Amendment 28 #
2011/0212(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point c
Amendment 29 #
2011/0212(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point d
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point d
Amendment 30 #
2011/0212(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point e
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point e
Amendment 31 #
2011/0212(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point f
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point f
Amendment 65 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) At the World Summit on Sustainable Development at Johannesburg in 2002, the Union and its Member States committed to act against the continued decline of many fish stocks. Therefore, the Union should improve its Common Fisheries Policy to ensure that as a matter of priority exploitation levels of marine biological resources stocks are restored and maintained at levels capable of producing maximum sustainable yields from the populations of harvested stocks by 2015. Where less scientific information is available, this may require applying proxies to maximum sustainable yield.
Amendment 66 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) Fisheries targets were laid down in the Decision by the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity on the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011 – –2020, and the Common Fisheries Policy should ensure coherence with the biodiversity targets adopted by the European Council and the targets of Commission Communication "‘Our life insurance, our natural capital: an EU Bbiodiversity Sstrategy to 2020"’, in particular to achieve maximum sustainable yield by 2015.
Amendment 74 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) Measures are needed to reduce and eliminate the current highthe levels of unwanted catches and discards. Indeed, unwanted catches and discards constitute a substantial waste and affect negatively the sustainable exploitation of marine biological resources and marine ecosystems as well as the financial viability of fisheries. An obligation to land all catches of managed stocks caught during fishing activities in Union waters or by Union fishing vessels should be established and gradually implemented.
Amendment 80 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
Recital 29
Amendment 84 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
Recital 30
Amendment 86 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
Recital 31
Amendment 101 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part I – Article 2 – paragraph 2
Part I – Article 2 – paragraph 2
2. The Common Fisheries Policy shall apply the precautionary approach to fisheries management, and shall aim to ensure, by 2015, that exploitation of living marine biological resources restores and maintainsmaintain or restore populations of harvested species aboveto levels capable of producing the maximum sustainable yield by 2020.
Amendment 106 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part I – Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
Part I – Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) eliminatsignificantly reduce catches of commercial stocks and gradually ensure that all catches of such stocks are landed;
Amendment 116 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part I – Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point d
Part I – Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) broad involvement of stakeholders, especially through the Advisory Councils, at all stages from conception to implementation of the measures;
Amendment 120 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part I – Article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 17
Part I – Article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 17
Amendment 124 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part II – Article 6 – paragraph 3
Part II – Article 6 – paragraph 3
3. In the waters up to 100 nautical miles from the baselines of the Azores, Madeira and the Canary Islandsall the outermost regions of the Union, the Member States concerned may from 1 January 2013 to 31 December 2022 restrict fishing to vessels registered in the ports of those islandregions. Such restrictions shall not apply to Union vessels that traditionally fish in those waters, in so far as those vessels do not exceed the fishing effort traditionally exerted. Member States shall inform the Commission of the restrictions put in place under this paragraph.
Amendment 125 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part III – Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point g
Part III – Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) adopting measures concerning the obligation to land all catchepermitting a significant reduction in unwanted catches of commercial stocks;
Amendment 126 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part III – Title II - Article 9 – paragraph 1
Part III – Title II - Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. Multiannual plans providing for conservation measures to maintain or restore fish stocks aboveto levels capable of producing maximum sustainable yield shall be established as a priority.
Amendment 130 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part III – Title II - Article 10 – paragraph 1
Part III – Title II - Article 10 – paragraph 1
1. Multiannual plans shall provide for adaptations of the fishing mortality rate, resulting in a fishing mortality rate that restores and maintains all stocks aboveto levels capable of producing maximum sustainable yield by 201520.
Amendment 133 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part III – Title II - Article 10 – paragraph 2
Part III – Title II - Article 10 – paragraph 2
2. In cases where the determination of a fishing mortality rate that restores and maintains stocks aboveto levels capable of producing maximum sustainable yield is not possible, multiannual plans shall provide for precautionary measures ensuring a comparable degree of conservation of the relevant stocks.
Amendment 135 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part III – Title II - Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point e
Part III – Title II - Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) technical measures including measures concerning the eliminasignificant reduction of unwanted catches;
Amendment 139 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part III – Title II - Article 14 – paragraph 1 – point a
Part III – Title II - Article 14 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) contribute to maintaining or restoring fish stocks aboveto levels capable of producing maximum sustainable yield through improvements in size-selection and where appropriate species selection;
Amendment 141 #
Amendment 145 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part III – Title II - Article 15 a (new)
Part III – Title II - Article 15 a (new)
Article 15a. Significant reduction in unwanted catches of commercial stocks 1. The European Parliament and the Council, taking into consideration the view of the STECF and the relevant Advisory Councils, as well as the conclusions of impact studies seeking to analyse the reasons for unwanted catches, shall define the objectives for significantly reducing unwanted catches from regulated commercial stocks, while being aware of the specificities of each fishery. These multiannual objectives can appear in the multiannual plans drawn up by fishery or regional zone. 2. The minimum conservation reference sizes shall be established based on the best available scientific advice for the fish stocks set out in paragraph 1. The sale of catches of such fish stocks below the minimum conservation reference size shall be restricted to uses other than human consumption or transmitted to approved charity organisations.
Amendment 146 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part III – Title II - Article 16 – paragraph 2
Part III – Title II - Article 16 – paragraph 2
Amendment 147 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part III – Title II - Article 16 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Part III – Title II - Article 16 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Each Member State shall decide, for vessels flying its flag, on the method of allocating the fishing opportunities assigned to that Member State in accordance with Community law. It shall inform the Commission of the allocation method.
Amendment 148 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part III – Title III - Chapter I - Article 17 – title
Part III – Title III - Chapter I - Article 17 – title
Conservation measures adopted in accordance with multiannual plansnd technical measures developed at a regional level
Amendment 149 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part III – Title III - Chapter I - Article 17 – paragraph 1
Part III – Title III - Chapter I - Article 17 – paragraph 1
1. In aWith a view to establishing or implementing the multiannual plans established pursuant to Articles 9, 10 and 11, Member States may be authorised to adopt measures, in accordance with that multiannual plan, which specify the conservation measures applicable to vessels flying their flag in relation to stocks in Union waters for which they have been allocated fishing opportunitieswhich have a direct interest in the relevant fishery shall participate, in close collaboration with the Advisory Councils, in developing technical measures or conservation measures adapted to the specificities of each fishery.
Amendment 151 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part III – Title III - Chapter I - Article 17 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Part III – Title III - Chapter I - Article 17 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Member States shall ensurewhich have a direct interest in the relevant fishery shall ensure, in close collaboration with the Advisory Councils, that the conservation measures adopted pursuant to paragraph 1or technical measures:
Amendment 161 #
Amendment 172 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part V – Article 34 – paragraph 3
Part V – Article 34 – paragraph 3
Amendment 173 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part V – Article 35 – paragraph 2
Part V – Article 35 – paragraph 2
Amendment 174 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part V – Article 35 – paragraph 3
Part V – Article 35 – paragraph 3
Amendment 178 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part XII – Article 54 – paragraph 1
Part XII – Article 54 – paragraph 1
1. Advisory Councils shall be mainly composed of organizsations representing the fisheries operators and shall also include other interest groups affected by the Common Fisheries Policy.
Amendment 228 #
2011/0195(COD)
Draft legislative resolution
Citation 3 a (new)
Citation 3 a (new)
having regard to Article 349 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Amendment 248 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4 a (new)
Recital 4 a (new)
(4a) The CFP should guarantee employment in fisheries and aquaculture and contribute to improvements in the working conditions of fishermen and fish farmers, taking into account the social dimension of fishing activity. The common fisheries policy should also be coordinated with the Union’s trade and customs policies in order to control imports into the European Union from third countries and their impact on the prices obtained by Community producers and to establish fair and equitable competition with third countries, particularly preventing distortions of competition due to disparities in labour costs.
Amendment 249 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) At the World Summit on Sustainable Development at Johannesburg in 2002, the Union and its Member States committed to act against the continued decline of many fish stocks. Therefore, the Union should improve its Common Fisheries Policy to ensure that as a matter of priority exploitation levels of marine biological resources stocks are restored and maintained at levels capable of producing maximum sustainable yields from the populations of harvested stocks by 201520. Where less scientific information is available, this may require applying proxies to maximum sustainable yield.
Amendment 268 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) Fisheries targets were laid down in the Decision by the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity on the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011 – 2020, the Common Fisheries Policy should ensure coherence with the biodiversity targets adopted by the European Council, and the targets of Commission Communication "Our life insurance, our natural capital: an EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020", in particular to achieve maximum sustainable yield by 201520.
Amendment 280 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) An ecosystem based approach to fisheries management needs to be implemented, environmental impacts of fishing activities should be limited and unwanted catches should be minimissignificantly reduced and progressively eliminated insofar as possible, particularly by investing in the selectiveness of gear.
Amendment 298 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) Implementation of the Common Fisheries Policy should take into account interactions with other maritime affairs as addressed by the Integrated Maritime Policy, recognizing that all matters related to Europe’s oceans and seas are interlinked, including maritime spatial planning. Coherence and integration should be ensured in the management of different sectoral policies within the Baltic Sea, North Sea, Celtic Seas, Bay of Biscay and the Iberian Coast, Mediterranean and, Black Sea, Antilles, French Guiana and Indian Ocean sea basins.
Amendment 314 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) Marine biological resources around the Azores, Madeira and the Canary Islandsall the outermost regions of the Union should continue to be especially protected since they contribute to the preservation of the local economy of these islands, having regard to the structural, social and economic situation of those islandregions. The limitation of certain fishing activities in those waters to fishing vessels registered in the ports of the Azores, Madeira and the Canary Islandoutermost regions should therefore be maintained.
Amendment 330 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) Measures are needed to reduce and eliminate the current high levels of unwanted catches and discardsignificantly reduce levels of unwanted catches and discards, taking account of the specificities of each fishery and on the basis of prior impact assessments to analyse the causes of discards and the social, economic and environmental impact of the proposed measures. Indeed, unwanted catches and discards constitute a substantial waste and affect negatively the sustainable exploitation of marine biological resources and marine ecosystems as well as the financial viability of fisheries. An obligation to land all catches of managed stocks caught during fishing activities in Union waters or by Union fishing vesselMultiannual plans of measures to significantly reduce discards should be established and gradually implemented.
Amendment 350 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
Recital 19
Amendment 370 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) In view of the precarious economic state of part of the fishing industry and the dependence of certain coastal communities on fishing activities, it is necessary to ensure the relative stability of fishing activities by allocating fishing opportunities among Member States, based on a predictable share of stocks for each Member State.
Amendment 386 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26
Recital 26
(26) Member States should be able to adopt, in close cooperation with the Advisory Councils, conservation measures and technical measures for the implementation of the Common Fisheries Policy to allow for the policy to better address the realities and specificities of individual fisheries and to increase the adherence to the policy.
Amendment 395 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
Recital 29
Amendment 417 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
Recital 30
Amendment 431 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
Recital 31
Amendment 444 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31 a (new)
Recital 31 a (new)
(31a) Each Member State should be allowed to choose its method of allocating the fishing opportunities assigned to it, in accordance with the subsidiarity principle, without imposing any allocation system at European level. In this way, Member States will remain free to establish – or not to establish – a system of transferable fishing concessions.
Amendment 446 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31 b (new)
Recital 31 b (new)
(31b) A binding system should be established to evaluate fleet registers and verify capacity ceilings in order to ensure that each Member State respects the capacity ceilings assigned to it and to step up the fisheries control system so that fishing capacity is aligned with the resources available.
Amendment 451 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32
Recital 32
(32) For Union fishing vessels not operating under a system of transferable fishing concessions, specific measures may be takenSpecific measures should be maintained to align the number of Union fishing vessels with available resources. Such measures should set compulsory maximum fleet capacity ceilings and establish national entry/exit schemes in relation to decommissioning funding granted under the European Fisheries Fund and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund.
Amendment 518 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 46 a (new)
Recital 46 a (new)
(46a) In view of the specificity of the outermost regions, particularly their geographical remoteness and the importance of fishing to their economies, an advisory committee for the outermost regions comprising three subcommittees (South-Western waters, South-West Indian Ocean waters, French West Indies and Antilles-Guiana Basin waters) should be set up. This advisory committee will also make it possible to contribute to measures against illegal, undeclared and unmanaged fishing worldwide.
Amendment 519 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 46 b (new)
Recital 46 b (new)
(46b) In view of the specificity of fishing in inland waters, particularly the large number of jobs which it represents, the direct or indirect threats to these fisheries, the lack of attention devoted to them and their expertise with regard to species and aquatic environments, an advisory committee for the inland fishing regions should be set up. This advisory committee will make it possible for fisheries to organise themselves collectively by means of an ecosystem approach.
Amendment 529 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 50
Recital 50
Amendment 544 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 53
Recital 53
(53) Dialogue with stakeholders has proven essential for the achievement of the objectives of the Common Fisheries Policy. Taking into account the diverse conditions throughout Union waters and increased regionalisation of the Common Fisheries Policy, Advisory Councils should enable the Common Fisheries Policy to benefit from the knowledge and experience of all stakeholders, ensuring that organisations representing the fishing and aquaculture industry have a majority representation on the Councils.
Amendment 554 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 54
Recital 54
(54) It appears appropriate that the Commission be empowered by delegated acts to create a new Advisory Councils and to modify areas of competence of existing ones, in particular considering the specificities of the Black Sea.
Amendment 560 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 55
Recital 55
(55) To achieve the objectives of the Common Fisheries Policy, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty should be delegated to the Commission for the purpose of specifying fishing related measures to alleviate the impact of fishing activities in special areas of conservation, adaptation of the obligation to land all catches for the purpose of complying with the Union's international obligations, default conservation measures in the framework of multiannual plans or technical measures, the recalculation of fleet capacity ceilings, definition of information on characteristics and activity for Union fishing vessels, rules for carrying out pilot projects on new control technologies and data management systems, amendments to Annex III in relation to the areas of competence for Advisory Councils and the compositioning and functioning of Advisory Councils.
Amendment 572 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 62
Recital 62
Amendment 615 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 2 – paragraph 2
Part 1 – article 2 – paragraph 2
2. The Common Fisheries Policy shall apply the precautionary approach to fisheries management, and shall aim to ensure, by 2015, that exploitation of living marine biological resources restores and maintains populations of harvested species above, by 2020 at the latest, to maintain harvested wild stocks at, or restore them to, levels which can produce the maximum sustainable yield.
Amendment 656 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 2 – paragraph 4
Part 1 – article 2 – paragraph 4
4. The Common Fisheries Policy shall integrate the Union environmental legislation requirementsrequirements of all Union legislation, particularly concerning health, consumer protection and environmental protection.
Amendment 680 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
Part 1 – article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) eliminatsignificantly reduce unwanted catches of commercial stocks and gradually ensure that all catches of such stocks are landed;
Amendment 701 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b
Part 1 – article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) provide conditions for efficient fishing activities within an economically viable and competitive fishing industry, ensuring fair competitive conditions on the European market;
Amendment 707 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b
Part 1 – article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) provide conditions for efficient fishing activities within an economically viable and competitive fishing industry, bearing in mind the role of small-scale fisheries in preserving the social fabric of coastal areas;
Amendment 803 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 4 – paragraph 1 – point d
Part 1 – article 4 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) broad involvement of stakeholders, in particular of the Advisory Councils, at all stages from conception to implementation of the measures;
Amendment 838 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 5 a (new)
Part 1 – article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 5 a (new)
– ‘aquaculture vessel’ means any vessel used by an aquaculture undertaking to move about on its holding at sea, perform the various rearing and maintenance operations in rearing areas and transfer the products harvested from its establishment on land to production areas;
Amendment 840 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 6
Part 1 – article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 6
– ‘maximum sustainable yield’ means the maximum catch that may continuously be taken from a fish stock, indefinitely the light of relevant environmental, social and economic factors, without affecting the process of fish reproduction;
Amendment 858 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 7
Part 1 – article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 7
– ‘'precautionary approach to fisheries management’' means an approach according to which the absexistence of adequate scientific informationuncertainties should not justify postponing or failing to take management measures to conserve target species, associated or dependent species and non-target species and their environment;
Amendment 889 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 12
Part 1 – article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 12
– ‘'conservation reference point’' means values of fish stock population parameters (such as biomass or fishing mortality rate) used in fisheries management, for example with respect to to define an acceptable level of biological risk or a desired level of yieldf deterioration of the reproductive capacity of stocks;
Amendment 922 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – Article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 17
Part 1 – Article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 17
Amendment 932 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – Article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 18
Part 1 – Article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 18
Amendment 958 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – Article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 23 a (new)
Part 1 – Article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 23 a (new)
– ‘professional fisherman’ means any person engaged in commercial fishing, as recognised by the Member State concerned, on board a fishing vessel or engaged in the professional harvesting of marine organisms on land, as recognised by the Member State concerned;
Amendment 961 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – Article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 23 b (new)
Part 1 – Article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 23 b (new)
- ‘inland fishing’ means fishing carried out for commercial purposes by vessels operating exclusively in inland waters or by other devices used for ice fishing;
Amendment 976 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – Article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 31
Part 1 – Article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 31
– ‘mixed fisheries’ means fisheries where more than one species are present in the area being fished and are vulnerable to being caught in the fishing gearich simultaneously exploit several commercial stocks.
Amendment 984 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – Article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 32
Part 1 – Article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 32
– ‘sustainable fisheries agreements’ mean international agreements concluded with another state for the purpose of obtaining access to resources or waters in exchange for a financial compensantribution from the Union.
Amendment 989 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – Article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 32 a (new)
Part 1 – Article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 32 a (new)
– ‘unwanted catches’ mean catches of non-marketable species or individuals of marketable species which do not meet the requirements specified in the provisions of Community fisheries law laying down technical, monitoring and conservation measures.
Amendment 1022 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 2 – Article 6 – paragraph 3
Part 2 – Article 6 – paragraph 3
3. In the waters up to 100 nautical miles from the baselines of the Azores, Madeira and the Canary Islandsexclusive economic zones of all the outermost regions of the Union, the Member States concerned may from 1 January 2013 to 31 December 2022 restrict fishing to vessels registered in the ports of those islandregions. Such restrictions shall not apply to Union vessels that traditionally fish in those waters, in so far as those vessels do not exceed the fishing effort traditionally exerted. Member States shall inform the Commission of the precise boundaries of the area concerned and of the restrictions put in place under this paragraph.
Amendment 1041 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – Article 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Part 3 – Article 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Measures for the conservation of marine biological resources shall take account of the scientific, technical and economic opinions available, in particular the reports drawn up by the STECF, and the opinions forwarded by the advisory councils and may include the following:
Amendment 1071 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point d
Part 3 – Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) establishing incentives, including those of an economic nature, to promote more selective or low impact fishingfishing or fishing which has a low impact on the marine ecosystem and fishery resources;
Amendment 1088 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point g
Part 3 – Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) adopting measures concerning the obligation to land all catchewhich make it possible to significantly reduce unwanted catches from commercial stocks;
Amendment 1109 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – Article 8 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Part 3 – Article 8 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Technical measures drawn up on the basis of the scientific, technical and economic opinions available, in particular the reports drafted by the STECF, and the opinions forwarded by the advisory councils may include the following:
Amendment 1113 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point a
Part 3 – Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) mesh sizedefinition of the characteristics of fishing gears and rules concerning their use of fishing gears;
Amendment 1115 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point b – introductory part
Part 3 – Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point b – introductory part
(b) restrictionules on the construction of fishing gear, including
Amendment 1122 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point c
Part 3 – Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) prohibthe definitions of the use of certain fishing gears in certain areas or seasonsareas and/or periods in which fishing activities are prohibited or restricted;
Amendment 1139 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point e
Part 3 – Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) requirements for fishing vessels to cease operating in an area temporarily and for a defined minimum period in order to protect a temporary aggregation of a vulnerable marine resource;
Amendment 1149 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point g
Part 3 – Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point g
Amendment 1158 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – Article 9 – paragraph 1
Part 3 – Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. Multiannual plans providing for conservation measuremanagement targets to maintain or restore fish stocks abovet or restore them to levels capable of producing maximum sustainable yield shall be established as a priority.
Amendment 1243 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – Article 10 – paragraph 1
Part 3 – Article 10 – paragraph 1
1. Multiannual plans shall provide for adaptations of the fishing mortality rate, resulting in a fishing mortality rate that restores and maintains all stocks abovell stocks to and maintains them at levels capable of producing maximum sustainable yield by 201520.
Amendment 1266 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – Article 10 – paragraph 2
Part 3 – Article 10 – paragraph 2
2. In cases where the determination of a fishing mortality rate that restores stocks to and maintains stocks abovethem at levels capable of producing maximum sustainable yield is not possible, multiannual plans shall provide for precautionary measurlay down management objectives ensuring a comparable degree of conservation of the relevant stocks.
Amendment 1291 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point c – point i
Part 3 – Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point c – point i
(i) fishing mortality rates, and/or
Amendment 1292 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point c – point ii
Part 3 – Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point c – point ii
Amendment 1297 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point c – point iii
Part 3 – Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point c – point iii
Amendment 1313 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 11 – paragraph 1 – point e
Part 3 – article 11 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) technical measures including measures concerning the eliminasignificant reduction of unwanted catches;
Amendment 1333 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 11 – paragraph 1 – point f
Part 3 – article 11 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) quantifiable biological, economic and social indicators for periodic monitoring and assessment of the progress related to achieving the targets of the multiannual plan;
Amendment 1344 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 11 – paragraph 1 – point h
Part 3 – article 11 – paragraph 1 – point h
(h) minimisation of impacts of fishing on the eco-system, ensuring sustainable development of the activity;
Amendment 1364 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 11 – paragraph 1 – point j
Part 3 – article 11 – paragraph 1 – point j
(j) any o assessment of the socioeconomic impact of ther measures suitable to achieve the objectives of multiannual plans.provided for by the plans for the fisheries concerned;
Amendment 1401 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 13 – paragraph 1
Part 3 – article 13 – paragraph 1
1. On the basis of evidence of a serious threat to the conservation of marine biological resources, or to the marine eco- system and requiring immediate action, the Commission, upon a reasoned request of a Member State or on its own initiative, may decide on temporary measures to alleviate the threat, for a period not exceeding six months, to alleviate the threat. The Commission may take a new decision to extend the emergency measures for no more than six months.
Amendment 1416 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 13 – paragraph 2
Part 3 – article 13 – paragraph 2
2. The Member State shall communicate the reasoned request referred to in paragraph 1 simultaneously to the Commission, to the other Member States and to the Advisory Councils concerned. They may submit their written comments to the Commission within five working days of receipt of the request. The Commission shall take a decision within 15 working days of the receipt of the request referred to in paragraph 1.
Amendment 1420 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 13 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Part 3 – article 13 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The emergency measures shall take effect immediately after notification to the Member States and to the Advisory Councils.
Amendment 1437 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 14 – paragraph 1 – point a
Part 3 – article 14 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) contribute to maintaining or restoring fish stocks abovet levels capable of producing maximum sustainable yield through improvements in size-selection and where appropriate species selection;
Amendment 1471 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 15 – title
Part 3 – article 15 – title
Amendment 1477 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 15 – paragraph 1
Part 3 – article 15 – paragraph 1
Amendment 1529 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 15 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Part 3 – article 15 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The Member States, taking into account the opinions of the STECF and of the competent Advisory Councils, as well as the conclusions of impact assessments to analyse the causes of unwanted catches, shall significantly reduce unwanted catches from managed commercial stocks, taking into account the specificities of each fishery, inter alia by including objectives to this end in the multiannual plans.
Amendment 1533 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 15 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Part 3 – article 15 – paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Each Member State shall submit to the Commission an annual report on the measures taken to attain the objective of significantly reducing unwanted catches.
Amendment 1534 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 15 – paragraph 2
Part 3 – article 15 – paragraph 2
Amendment 1555 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 15 – paragraph 3
Part 3 – article 15 – paragraph 3
Amendment 1564 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 15 – paragraph 4
Part 3 – article 15 – paragraph 4
4. Member States shall ensure that Union fishing vessels flying their flag are equipped to ensure full documentation of all fishing and processing activities for the purpose of monitoring compliance with the obligation to landspecifically identifying all catches.
Amendment 1581 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 15 – paragraph 5
Part 3 – article 15 – paragraph 5
Amendment 1587 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 15 – paragraph 6
Part 3 – article 15 – paragraph 6
Amendment 1593 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 16 – title
Part 3 – article 16 – title
Amendment 1603 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 16 – paragraph 2
Part 3 – article 16 – paragraph 2
Amendment 1619 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 16 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Part 3 – article 16 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Each Member State shall decide, for vessels flying its flag, on the method of allocating the fishing opportunities assigned to that Member State in accordance with Community law. It shall inform the Commission of the allocation method.
Amendment 1633 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 17 – paragraph 1
Part 3 – article 17 – paragraph 1
1. In a multiannual plan established pursuant to Articles 9, 10 and 11, Member States may be authorised to adopt measures, in accordance with that multiannual plan, which specify the conservation measures applicable to vessels flying their flag in relation to stocks in Union waters for which they have been allocated fishing opportunitieswhich have a direct interest in the fishery concerned shall participate, in close cooperation with the competent Advisory Councils, in drafting conservation measures suited to the specificities of each fishery which accord with that multiannual plan.
Amendment 1649 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 17 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Part 3 – article 17 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Member States shall ensurewhich have a direct interest in the fishery concerned shall ensure, in close cooperation with the competent Advisory Councils, that conservation measures adopted pursuant to paragraph 1:
Amendment 1665 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 17 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Part 3 – article 17 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. In the event of unanimity regarding the conservation measures to be taken to implement a multiannual plan among the Member States which have a direct interest in the fishery and after consulting the competent Advisory Councils, these measures shall be implemented by means of implementing acts. These implementing acts shall be adopted using the examination procedure referred to in Article 56.
Amendment 1671 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 17 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Part 3 – article 17 – paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. In the absence of unanimity regarding the conservation measures to be taken among the Member States which have a direct interest in the fishery and after consulting the competent Advisory Councils, the Commission shall submit a proposal in accordance with the rules laid down in the Treaty.
Amendment 1705 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 20 – paragraph 1
Part 3 – article 20 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 55 to specify the conservation measures for fisheries covered by a multiannual plan, if the Member States authorised to take measures in accordance with Article 17In accordance with the rules laid down in the Treaty, the Commission shall submit a proposal defining the conservation measures for fisheries covered by a multiannual plan, if: - there is no unanimity among the Member States which have a direct interest in the fishery regarding the conservation measures to be taken to implement a multiannual plan, or - the Member States which have a direct interest in the fishery do not notify such measures to the Commission within threesix months after the date of entry into force of the multiannual plan, or - Member State measures are deemed not to be compatible with the objectives of a multiannual plan on the basis of an assessment carried out pursuant to Article 19, or - Member State measures are deemed not to meet the objectives and quantifiable targets set out in multiannual plans effectively, on the basis of an assessment carried out pursuant to Article 19, or - safeguards established in accordance with Article 11(i) are triggered.
Amendment 1714 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 20 – paragraph 2
Part 3 – article 20 – paragraph 2
Amendment 1729 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 20 – paragraph 3
Part 3 – article 20 – paragraph 3
Amendment 1735 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 21 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Part 3 – article 21 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
In a technical measures framework established pursuant to Article 14, Member States may be authorised to adoptwhich have a direct interest in the fishery concerned shall participate, in close cooperation with the competent Advisory Councils, in drafting measures, in accordance with that framework, which specify the technical measures applicable to vessels flying their flag in relation to stocks in their waters for which they have been allocated fishing opportunities. Member States which have a direct interest in the fishery concerned shall ensure that such technical measures:
Amendment 1747 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 21 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Part 3 – article 21 – paragraph 1 a (new)
In the event of unanimity among the Member States which have a direct interest in the fishery regarding the measures to be taken to implement technical measures and after consulting the competent Advisory Councils, these measures shall be implemented strictly by means of implementing acts. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 56.
Amendment 1749 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 21 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Part 3 – article 21 – paragraph 1 b (new)
In the absence of unanimity among the Member States which have a direct interest in the fishery regarding the measures to be taken to implement technical measures and after consulting the competent Advisory Councils, the Commission shall submit a proposal in accordance with the rules laid down in the Treaty.
Amendment 1763 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 24 – paragraph 1
Part 3 – article 24 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 55 to specify the technical measures covered byIn accordance with the rules laid down in the Treaty, the Commission shall submit a proposal defining the technical measures covered by a technical measures framework, if: - there is no unanimity among the Member States which have a direct interest in the fishery regarding the technical measures to be taken to implement a technical measures framework, ifor - the Member States authorised to take measures in accordance with Article 21which have a direct interest in the fishery do not notify such measures to the Commission within threesix months after the date of entry into force of the technical measures framework, or - Member State measures are deemed not to be compatible with the objectives set out in a technical measures framework, or - Member State measures are deemed not to meet the objectives set out in a technical measures framework effectively.
Amendment 1768 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 24 – paragraph 2
Part 3 – article 24 – paragraph 2
Amendment 1779 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 24 – paragraph 3
Part 3 – article 24 – paragraph 3
Amendment 1780 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 24 a (new)
Part 3 – article 24 a (new)
Article 24a Consultation of Advisory Councils 1. An Advisory Council on the outermost regions shall be established in accordance with Article 53. 2. An Advisory Council on inland fishing shall be established in accordance with Article 53.
Amendment 1798 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 4 – article 27
Part 4 – article 27
Amendment 1852 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 4 – article 28
Part 4 – article 28
Amendment 1909 #
Amendment 1951 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 4 – article 30
Part 4 – article 30
Amendment 1964 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 4 – article 31
Part 4 – article 31
Amendment 1995 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 4 – article 32
Part 4 – article 32
Amendment 2010 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 4 – article 33
Part 4 – article 33
Amendment 2026 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 5 – article 34 – paragraph 1
Part 5 – article 34 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall, where necessary, put in place measures to adjust the fishing capacity of their fleets in order to achieve an effective balance between such fishing capacity and their fishing opportunities.
Amendment 2048 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 5 – article 34 – paragraph 3
Part 5 – article 34 – paragraph 3
Amendment 2062 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 5 – article 35 – paragraph 1
Part 5 – article 35 – paragraph 1
1. Each Member State fleet shall be strictly subject to fishing capacity ceilings as set out in Annex II.
Amendment 2068 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 5 – article 35 – paragraph 2
Part 5 – article 35 – paragraph 2
Amendment 2075 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 5 – article 35 – paragraph 3
Part 5 – article 35 – paragraph 3
Amendment 2085 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 5 – article 36 – paragraph 2
Part 5 – article 36 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall make availableeach year submit to the Commission the information referred to in paragraph 1, together with a copy of their updated fleet registers.
Amendment 2089 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 5 – article 36 – paragraph 4
Part 5 – article 36 – paragraph 4
4. The information contained in the Union fishing fleet register shall be made available to all Member States, Parliament and the Council. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 55 concerning the definition of the information referred to in paragraph 1.
Amendment 2094 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 5 – article 36 a (new)
Part 5 – article 36 a (new)
Article 36a Consultation of the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF) 1. The STECF shall be consulted at regular intervals on matters pertaining to the conservation, exploitation and management of marine biological resources, including biological, economic, environmental, social and technical considerations. 2. The Commission shall take into account the opinion of the STECF when presenting proposals pursuant to this Regulation.
Amendment 2174 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 7 – article 39 – paragraph 2
Part 7 – article 39 – paragraph 2
2. The positions of the Union in international organisations dealing with fisheries and RFMOs shall be based on the best available scientific advice to ensure that fishery resources are maintained abovet or restored abovto the levels capable of producing maximum sustainable yield.
Amendment 2207 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 7 – article 41 – paragraph 2
Part 7 – article 41 – paragraph 2
2. Union fishing vessels shall only catch surplus of the allowable catch determined by the third country as referred to in Article 62(2) of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, and identified on the basis of the best available scientific advice and relevant information exchanged between the Union and the third country concerned about the total fishing effort on the affected stocks, in order to ensure that fishery resources remain abovt the levels capable of producing maximum sustainable yield.
Amendment 2233 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 7 – article 42 – title
Part 7 – article 42 – title
Financial assistancecontribution
Amendment 2234 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 7 – article 42 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Part 7 – article 42 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The Union shall provide a financial assistancecontribution to third countries through sustainable Fisheries Agreements in order to:
Amendment 2355 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 9 – article 45 – paragraph 1 – point c
Part 9 – article 45 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) strengthen the competitiveness of the Union fishery and aquaculture industry, in particular producers, by implementing production and marketing plans;
Amendment 2367 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 9 – article 45 – paragraph 1 – point e
Part 9 – article 45 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) contribute to ensuring a level playing field and equal health, social and environmental requirements for all products marketed in the Union by promoting sustainable exploitation of fisheries resources.
Amendment 2393 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 10 – article 46 – paragraph 2 – point b
Part 10 – article 46 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) the use of modern control technologies for the availability and quality of data on fisheries and aquaculture;
Amendment 2416 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 10 – article 46 a (new)
Part 10 – article 46 a (new)
Amendment 2423 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 10 – article 48 – paragraph 1
Part 10 – article 48 – paragraph 1
Amendment 2456 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 12 – article 52 – paragraph 1
Part 12 – article 52 – paragraph 1
1. Advisory Councils are established for each of the areas or spheres of competence set out in Annex III, to promote a balanced representation of all stakeholders and to contribute to the achievement of the objectives set out in Articles 2 and 3.
Amendment 2485 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 12 – article 53 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Part 12 – article 53 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) issue opinions on the draft multiannual plans as described in Article 17 and draft technical measures as described in Article 21, and submit them to the Member States directly concerned with the fishery or area in question.
Amendment 2495 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 12 – article 53 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Part 12 – article 53 – paragraph 2 a (new)
(2a) Prior to any proposal for a management measure falling within the field of responsibility of a given Advisory Council the Commission shall seek the opinion of that Council.
Amendment 2500 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 12 – article 54 – paragraph 1
Part 12 – article 54 – paragraph 1
1. Advisory Councils shall be composed predominantly of organisations representing the fisheries operators andand aquaculture operators. They shall also include other interest groups affected by the Common Fisheries Policy.
Amendment 2519 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 12 – article 54 – paragraph 4
Part 12 – article 54 – paragraph 4
4. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 55 concerningAdvisory Councils shall establish their internal rules of procedure on the basis of common rules drawn up by the cComposition and the functioning of Advisory Councilmission by means of implementing acts.
Amendment 2527 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 13 – article 55 – paragraph 2
Part 13 – article 55 – paragraph 2
2. The delegation of power referred to in Articles 12(2), 15(6), 20(1) and (2), 24(1) and (2), 35(3), 36(4), 37(6), 47(2), and 52(2), 54(4) shall be conferred for an indeterminate period of time from 1 January 2013.
Amendment 2529 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 13 – article 55 – paragraph 3
Part 13 – article 55 – paragraph 3
3. The delegation of power referred to in Articles 12(2), 15(6), 20(1) and (2), 24(1) and (2), 35(3), 36(4), 37(6), 47(2), and 52(2), 54(4) may be revoked at any time by the European Parliament or by the Council. A decision of revocation shall put an end to the delegation of the powers specified in that decision. It shall take effect the day following the publication of the decision in the Official Journal of the European Union or at a later date specified therein. It shall not affect the validity of any delegated acts already in force.
Amendment 2531 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 13 – article 55 – paragraph 5
Part 13 – article 55 – paragraph 5
5. A delegated act adopted pursuant to Articles 12(3), 15(4), 20(1) and (2), 24(1) and (2), 35(3), 36(4), 37(7), 47(2), or 52(2), 54(4) shall enter into force only if no objection has been expressed either by the European Parliament or the Council within a period of 2 months of notification of that act to the European Parliament and the Council or if, before the expiry of that period, the European Parliament and the Council have both informed the Commission that they will not object. That period shall be extended by 2 months at the initiative of the European Parliament or the Council.
Amendment 2537 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 14 – article 57 – paragraph 4
Part 14 – article 57 – paragraph 4
Amendment 2546 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex 3 – title 1 – point 8 a (new)
Annex 3 – title 1 – point 8 a (new)
ANNEX III ANNEX III ADVISORY COUNCILS Name of the Area of Advisory competence: Council: Baltic Sea ICES zones IIIb, IIIc and IIId IIIc and IIId Mediterranean Maritime Waters Sea of the Mediterranean of Mediterranean of the East of line the East of line 5°36' West 5°36' West North Sea ICES zones IV and IIIa and IIIa North Western ICES zones V waters (excluding Va South Western ICES zones VIII, waters IX and X (waters and only Union and only Union waters of Vb), VI waters of Vb), VI and VII and VII South Western ICES zones VIII, waters IX and X (waters around Azores), around Azores), and CECAF and CECAF zones 34.1.1, zones 34.1.1, 34.1.2 and 34.2.0 34.1.2 and 34.2.0 (waters around (waters around Madeira and the Madeira and the Canary Islands) Canary Islands) Pelagic stocks All areas (blue whiting, competence mackerel, horse (excluding the mackerel, Baltic Sea, the herring) Mediterranean Sea and Sea and Aquaculture) Aquaculture) High seas/long All non Union- distance fleet waters Aquaculture Aquaculture, as defined in Article defined in Article 5 5 Outermost All the ICES regions, divided zones covering into three sea waters around basins: West the outermost Atlantic, East regions, Atlantic, Indian particularly the Ocean Maritime Waters of Guadeloupe, French Guiana, Martinique, the Canary Islands, the Azores, Madeira and Reunion
Amendment 2547 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex 3 – title 1 – point 8 b (new)
Annex 3 – title 1 – point 8 b (new)
Amendment 34 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2 a (new)
Recital 2 a (new)
(2a) Fishing plays a particularly important role in the economies of the EU’s coastal regions, including the outermost regions (ORs). Given that it provides fishermen in those regions with a livelihood, steps should be taken to foster market stability and a better match between supply and demand.
Amendment 35 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 a (new)
Recital 5 a (new)
(5a) In view of the large volumes of fishery and aquaculture products that are imported into the EU and the substantial proportion of overall EU consumption for which they account, it is essential for the common market organisation to form part of a commercial and customs policy geared to regulating imports and mitigating their effects on the first-sale prices paid to EU producers and the profitability of their activities.
Amendment 36 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 b (new)
Recital 5 b (new)
(5b) The greatest possible degree of consistency needs to be achieved between the common fisheries policy and the common commercial policy, with the latter policy systematically being used to further the objectives of the former, both in WTO multilateral negotiations and in connection with bilateral and regional trade agreements.
Amendment 37 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 c (new)
Recital 5 c (new)
(5c) All national agencies with responsibility for customs and health checks on fishery and aquaculture products imported into the EU must be given the human and financial resources and tools they require to do their job properly.
Amendment 39 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6 a (new)
Recital 6 a (new)
(6 a) It is essential, in order for the Common Market Organisation to be a success, that consumers are informed, through marketing and educational campaigns, about the value of eating fish and the wide variety of species available, as well as told of the importance of being able to understand the information contained on labels;
Amendment 52 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11 a (new)
Recital 11 a (new)
(11a) In view of the remoteness and geographical isolation of ORs, a special action programme taking account of the specific features of such regions is possible under Article 349 of the Treaty.
Amendment 59 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) The widening variety of fishery and aquaculture products makes it essential to provide consumers with a minimum amount of mandatory information on the main characteristics of products, including, in the case of fishery products, the date and place of landing. In order to promote differentiation of products, it is also necessary to take account of additional information that may be indicated on a voluntary basis.
Amendment 63 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16 a (new)
Recital 16 a (new)
(16a) In view of the importance that consumers attach to origin and provenance, in the broad sense of the terms, when choosing between the fishery and aquaculture products available on the market, special care must be taken to ensure that the information they are given thereon is as accurate, clear and comprehensive as possible.
Amendment 67 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16 b (new)
Recital 16 b (new)
(16b) With a view to ensuring consistency between the common fisheries policy – with particular reference to its common market organisation and consumer information provisions – and the common commercial policy, care must be taken to avoid excessively broad definitions of the preferential origin of fishery and aquaculture products, as well as any exceptions to the standard definitions that would undermine product traceability and cause confusion as to where and how a given product has been sourced.
Amendment 97 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) promoting viable and sustainable fishing activities of their members in full compliance with the conservation policy laid down in the Regulation on the Common Fisheries Policy and environmental legislation;
Amendment 115 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) managing the resource access rights assigned to their members in accordance with the provisions of Chapter IV of the Common Fisheries Policy Regulation;
Amendment 117 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
(da) helping to maintain and create jobs in coastal regions;
Amendment 130 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
Amendment 132 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – title
Article 8 – title
Measures to be deployabled by fishery producer organisations
Amendment 135 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Fishery producer organisations mayshall make use of the following measures to achieve the objectives set out in Article 7:
Amendment 141 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point b – introductory part
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point b – introductory part
Amendment 162 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) channelloncentrating the supply and the marketing of their members' products;
Amendment 165 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point f a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point f a (new)
(fa) managing their members’ fishing opportunities on a collective basis.
Amendment 181 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) promoting extensive and sustainable aquaculture activities of their members by providing opportunities for their development;
Amendment 201 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 - paragraph 1 - point e a (new)
Article 10 - paragraph 1 - point e a (new)
(ea) using, where possible, Information Communications Technology to ensure that the best possible price for products is achieved;
Amendment 204 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) promotion of responsible, extensive and sustainable aquaculture, notably in terms of environment protection, animal health and animal welfare;
Amendment 220 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) coordinating and developing activities of common interest for the member producer organisations, including the improved marketing of products for consumers.
Amendment 225 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) improving quality, knowledge of and the transparency of production and the market, as well as product traceability and food safety;
Amendment 229 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point g a (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point g a (new)
(ga) implementing vocational training measures.
Amendment 243 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) they may not hold a dominant position on a given market unless necessary in pursuance of the goals of aArticles 39 and 40 of the Treaty.
Amendment 274 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 2
Article 26 – paragraph 2
2. For the purposes of paragraph 1(a) a fishery producer organisation is deemed representative where it accounts for at least 6530 % of the quantities marketed of the relevant product during the previous year in the area where it is proposed to extend the rules.
Amendment 285 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 4
Article 26 – paragraph 4
4. The rules to be extended to non- members shall apply for a period between 930 days and 12 months.
Amendment 290 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 3
Article 29 – paragraph 3
3. Within two month15 days of receipt of the notification, the Commission shall take a decision authorising or refusing to authorise the extension of rules and shall inform the Member States. Where the Commission has not taken a decision within the two-month15-day period, the extension of rules shall be deemed to have been authorised by the Commission.
Amendment 296 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 1
Article 32 – paragraph 1
1. Each producer organisation shall submit a production and marketing plan to their competent national authorities to fulfil the objectives laid down in Articles 3, 7 and 10.
Amendment 341 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
Article 39 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
(aa) classification by quality, size or weight, as well as presentation;
Amendment 350 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 1
Article 40 – paragraph 1
1. The products for which marketing standards have been laid down may be marketed for human consumption in the Union only in accordance with those standards.
Amendment 353 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 3
Article 40 – paragraph 3
3. All fishery products landed, including those not complying with marketing standards, may be, under the responsibility of the Member States, distributed free of charge to philanthropic or charitable institutions established in the Union or to persons who are recognised by the legislation of the Member State concerned as being entitled to public assistance.
Amendment 373 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 42 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) the area where the producproduct’s provenance, i.e. where it was caught or farmed;
Amendment 379 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 42 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) the date of catchand place of landing of fishery products or harvest of aquaculture products;
Amendment 394 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 42 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) the area where the producproduct’s provenance, i.e. where it was caught or farmed;
Amendment 414 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – title
Article 44 – title
Indication of the catch or produc, rearing or cultivation area
Amendment 416 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 44 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The indication of the catch or production areaproducts’ provenance, i.e. where they were caught or farmed, in accordance with Article 42, paragraphs 1(c) and 2(c) shall consist of the following:
Amendment 419 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Article 44 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
(aa) details of whether the products were caught inside or outside EU waters;
Amendment 420 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 1 – point a b (new)
Article 44 – paragraph 1 – point a b (new)
(ab) details of the flag State of the vessel that caught the products;
Amendment 421 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 44 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) in the case of fishery products caught in freshwater, a reference to the Member State or third country of provenancecatch of the product;
Amendment 448 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 49 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 49 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) make adequate market information available to the adequate level to stakeholdersall stakeholders. This should include making such information available to consumers in an accessible and understandable manner.
Amendment 463 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – New entries to be inserted/added
Annex II – New entries to be inserted/added
03026999 Skate (Raja spp, Amblyraja spp and Leucoraja spp) 03028410 European seabass (Dicentrarchus labrax)
Amendment 5 #
2011/0177(APP)
Draft opinion
Paragraph D
Paragraph D
D. Points out that some of the policy objectives proposed by the Commission –— such as closing the innovation gap between fisheries and other sectors of the economy; facilitating the transition towards low impact fisheries, with the eliminasignificant reduction of discards and low impact on marine ecosystems; the viability of communities dependent on inshore fishing and diversification, inter alia –— require increased financial resources, a lack of which will compromise their achievement;
Amendment 4 #
2011/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation (EC) No 302/2009
Article 1 - paragraph 3
Article 1 - paragraph 3
The objective of that recovery plan shall be to achieve a biomass corresponding to the maximum sustainable yield with greater thanat least 60% probability.
Amendment 6 #
2011/0144(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point a
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point a
Regulation (EC) No 302/2009
Article 4 - paragraph 4 - subparagraph 1
Article 4 - paragraph 4 - subparagraph 1
4. No later than 1530 September each year, Member States shall transmit to the Commission the provisional annual fishing plan related to the following year. The Commission shall transmit the Union fishing plan to the ICCAT Secretariat for endorsement by ICCAT.
Amendment 1 #
2011/0139(NLE)
Draft legislative resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Declines to cConsents to conclusion of the Protocol;
Amendment 3 #
2010/2305(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas absorption capacity is the extent to which a Member State is able to spend the financial resources allocated from the Structural and Cohesion Funds in an effective and efficient manner, and whereas this capacity is necessary for making a maximum contribution to economic and soc, social and territorial cohesion with the resources available from the EU funds,
Amendment 11 #
2010/2305(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas absorption capacity is not a parameter but a variable and whereas it differs widely in the different Member States and regions, so that individual solutions are necessary to increase this capacity,
Amendment 14 #
2010/2305(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas aiming at absorbing as much financial support as possible requires continuous efforts by the Member States and management authorities and the involvement of the local and regional level of administration in every stage of the process,
Amendment 17 #
2010/2305(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the rules relating to Structural and Cohesion Funds are complex and therefore difficult to comply with, causing errors, so that Member Stamust remain stable over time in order to promote a bettesr spend a disproportionate amount of time trying to manage and control these errorsse of ownership; whereas, however, simplification of the implementation of financial instruments should be encouraged,
Amendment 24 #
2010/2305(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas the Member States that joined the EU in the current programming period in particular are facing substantial difficulties as regards absorption resulting from the significant increase in the amount of the funds available in comparison with the pre -accession funds and the shortcomings of the administrative structures for setting up, supporting and evaluating projects,
Amendment 25 #
2010/2305(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
Ea. whereas the lack of visibility regarding the levels of uptake of short- and medium-term funds is an obstacle to absorption capacity, and whereas better transparency is needed at all levels of governance,
Amendment 34 #
2010/2305(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – point 6
Paragraph 2 – point 6
over-complicated and over-strict national requirementprocedures, and frequent changes therein;
Amendment 39 #
2010/2305(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – point 11
Paragraph 2 – point 11
Amendment 42 #
2010/2305(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Reiterates the need for simplification of rules and procedures at both EU and national level without creating major difficulties for the beneficiariBelieves that the rules relating to the structural and cohesion funds must remain stable over time in order to promote a better sense of ownership; stresses, however, the need for simplification of rules and procedures on the implementation of financial instruments at both EU and national level in order to facilitate access to EU funds for project organisers and to promote sound management of those funds by the administrative services; believes that simplification will contribute to the speedy allocation of these funds, higher absorption rates, increased efficiency, fewer errors and reduced payment periods; considers that a balance needs to be struck between simplification measures and the stability of rules and procedureexisting arrangements;
Amendment 50 #
2010/2305(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Takes the view that emphasis should be placed on payments for delivery of results rather than checking inputs; believes, in this context, that a better balance should be found betwea more effective, results-based cohesion policy should be promoted while respecting the existing provisions relating to the implementation, control and payment systems for the structural funds; considers that introducing the principle of making reimbursemen,t onf the one hand, the rules and procedures required for ensuring the legality and regularity of EU expenditure and, on the other, making cohesion policy more performance- oriented and cost-efficientnational authorities conditional on payment of their contribution to beneficiaries risks paralysing the uptake of the funds and is therefore inappropriate; supports, however, making EU financing conditional on obtaining results, which could be assessed on the basis of clear and relevant indicators;
Amendment 54 #
2010/2305(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Takes the view that a stronger focus should be placed on fraud than on formal irregularities and on more differentiated treatment of irregularities, allowing for flexibilitypunishing fraud rather than formal irregularities; calls for a more flexible and differentiated approach depending on the seriousness of the irregularity identified;
Amendment 57 #
2010/2305(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses that proportionality between the volume of support and control requirementsthe application of the proportionality principle to control procedures depending on the scale of the project should be strengthened, and emph; calls for the asises that the coordination of audit activity should be enhanced and the single audit principle followed in the next programming periosment, eligibility and control conditions for small-scale and low-risk projects to be eased;
Amendment 60 #
2010/2305(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Stresses that the coordination of audit activities should be improved and calls, to that end, for redundant controls to be removed in Member States which have an adequate fund management system; considers that the single audit principle should be applied in the next programming period and that, as with the ‘contract of confidence’ principle, it should be implemented as often as possible;
Amendment 64 #
2010/2305(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. HighlightStresses the benefmerits of synergies between ERDF, ESF agreater synergy and complementarity between all the shared management funds (ERDF, ESF, cohesion fund, EAFRD and EFF); takes the view that flexibility to support ESF- type of actions in ERDF programmes should be increased, andbetween the ERDF and the ESF should be encouraged so as to facilitate the financing of integrated projects, while taking into account the specific nature and objectives of each of these funds; stresses that harmonisation of rules and procedures would lead to simplified delivery systems and encourage participation by potential beneficiaries in EU co-funded programmes; recalls in this context the potential of cross-financing, which is not yet being fully exploited;
Amendment 68 #
2010/2305(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Calls on the Member States to make further efforts to attract and retain and the Commission, in coordination with local and regional authorities, to promote the training of high-qualifiedty staff to manage EU funds;
Amendment 77 #
2010/2305(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Points out the importance of inter- regional cooperation programmes and of programmes such as INTERACT and URBACT in identifying and disseminating best practices and in training the political and administrative actors in the optimum use of the funds; calls for actions promoting regional planning and effective use of funds to be eligible for appropriations under the ‘inter-regional cooperation’ part of the Territorial Cooperation Objective;
Amendment 80 #
2010/2305(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Calls on the Commission to explore the introduction of harmonised information and communication systems, bearing in mind the differences between the management and control systems of the Member States, and calls, to that end, for the implementation of uniform software to monitor the use of funds in the context of the territorial cooperation programmes;
Amendment 90 #
2010/2305(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Points out that most SMEs, and especially small and micro enterprises, cannot access structural funds on their own due to current administrative and financial constraints, and that they need support and advice from their representative organisations at regional and national level; considers that a simplification of the rules and procedures is essential to ensuring their access to structural funds; calls for the Small Business Act, its ‘think small first’ and ‘only once’ principles and the proportionality principle to be applied at all levels of decision-making to define investment priorities and the design of management, audit and control procedures in order to ensure better absorption of the funds;
Amendment 92 #
2010/2305(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Calls on the Member States to inform citizensand provide support to citizens, representatives of civil society and regional and local authorities fully about financing possibilities, eligibility for co-financing from the Structural and Cohesion Funds, the co- financing rules, the rules on reimbursement, and where to find calls for proposals;
Amendment 95 #
2010/2305(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Reiterates that multi-level governance and the partnership principle are key elements in the effectiveness of operational programmes and in high absorption capacity; recommends to the Members States, in line with the principles of subsidiarity and of their institutional autonomy, that they consistently reinforce the partnership and transparency principle, while implementing the operational programmes, and that they involve the economic and social actors and sub- national levelauthorities from the outset in defining investment priorities, in the decision making process itself and in the implementation and evaluation of programmes;
Amendment 10 #
2010/2304(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Considers that full broadband coverage must be made a universal service, as it is essential to helping create equal living conditions in Europe and is a key factor in stimulating economic activity in rural areas;
Amendment 38 #
2010/2304(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Calls on regional and local authorities and businesses to use ERDF funding to improve broadband coverage, in particular in rural areas;
Amendment 22 #
2010/2276(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Recognises that, in times of demographic change, the Roma population, which has been part of our common heritage for centuries, should be given the means through good quality education, decent housing and job opportunities to fully integrate the work place and contribute to economic development as foreseen in the EU 2020 strategy; calls on the Member States and regional and local public authorities, therefore, to increase their efforts now, by reinforcing their effective strategies for addressing the specific circumstances (deep poverty, lack of education, poor health conditions) of marginalised communities, in order to ensure their social and economic integration;
Amendment 45 #
2010/2276(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Recommends Member States and regional and local public authorities to consider making the allocation of new housing to marginalised communities conditional on social commitments on their part, such as appropriate participation in the process of building the new establishments, obligatory school attendance for children, and the acceptance of jobs offered by job mediators, in order to ensure their real, effective and sustainable integration.
Amendment 48 #
2010/2276(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Recalls that part of the Roma populations consists of nomads and that this dimension is an integral part of their identity; considers therefore that integration policies should differ according to whether they are addressed to nomadic or sedentary Roma people;
Amendment 1 #
2010/2245(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses that innovation can be addressed most effectively at the regional level, where physical proximity fosters partnership between actors such as universities, research organisations and industry, large firms, SMEs and regional and local authorities, in particular within clusters; notes that the most dynamic technology industries are not located in or near capital cities but in the proximity of the most innovative universities;
Amendment 11 #
2010/2245(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Notes that fostering innovation at the regional level can help reduce regional disparities; encourages the various levels (regional, national and EU) nonetheless to coordinate their efforts more effectively as part of Europe-wide planning of R&D activities;
Amendment 22 #
2010/2245(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Is of the opinion that the EU’s various instruments for cohesion, research and innovation should be implemented in an integrated manner with a view to ensuring their effectiveness; emphasises the need to seek synergies between these instruments and to eliminate obstacles to such synergies, in particular by harmonising the rules on audits and eligibility of costs in order to simplify implementation by beneficiaries;
Amendment 4 #
2010/2211(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Points to the increased importance of cohesion policy following the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon, and to the fact that a third pillar – territorial cohesion – has been added to it, and notes that the regions are best placed to implement that policy on an active basis and that sectoralisation iswould therefore be counterproductive;
Amendment 52 #
2010/2211(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Endorses the view that that the ESF must remain an integral component of cohesion policy and be strengthened; calls for greater coordination with cohesion policy measures and rural development measures under the ERDF so that rural regions can be properly involved and resources used more efficiently;
Amendment 57 #
2010/2211(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Insists, in keeping with a spirit of solidarity, on specific support for the EU- 27's mo‘least’ disadvantaged regionseveloped regions (Objective 1); stresses, at the same time, the need for a powerful Objective 2 and sound transitional rulefor the 'most' developed regions and fair provisions for intermediate regions;
Amendment 62 #
2010/2211(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Points out that there is a significant threshold effect between the regions eligible for funding under the convergence objective and the other regions, and takes the view that this threshold effect should be reduced; on that basis, welcomes the Commission’s proposals to create an intermediate category of regions for the next programming period;
Amendment 71 #
2010/2211(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Points out that funds must be spent transparently and efficiently in the regions, on the basis of rules that are as simple as possible and sound management; urges that, in keeping with the proportionality principle, the frequency of checks should be commensurate with the risk of irregularities;
Amendment 81 #
2010/2211(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Notes that a five-year period is too short, since authorisation procedures would be much too long and would not make it possible to use resources efficiently; points to the fact that a seven-year period has proved its worth in the past and that the programming period should in no circumstances be shorter; underscores the fact that a seven-year period, until 2020, would make the link with the EU 2020 strategy clear; notes that it might make sense thereafter to consider a 10-year model (five years + five years) in such a way as to match the scheduling of financing priorities with the terms of office of Parliament and the Commission, combining this with a vision and a policy strategy stretching over 10 years;
Amendment 82 #
2010/2211(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Stresses that cofinancing and the n+2 and n+3 rules should be maintained, possibly combined with greater flexibility to cover exceptional situations which might be expected to arise within the nex (except for the first programming periodyear); insists that unspent funds should be made available for other regions and not returned to the Member States;
Amendment 86 #
2010/2211(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Stresses that cofinancing and the n+2 and n+3 rules should be maintained, possibly combined with greater flexibility to cover exceptional situations which might be expected to arise within the next programming period; takes the view that the level of cofinancing for the next programming period should remain similar in overall terms to that for the current period; insists that unspent funds should be made available for other regions and not returned to the Member States;
Amendment 21 #
2010/2210(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Considers that IUU fishing also constitutes unfair competition for European fishermen who are fishing legally and in a controlled manner and stresses the importance of the strict application of Community legislation on traceability to fish and aquaculture products landed in the EU and/or imported;
Amendment 22 #
2010/2210(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Amendment 61 #
2010/2210(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Considers that improving transparency in all aspects of the fishing industry and their activities, including agreeing on international criteria to establish real, beneficial ownership of vessels and monitoring fishing vessels in international waters, is crucial;
Amendment 62 #
2010/2210(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Calls on the Commission to provide for the creation of a ‘European coastguard’ which would effectively combat current or future dangers at sea such as terrorism, piracy, IUU fishing, trafficking or even marine pollution;
Amendment 70 #
2010/2210(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Asks the Commission to add the FAO Port State Measures Agreement, the UN Fish Stock Agreement and the FAO Compliance Agreement to the list of instruments to be implemented for countries to be eligible for the Generalised System of Preferences plus, which is currently being revised; calls for the withdrawal of export licences for all countries which market products obtained by IUU fishing; considers that the EU should work with such countries in order to ban the marketing of these products;
Amendment 71 #
2010/2210(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Recalls that the issue of IUU fishing is inseparable from that of fisheries partnership agreements in the context of trade which is subject to the rules of the WTO; stresses the problem of derogation from the rules of origin for some processed fishery products and in particular the case of Papua New Guinea, which prevents the traceability of such products and opens the way for IUU fishing;
Amendment 79 #
2010/2210(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Calls for an urgent expansion of the network of RFMOs to cover all high seas fisheries and areas, either by establishing new RFMOs or by expanding the mandate of existing ones; believes that vastly enhanced cooperation among RFMOs, in terms of information exchange, sanctions against vessels and CPCs and other matters, is necessary given the global nature of IUU fishing;
Amendment 99 #
2010/2210(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Underlines that maintaining and developing the European fisheries sector depends in part on strict IUU monitoring of fishery products traded on European and global markets; stresses the importance of this sector for regional planning, food safety and safeguarding jobs and resources in Community waters;
Amendment 16 #
2010/2206(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Emphasises that tourism has a tangible impact on the economic, social and territorial cohesion of all the Member States; stresses also that tourism represents the main resource of some EU regions, particularly the outermost regions or regions that are lagging behind economically, and that it has a direct impact on growth in other sectors;
Amendment 48 #
2010/2206(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Expresses satisfaction at the Commission’s proposal that the structural funds will continue to provide support for the development of tourism during the current programming period; regrets, however, that the Commission has not made any proposal for the next programming period and is simply leaving the decision to the guidelines which will be adopted in the coming months for the priorities of the European Union;
Amendment 13 #
2010/2160(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Insists that the European Social Fund should remain in the framework of the regulation on general provisions on the cohesion policy funds, but needs its own rules;
Amendment 29 #
2010/2158(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Highlights that it is to a great extent urban areas that translate European policies into on the ground implementation; stresses that urban areas generate around 80% of the GDP of the EU and significantly contribute to the economic growth of Europe; on the other hand they also bear the costs of economic productivity (urban sprawl, congestions, pollution, etc.) and are affected by major social imbalances (unemployment, exclusion, etc.) that put their role as 'motors of growth' into risk; considers therefore that there is a clear justification for common engagement towards the urban areas of the EU;
Amendment 81 #
2010/2158(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Considers that urban areas have an essential role to play in the implementation of macro-regional strategies and functional geographical entities;
Amendment 94 #
2010/2158(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Amendment 51 #
2010/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Encourages the regions to use the structural funds to address demographic challenges and remain attractive to residents, as that can stem depopulation;Does not apply to English text
Amendment 85 #
2010/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Considers that public investments in the health and care systems are important for social cohesion in Europe; calls on the Member States to ensure good healthcare provision in rural areas also, for example through gateway clinics making it possible to combat ‘medical desertification’, and to use structural funds to promote additional measures in the field of telemedicine;
Amendment 91 #
2010/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Considers that public investments in the health and care systems are important for social cohesion in Europe; calls on the Member States to ensure good healthcare provision in rural areas also, for example through gateway clinics, and in border regions through greater cross-border cooperation between clinics and between stakeholders, and to use structural funds to promote additional measures in the field of telemedicine;
Amendment 136 #
2010/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Calls on the Commission to orientate the ESF more towards ensuring that its potential is sufficient to deal with the challenges of demographic change; notes that the know-how of older people should be utilised, for example for coaching projects, and that structures are required for this purpose; takes the view that intergenerational communication is an opportunity that should be seized;
Amendment 42 #
2010/2156(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. CRecalls that the existence of a fabric of dynamic SMEs is the basis for a diversified and high-quality cultural and recreational industry; calls for a more important future role for SMEs and private capital in the implementation of projects and measures in the cultural and creative sector, particularly through PPPs and through maximisation of the use of EIB and EIF financial instruments;
Amendment 48 #
2010/2156(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls on the Commission to continue its efforts to support the culture and creativity framework by fostering a more elaborate system of cooperation among Member States and EU institutions, based onot on a regulatory framework but on the Open Method of Coordination for sharing experience, and recommends that the Commission include local and regional authorities in the follow-up process to the Green Paper, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity.
Amendment 1 #
2010/2155(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 18 a (new)
Citation 18 a (new)
– having regard to the Commission Communication of XX June 2011 on the EU strategy for the Atlantic region (COM (2011)XXXX)
Amendment 13 #
2010/2155(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Is convinced of the European added value of territorial cooperation and the key role it plays in deepening the internal market and fostering closer European integration; calls for territorial cooperation to remain one of the pillarobjectives of cohesion policy;
Amendment 36 #
2010/2155(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls for forward thinking to ascertain the strategic needs of each border region and area of cooperation in connection with the Europe 2020 strategy, and, subsequently, for European territorial cooperation to be integrated in, and tailored to, all levels of strategic planning: European, national, and regional;
Amendment 70 #
2010/2155(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Points out that the concept of macro- regions, a Council initiative, came into being as an experimental, logical way of coordinating common projects covering a very large territory, characterised by common territorial problems, with a view to exploiting the advantages of an integrated and, multisectoral and territorial approach based on common strategic actions receiving support from existing funds; points out that these strategies must neither generate additional expenditure for the EU budget, nor necessitate the establishment of new institutions or the application of new rules;
Amendment 79 #
2010/2155(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. Is convinced that the transnational component of Objective 3 can help to improve cooperation in the context of macro-regional strategies by involving regional and local authorities and civil society more closely in the implementation of practical initiatives;
Amendment 83 #
2010/2155(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Points out that territorial cooperation concerns both the EU’s internal and external borders, including matters relating to current and future macro- regional strategies; asks the Commission to consider how to create more effective synergies between initiatives under the ERDF, the Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA), the European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument (ENPI) and the European Development Fund (EDF);
Amendment 9 #
2010/2142(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. In the context of the revision of the Financial Regulation, stresses the need to harmonise rules and management schemes for cohesion programmes under shared management; notes that any governance problem between the Financial Regulation and the cohesion regulations can be avoided by better alignment of eligibility rules across various policies; takes the view, nonetheless, that simplification, in particular in connection with the revision of the Financial Regulation, first requires stable rules and management schemes in the long term;
Amendment 88 #
2010/2139(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Believes that simplification of provisions and procedures at EU and national level should continue without creating major difficulties for beneficiaries and should contribute to increased efficiency; regrets that, due to superfluous bureaucracy, overcomplicated rules and a lack of harmonised procedures, many funds remain unused; considers that any simplification must first be examined to ensure the stability of rules and procedures;
Amendment 91 #
2010/2139(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Encourages Member States and regional authorities to enhance capacity- building and, in particular, to ensure the cofinancing of projects by national contributions and with financial engineering support, in order to increase the absorption of the funds and to avoid further major delays in investing;
Amendment 1 #
2010/2113(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
Amendment 8 #
2010/2113(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Points out that a viable, stable and sustainable fisheries sector needs to be established at European level, and that, more specifically, the Black Sea needs a special policy to preserve and improve the situation of fisheries resources and ensure a stable, sustainable and adaptedthat the fisheries sector ins adapted to the Black Sea basin, bearing in mind the specificities of the Black Sea region, as well as taking into consideration that the Black Sea fisheries policy should be integral part of the upcoming reform of the CFP;
Amendment 13 #
2010/2113(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Underlines the need for a more structured framework, with regards to the regional approach of the management of fisheries in the region, in particular with a view to developing a competitive fisheries sector in a European market that is already under a lot of pressure as a result of fish and aquaculture products being imported from outside the EU;
Amendment 22 #
2010/2113(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Believes that not only collaborative research among European scientific teams should have access to EU funding, but financial support should also be allocated forand that closer cooperation ofbetween European scientists withand their counterparts from the Ukraine, the Russian Federation, Georgia and Turkey should be established;
Amendment 23 #
2010/2113(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Underlines that the EU's Common Fisheries Policy should encourage the establishment of professional fishermen’s organizsations and inter-branch organisations in the fisheries and aquaculture industries in the Black Sea where they are lacking or are very underdeveloped;
Amendment 26 #
2010/2113(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19a. Stresses the importance of managing fisheries with a view to ensuring that ecosystems are viable and sustainable, that fishing is carried out legally and that action is taken against IUU fishing; calls for the establishment of a European coastguard in order to develop cooperation between Member States in an effective way so as to boost maritime security and combat new threats at sea, in particular in the Black Sea;
Amendment 19 #
2010/2107(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Points out that enterprises, through their innovation efforts, play a vital role in devising and implementing energy savings measures; hopes that structural funding will encourage enterprises actively to participate in projects in the field of energy efficiency.
Amendment 4 #
2010/2095(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Considers that an ‘EU industrial policy for the globalised era’ can achieve its aims only if it deals with the extent to which Community policies are adapted to future challenges that European regions and their local industries are facing and will face in the coming years; in this regard, stresses that the impact of economic, demographic, climate and energy changes needs to be further analyzed with respect to their regional dimension, taking into consideration the potential regional disparities that these challenges will generate, thus affecting the homogeneous growth of EU industries;
Amendment 10 #
2010/2095(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that the vast majority of our industrial market is made up of small and medium-sized enterprises: any integrated strategy on the future of European industries should therefore focus primarily on an enhanced approach toward SMEs as the key to territorial cohesion; calls for further simplification of the procedures for obtaining EU funding, and for SMEs to be direct beneficiaries of such funding;
Amendment 13 #
2010/2095(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that the vast majority of our industrial market is made up of small and medium-sized enterprises: any integrated strategy on the future of European industries should therefore focus primarily on an enhanced approach toward SMEs as the key to economic competitiveness and territorial cohesion;
Amendment 22 #
2010/2095(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Points out that regional and local public authorities actively help to support industry by making grants to innovative firms and offering training and upskilling programmes for workers; notes that structural funding can be used to co- finance such programmes, and is of the opinion that their role in industrial policy at regional and local level should be further stepped up to help achieve the objectives of the EU 2020 Strategy;
Amendment 23 #
2010/2095(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Is concerned about firms’ limited uptake of structural funding for the purpose of financing innovative projects; takes the view that managing authorities should focus on raising firms’ awareness of the operational programmes and providing them with whatever help they need to launch their projects;
Amendment 40 #
2010/2095(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Stresses the importance of a well- balanced and sustainable resource efficiency plan as a tool for driving EU industries towards a competitive industrial strategy, thus enhancing the competitiveness of our industrial sector compared to other markets, such as the USA and China, which have set ambitious targets on environmental products; emphasises that environmental standards on raw and auxiliary materials, as well as on security of energy supplies, should lead to enhanced territorial cohesion instead of increasing the distance between central and outermostperipheral regions, taking special account of the peripheraloutermost regions and their needs;
Amendment 44 #
2010/2095(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Notes that an integrated strategy for EU industries should focus on overcoming the skill shortages affecting SMEs and industries. In this respect, emphasises the need for coordinated initiatives to improve the teaching of STEM subjects (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) at all levels, whilst promoting additional coordinated and targeted higher qualifications; calls on the Member States to include vocational qualifications for entrepreneurship in university programmes and other higher education courses; highlights the need to revise the European Social Fund in accordance with the revised skillsemphasises that the European Social Fund must adapt to the changing requirements set byof the industrial sector;
Amendment 19 #
2010/2088(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. TRecalls that the main objective of cohesion policies is the balanced development of all the regions of the European Union; takes the view, therefore, that GDP is an essential measurement of economic growth, but is insufficient to assess regional development and establish cohesion policies;
Amendment 47 #
2010/2088(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Reiterates that the condition of natural environments, environmental sustainability, fairness and social integration are now just as important as the economy among the key issues underpinning the European model for development; states, furthermore, that an overarching approach should be taken with regard to assessing people’s wellbeing and quality of life, as well as regions’ vulnerabilities;
Amendment 67 #
2010/2088(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls on the Commission, therefore, to introduce, as a matter of priority and urgency, readily and precisely measurable indicators in addition to GDP for environmental and social issues, with a view to establishing a more comprehensive picture of regional cohesion policies, at the latest by the start of the 2014-2020 programming period;
Amendment 81 #
2010/2088(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Proposes that the criteria governing regions’ eligibility for EU funding should be considered in the light of the set of indicators that is brought in; calls for environmental and social indicators to be given the same status as GDP when it comes to classifying the regions.GDP to remain the key eligibility criterion, but urges that environmental and social indicators should also be taken into account;
Amendment 89 #
2010/2088(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Points out that Annex 2 to Regulation 1083/2006 provides for the criteria of the unemployment rate, the employment rate, workers' level of education and population density to be used when allocating funding under the objective 'regional competitiveness and employment'; stresses the importance of these criteria as adjuncts to GDP.
Amendment 92 #
2010/2088(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6b. Notes that the strict application of the GDP criterion in determining regions' eligibility under the 'convergence' objective creates a significant threshold effect to the detriment of regions which are not eligible; calls on the Commission, therefore, to assess the possibility of creating an intermediate objective between 'convergence' and 'regional competitiveness and employment' with a view to attenuating this threshold effect.
Amendment 2 #
2010/2087(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Considers the Black Sea region to be a strategically crucial area and deemsbelieves that an EU Strategy for the Black Sea will contribute to realising the aims of European integration, as well as being essential to ithe region’s sustainable and coordinated development;
Amendment 8 #
2010/2087(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Believes that in order to launch an effective Strategy for the Black Sea, it is vital to involve fully all the countries concerned, with no distinction between EU and non-EU countries; calls for cooperation between all the relevant regions and stresses the importance of participation by bodies at all levels of governance in order to ensure the success of an integrated approach, through the involvement of existing organisations, such as the BSEC, the PABSEC and the Commission on the Black Sea, but also through the creation of new ones where necessary, with the aim of jointly identifying common challenges and available resources, as well as areas where coordinated action can bring significant added value;
Amendment 15 #
2010/2087(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Encourages the development, in the context of the Strategy, of an integrated approach and the use of the well- established principles of the EU’s Cohesion Policy; in particular, believes that cross-border cooperation between regions should be promoted, in order to tackle common problems through coordinated action; points out that the European Grouping for Territorial Cooperation (EGTC) offers a suitable cooperation framework for structured, multi-level governance; calls on the Commission to explore ways of better coordinating the various European instruments providing for cross-border cooperation on the Union’s external borders;
Amendment 17 #
2010/2087(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. encourages the development of synergies between the various Union policies that come into play in the Strategy, particularly the structural funds, the Research and Development Framework Programme and the Trans- European Transport Networks;
Amendment 18 #
2010/2087(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Takes the view that the Strategy must not be funded via a new EU budget line but must facilitate networking among existing Union policies;
Amendment 33 #
2010/2087(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Having regard to the importance of the Black Sea region for Europe’s energy supply, considers a thorough evaluation of all the benefits and environmental implications of currently planned and future energy projects essential; believes that all possible measures should be taken to facilitate a prompt and effective response to all potential environmental disasters or technical accidents; in this regard, regardconsiders it as crucial that all the countries and regions concerned agree well in advance on how to deal with these events from an environmental, economic and technical point of view;
Amendment 1 #
2010/2079(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 (new)
Paragraph -1 (new)
-1. Stresses the importance of research and development for the purpose of confronting the major challenges facing the European Union, particularly in connection with the EU 2020 Strategy; recalls that cohesion policy makes a substantial contribution to the financing of R&D in the regions;
Amendment 11 #
2010/2079(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Is of the opinion that the EU’s various instruments for cohesion, research and innovation should be implemented in an integrated manner with a view to ensuring their effectiveness; emphasises, therefore, the need to seek synergies between these instruments, in particular by harmonising the rules on audits and eligibility of costs in order to simplify implementation by beneficiaries;
Amendment 14 #
2010/2079(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Takes the view that research and innovation can best be fostered at regional level, thanks to the proximity between universities, public research bodies, large companies, SMEs and regional public authorities, for example within clusters; encourages the various levels (regional, national and Community) nonetheless to coordinate more effectively their efforts to plan R&D activities at European level;
Amendment 20 #
2010/2079(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Recalls that the EU’s instruments for encouraging research and development focuFP7 focuses on large-scale projects of excellence likely to have a tangible impact on economic activity and job creation; points out that the momentum generated by projects of excellence benefits all the Member States, irrespective of their current level of scientific development, and is an effective adjunct to the territorial dimension of cohesion policy instruments with a view both to balanced development and to competitiveness.
Amendment 12 #
2010/2053(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Hopes that the aims of the directive may start to be achieved in the near future and that the whole of the EU and its regions may benefit, thus contributing to real economic, social and territorial cohesion; underlines the role of the structural funds and other funding instruments in providing access to and ensuring the availability of infrastructure such as transport, telecommunications and research and innovation, in granting access to public goods and services in the regions, particularly in areas unless attractive to investors, and in helping to encourage exchanges of good practice in the provision of key services; demands, in this context, greater coherence and coordination between all policies;
Amendment 30 #
2010/2053(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls for proper and thorough monitoring of the application of the restrictions provided for in the directive in respect of services of general economic interest, while respecting the division of competences with the Member States; points out that this directive does not affect the freedom of Member States to define, in conformity with Community law, what they consider to be services of general economic interest, how those services should be organised and financed, in compliance with State aid rules, and what specific obligations they should be subject to.
Amendment 14 #
2010/2040(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Considers it essential to strengthen regional cooperation in order to achieve sustainable and more efficient management of marine and coastal resources, particularly where there is a complete interdependence of activities in the maritime area, as is the case in many sea areas, in particular in the Mediterranean;
Amendment 24 #
2010/2040(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a
Paragraph 5 a
5a. Calls for the development of an exchange between institutional actors of the IMP and the CFP in connection with the desirable regionalisation of the latter, so as to release potential synergies between the IMP and the CFP, particularly in the context of an approach based on fishing zones;
Amendment 32 #
2010/2040(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Amendment 34 #
2010/2040(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Stresses that the wish to see the IMP contribute to the safeguarding of an economically and socially viable European fisheries sector which respects the environment but is also a source of wealth for its actors has implications for the Union’s commercial policy;
Amendment 37 #
2010/2040(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Calls, in particular, for the Commission to make the maintenance of European fisheries a non-negotiable element in the negotiations it is conducting at international level, and for increased liberalisation of fisheries and aquaculture products from third countries to apply only to products complying with the same environmental, social and health requirements as those for products originating in the European Union;
Amendment 7 #
2010/2010(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. considers that EU cohesion policy plays a crucial role in developing the job potential of a sustainable economy, as it helps eliminate regional differences and create a society with fullstimulate the employment market; stresses that the European Structural Funds can encourage the regions to take initiatives to create new, sustainable jobs;
Amendment 36 #
2010/2010(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. stresses the vital role of small and medium-sized firms in stimulating regional and local employment sustainably; therefore stresses the need to facilitate access for such firms to financing by the Structural Funds;
Amendment 1 #
2010/2001(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Expresses concern at the low take-up rate of Structural Funds and calls on the Commission to identify the reasons for this; considers that achieving an optimum take-up of funds should be a political priority, particularly in the run-up to the next budget planning period;
Amendment 3 #
2010/2001(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the fisheries and maritime policy proposals in the 2011 general budget despite the fact that the 2007-2013 multiannual financial framework does not take adequate account of the political importance of the common fisheries policy (CFP), in particular as regards the political expectations from greater European Union involvement in fisheries control, in fisheries research, in modernisation of the fleet to save energy and improve safety, and in cushioning the social effects of what is a necessary reduction in capacity;
Amendment 12 #
2010/2001(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Deplores the proposed cut in commitment appropriations for support for the management of fish resources (improvement of scientific advice), since expanding fisheries research is an essential prerequisite for a successful fisheries policy, particularly in establishing fishing opportunities on an annual basis and guaranteeing the sustainable management of resources and a socio- economically viable fisheries sector; notes that, in the medium and long term, a significant increase in expenditure on fisheries research is essential for successful reform of the CFP;
Amendment 20 #
2010/2001(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Points out that the funds proposed for the development of an Integrated Maritime Policy (IMP) are not sufficient to cover the most important aspects of the launch of this new policy; calls for specific budget headings to be created for the European Union's new maritime policy, which must be endowed with the appropriations needed for successful developmentufficient funding for implementation of the IMP; states that it must be ensured that the IMP does not develop at the expense of the CFP;
Amendment 22 #
2010/2001(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 25 #
2010/2001(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Deplores the lack of funding for a number of areas in which coordinated action at EU level is imperative, in particular for the dissemination of knowledge already gained about selective fishing gear and for the coordination of, and support for, applied fisheries research; stresses the need for R&D funding to build up expertise on all stocks and establish the average sustainable yield under the CFP.
Amendment 13 #
2010/0395(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – paragraph 1
Article 56 – paragraph 1
1. When the Commission implements the budget on a shared management basis, budget implementation tasks shall be delegated to the Member States. Member States shall respect the principles of sound financial management, transparency and non-discrimination and ensure the visibility of Union action when they manage Union funds. To this end, Member States shall fulfil the control and audit obligations and assume the resulting responsibilities laid down in this Regulation. Complementary provisions may be laid down in sector- specific rules.
Amendment 15 #
2010/0395(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 56 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Member States shall prevent, detect and correct irregularities and fraud when executing tasks related to the implementation of the budget. To this end, in accordance with the sector-specific rules, they shall carry out ex ante and ex post controls including, where appropriate, on the spot checks, to ensure that the actions financed from the budget are effectively carried out and implemented correctly, recover funds unduly paid and bring legal proceedings as necessary.
Amendment 17 #
2010/0395(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 56 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 18 #
2010/0395(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 56 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 20 #
2010/0395(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
Article 56 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
Amendment 22 #
2010/0395(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
Article 56 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. Bodies accredited pursuant to paragraph 3 of this ArticleAt the appropriate level, Member States shall:
Amendment 25 #
2010/0395(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – paragraph 4 – point c
Article 56 – paragraph 4 – point c
Amendment 29 #
2010/0395(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 56 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Amendment 31 #
2010/0395(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 56 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point a
a) their accounts drawn up for the expenditure made in the execution of the tasks entrusted; , together with a management declaration confirming that; - the accounts are presented in an exact and exhaustive manner; - the expenditure referred to has been effected in accordance with the sector- specific rules; - the control procedures put in place give the necessary guarantees concerning the legality and regularity of the transactions carried out;
Amendment 33 #
2010/0395(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Article 56 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Amendment 35 #
2010/0395(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point d
Article 56 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point d
d) the opinion of an independent audit body on the management declaration of assurance mentioned in point (c) of this paragraph, covering all its elements.
Amendment 36 #
2010/0395(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
Article 56 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 25 #
2010/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) Union funding should be designed to support exploratory work on actions which aim to promote the strategic objectives of the Integrated Maritime Policy, including the integrated maritime governance at all levels, the further development and implementation of integrated sea-basin strategies tailored to the specific needs of Europe’s different sea basins, the definition of the boundaries of sustainability of human activities in the framework of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive and of Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy (the EU Water Framework Directive)(1), which constitutes the environmental pillar of the Integrated Maritime Policy, paying due attention to their cumulative impacts, on the basis of the ecosystem approach, the further involvement of stakeholders in integrated maritime governance schemes, the further development of cross-cutting tools for integrated policy-making, the promotion of the international dimension of the Integrated Maritime Policy, and sustainable economic growth, employment, innovation and competitiveness. (1) OJ L 327, 22.12.2000, p. 1.
Amendment 26 #
2010/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7 a (new)
Recital 7 a (new)
(7a) It is important for the programme to tie in with other EU policies that may encompass a maritime dimension, in particular the structural funds, the trans- European transport networks, the Common Fisheries Policy, tourism, action in relation to the environment and climate change, the Framework Programme for Research and Development and energy policy.
Amendment 36 #
2010/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – point b
Article 2 – point b
(b) to contribute to the development of tools that cut across sea or coast-related sectoral policiectoral policies relating to the sea, coasts and land-sea links;
Amendment 39 #
2010/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – point c
Article 2 – point c
(c) to support joined up policy-making involving regional and local authorities, and to promote the sustainable use of the marine and coastal resources and sustainable economic growth, innovation and employment in maritime sectors and coastal regions, in coherence with sectoral policy priorities and actions;
Amendment 40 #
2010/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – point d
Article 2 – point d
(d) to further define the boundaries of sustainability of human activities that have an impact on the marine environment and marine pollution, in the framework of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive and the EU Water Framework Directive;
Amendment 40 #
2010/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) The Commission Communication on an Integrated Maritime Policy for the European Union - COM(2007) 575 of 10 October 2007, states that the primary objective of the Integrated Maritime Policy is to develop and implement integrated, coherent and joined-up decision-making in relation to the oceans, seas, coastal regions, islands and maritime sectors.
Amendment 43 #
2010/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) stimulate and reinforce dialogue and cooperation with and among stakeholders at all levels of governance, as well as with civil society and representatives of professions related to the sea, on cross- cutting issues related to Integrated Maritime Policy;
Amendment 44 #
2010/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) Union funding should be designed to support exploratory work on actions which aim to promote the strategic objectives of the Integrated Maritime Policy, including the integrated maritime governance at all levels, the further development and implementation of integrated sea-basin strategies tailored to the specific needs of Europe's different sea basins, the definition of the boundaries of sustainability of human activities in the framework of the Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy*, (hereinafter the EU Water Framework Directive) and Directive 2008/56/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of marine environmental policy (Marine Strategy Framework Directive)**, which constitutes the environmental pillar of the Integrated Maritime Policy, paying due attention to their cumulative impacts, on the basis of the ecosystem approach, the further involvement of stakeholders in integrated maritime governance schemes, the further development of cross-cutting tools for integrated policy-making, the promotion of the international dimension of the Integrated Maritime Policy, and sustainable economic growth, employment, innovation and competitiveness. * OJ L 327, 22.12.2000, p. 1. ** OJ L 164, 25.6. 2008, p. 19.
Amendment 46 #
2010/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7 a (new)
Recital 7 a (new)
(7a) It is important for the programme to tie in with other EU policies that may encompass a maritime dimension, in particular the Structural Funds, the trans-European transport networks, the Common Fisheries Policy, tourism, action in relation to the environment and climate change, the Framework Programme for Research and Development and energy policy.
Amendment 47 #
2010/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) encourage coordination and efforts to identify synergies between maritime policy and other EU policies, in particular the structural funds, the trans-European transport network, the Common Fisheries Policy, action in relation to the environment and climate change, the Framework Programme for Research and Development and energy policy;
Amendment 48 #
2010/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7 b (new)
Recital 7 b (new)
(7b) The programme should encourage economic dynamism and competitiveness of coastal regions and islands, particularly in the field of fisheries and aquaculture.
Amendment 50 #
2010/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) maritime spatial planning and, integrated coastal zone management, both of and the development of land-sea links, which provide a fundamental tool for eco-system based management and sustainable development of marine areas and coastal regions;
Amendment 53 #
2010/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – point e
Article 4 – point e
(e) actions relating to cross-cutting tools, including test projects and macro-regional strategies.
Amendment 54 #
2010/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3 – point g a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 3 – point g a (new)
(ga) possible synergies with other EU financing instruments.
Amendment 55 #
2010/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – point e a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – point e a (new)
(ea) possible synergies with other EU financing instruments.
Amendment 58 #
2010/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – point b
Article 2 – point b
(b) to contribute to the development of tools that cut across sea or coast-related sectoral policies and land-sea links;
Amendment 63 #
2010/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – point c
Article 2 – point c
(c) to support joined up policy-making and to promote the sustainable use of the marine and coastal resources and sustainable economic growth, innovation and employment in maritime sectors and coastal regions, and exploitation of offshore energy sources in coherence with sectoral policy priorities and actions;
Amendment 64 #
2010/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – point d
Article 2 – point d
(d) to further define the boundaries of sustainability of human activities that have an impact on the marine environment, in the framework of and marine pollution, in the framework of the Water Framework Directive and the Marine Strategy Framework Directive;
Amendment 72 #
2010/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) stimulate and reinforce dialogue and cooperation with and among stakeholders at all levels of governance, as well as with civil society and representatives of professions related to the sea on cross- cutting issues related to Integrated Maritime Policy;
Amendment 75 #
2010/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) encourage coordination and efforts to identify synergies between maritime policy and other EU policies, in particular the Structural Funds, the trans-European transport networks, the Common Fisheries Policy, tourism, action in relation to the environment and climate change, the Framework Programme for Research and Development and energy policy;
Amendment 85 #
2010/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) a common information sharing environment for the EU maritime domain which promotes cross-sectoral and cross- border surveillance activities and reinforces the safe and secure use of marine space, taking into account the relevant developments of sectoral policies as regards surveillance and contributing, as appropriate, to their necessary evolutions, including through the creation of a European coastguard service;
Amendment 86 #
2010/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) maritime spatial planning and, integrated coastal zone management, both of and the development of land-sea links, which provide a fundamental tool for eco-system based management and sustainable development of marine areas and coastal regions;
Amendment 91 #
2010/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
(ca) exchange of data on marine research, including research on offshore energy sources.
Amendment 95 #
2010/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. The Commission may clarify this article by means of delegated acts in accordance with Article 13 and subject to the conditions of Articles 13a and 13b.
Amendment 100 #
2010/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – point b a (new)
Article 4 – point b a (new)
(ba) exchanges of good practice on maritime surveillance, including the creation of a European coastguard service;
Amendment 103 #
2010/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – point e
Article 4 – point e
(e) actions relating to cross-cutting tools, including test projects and macro-regional strategies.
Amendment 106 #
2010/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 1
1. The CommissionProgramme shall be implement the Programmed in accordance with the Financial Regulation.
Amendment 107 #
2010/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3 – point g a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 3 – point g a (new)
(ga) possible synergies with other EU financing instruments.
Amendment 108 #
2010/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – point e a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – point e a (new)
(ea) possible synergies with other EU financing instruments.
Amendment 26 #
2010/0242(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Recital 16 a (new)
Recital 16 a (new)
(16a) It should be recognised that regional and local public authorities play a key role in achieving the objectives of the European Year of Active Ageing, in particular where their responsibilities include the social integration of those in difficulties and the provision of support to older people.
Amendment 35 #
2010/0242(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – indent 3
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – indent 3
– exchange of information, experience and good practices, particularly between local representatives with responsibilities relating to active ageing and solidarity between generations;
Amendment 36 #
2010/0242(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – indent 4
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – indent 4
– research and surveys on a Union or national, national or regional/ local authority scale, and dissemination of the results.
Amendment 27 #
2010/0220(NLE)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
Amendment 43 #
2010/0220(NLE)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point h
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point h
Amendment 12 #
2010/0080(COD)
Draft legislative resolution
Citation 2
Citation 2
– having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 43(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C7- 0107/2010),
Amendment 13 #
2010/0080(COD)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 2 a (new)
Article 1 – point 2 a (new)
Regulation (EC) No 861/2006
Article 3 – point b a (new)
Article 3 – point b a (new)
2a. The following point is added to Article 3: ‘(ba) safeguarding coastal fishing activities, in parallel with the development of industrial fishing;’
Amendment 14 #
2010/0080(COD)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 3
Article 1 – point 3
Regulation (EC) No 861/2006
Article 5
Article 5
Community financial measures referred to in Articles 9, 10 and 11 shall contribute to the objective of improving data collection, management and use and scientific advice on the state of the resources, the level of fishing, the impact that fisheries have on the resources and the marine eco-system, on the degree of commercial dependence on the Union’s market for fisheries and aquaculture products and on the performance of the fishing industry, within and outside Community waters, by providing financial support to the Member States to establish multi- annual aggregated and science based datasets which incorporate biological, technical, environmental and socio- economic information."
Amendment 16 #
2010/0080(COD)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 14 – point a
Article 1 – point 14 – point a
Regulation (EC) No 861/2006
Article 20 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 20 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
1. “Applications by Member States for Community financial measures shall be submitted to the Commission by 31 Octo15 November prior to the year of implementation concerned.”
Amendment 1 #
2009/2238(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital -A a (new)
Recital -A a (new)
-Aa. having regard to the strategic importance of the fisheries and aquaculture sector for supplying the population and for the food balance of both the Member States and the EU as a whole, as well as its contribution to the social and economic wellbeing of coastal communities, local development, employment and the preservation of cultural traditions;
Amendment 2 #
2009/2238(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. having regard to the specific objectives set for fisheries management at the World Sustainable Development Summit held in Johannesburg in 2002, among them that of, by 2015, bringing down the exploitation of fish stocks to a level compatible with maximum sustainable yield (MSY);
Amendment 4 #
2009/2238(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Recital F a (new)
Fa. whereas, furthermore, despite the new strategy defined for the area, the multiple constraints on the development of aquaculture in the Community are such that it is unlikely to be able to compensate significantly, in the short or medium term, for the general trend of lower production in the extractive sector,
Amendment 8 #
2009/2238(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K a (new)
Recital K a (new)
Ka. whereas this reflection also calls for a critical examination of the common commercial policy as applied to this sector in particular, and also of the consistency of the decisions taken in that framework with the need to preserve a viable and responsible European fisheries sector,
Amendment 12 #
2009/2238(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital R a (new)
Recital R a (new)
Ra. whereas, for example, a depressive effect on prices at the initial point of sale caused by competition from imports would appear to be a more sensitive issue for 'industrial' species (those destined for the processing industry) than for non- industrial species,
Amendment 13 #
2009/2238(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital R b (new)
Recital R b (new)
Rb. having regard to the need to ensure acceptable outlets for Community producers (fishermen and aquaculture enterprises) on a basis of sufficiently remunerative prices, taking account of the costs, constraints and imponderables related to their activity,
Amendment 14 #
2009/2238(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital R c (new)
Recital R c (new)
Rc. having regard to the need to ensure that Community processors can benefit from raw materials of uniform quality, in sufficient quantities and at stable prices all year long,
Amendment 15 #
2009/2238(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital R d (new)
Recital R d (new)
Rd. having regard to the need to satisfy the demand from consumers in the Community for high-quality products at competitive prices and to take account of their increasing desire for information on those products' characteristics and origin and the conditions under which they were caught or produced,
Amendment 33 #
2009/2238(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Calls for the development, through a series of studies and consultations, of a clear and complete picture of the Community market in fishery and aquaculture products, species by species, as well as of likely trends in demand and production in the Community and of the outlets expected to be maintained for production in a context of fair competition;
Amendment 34 #
2009/2238(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 b (new)
Paragraph 9 b (new)
9b. Calls for the more systematic, specific and detailed evaluation of the impact of individual trade negotiations on the fishery and aquaculture sector, notably with regard to enterprise profitability, employment and regional planning;
Amendment 39 #
2009/2238(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Warns against concluding in the WTO any agreement on fisheries sector subsidies that would deny the EU the possibility of granting its producers certain types of support, without imposing the same constraints on other countries that are among its main suppliers; is opposed in principle to any 'early harvest' of such an agreement, which should remain indissociable from the other elements of the Doha round;
Amendment 44 #
2009/2238(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Draws attention to the option for the Community industry of making use of the EU's commercial defence instruments in cases of dumping, subsidisation or increase on a large scale and without warning of imports for certain categories of fishery and aquaculture products;
Amendment 52 #
2009/2238(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Warns against the risk of merely substituting a Community production that is falling under the impact of stringent resource management measures by additional imports that do not meet comparable requirements;
Amendment 71 #
2009/2238(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 a (new)
Paragraph 32 a (new)
32a. Calls on the Commission, accordingly, to carry out as a matter of urgency the study required under Regulation No 66/2010 (CE), so as to ensure that specific criteria can be drawn up as soon as possible for the eco- labelling of fishery and aquaculture products;
Amendment 72 #
2009/2238(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 a (new)
Paragraph 34 a (new)
34a. Notes the existence of significant substitution effects, in terms of consumer habits and demand on the part of distributors in the EU, as between fresh products of Community origin and certain types of imported aquaculture products;
Amendment 75 #
2009/2238(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 a (new)
Paragraph 36 a (new)
36a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to take due account of the main recommendations contained in this report in their proposals and decisions related to the reform of the Common Fisheries Policy;
Amendment 60 #
2009/2233(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Points out that co-financing is a principle fundamental to the sound management of cohesion policy; calls for its continued application despite the restrictions on public spending which the economic crisis has brought about;
Amendment 61 #
2009/2233(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8b. Emphasises the key role played by small and medium-sized undertakings in fostering economic competitiveness and creating jobs; therefore stresses the need to facilitate access for such firms to Structural Fund financing;
Amendment 66 #
2009/2233(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Amendment 84 #
2009/2233(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Emphasises the decisive role ofwhich regional development and territorial cohesion play, by virtue of their European added value, in enhancing the economic competitiveness of the EU and meeting the EU 2020 targets, with the place-based approach being one of the main ways of achieving economic balance;
Amendment 95 #
2009/2233(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Reiterates its commitment to a strong and properly funded cohesion policy which can help to ensure that all the regions of the European Union develop harmoniously; in that connection, calls for the budget for that policy to be maintained after 2013 and for any attempt to renationalise it to be rejected;
Amendment 14 #
2009/2232(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 20 #
2009/2232(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Underlines that full compliance with the ETI requirements could be better ensured by means of stronger regulations and sanctions in cases of non-compliance;is necessary.
Amendment 41 #
2009/2232(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Reiterates its view that partnership can contribute to transparency, responsiveness, efficiency and legitimacy in all the phases of cohesion programming and implementation, and can increase commitment to, and public ownership of, programme outputs; calls, therefore, on the Member States and managing authorities to involve partners more closely in all the phases of cohesion programming and implementation at an early stage, including through an internet platform at national level providing visibility as regards the existing funds and operational programmes and through good-practice leaflets, and to give them full access to all project documents, with a view to making better use of their experience and knowledge;
Amendment 3 #
2009/2231(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital -A (new)
Recital -A (new)
-A. whereas implementation of the cohesion policy is predominantly decentralised and based on sub-national authorities assuming responsibility
Amendment 5 #
2009/2231(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital Aa (new)
Recital Aa (new)
Aa. whereas cohesion policy is based on principles of partnership and co- financing, leading to various kinds of actors, such as sub-national authorities, associations and undertakings, being involved;
Amendment 30 #
2009/2231(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8a (new)
Paragraph 8a (new)
8a. Considers that the principles of partnership and co-financing foster the assumption of responsibility by sub- national authorities in the implementation of cohesion policy; reiterates its commitment to these principles of good management and calls for their continued application despite the restrictions on public spending arising from the economic crisis;
Amendment 58 #
2009/2231(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20a (new)
Paragraph 20a (new)
20a. Reiterates its commitment to a strong and properly funded cohesion policy that ensures that all European Union regions develop harmoniously; calls for the budget for the policy to be maintained after 2013 and for any attempt to renationalise it to be rejected;
Amendment 5 #
2009/2222(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Urges the CommissionCalls on Member States, especially at a time when the citizens are resorting even more to SSGI owing to the severe economic crisis, to ensure that wthen Member States decentraliseation of power to regional or local authorities they also provideis accompanied by sufficient budgetary resources;
Amendment 10 #
2009/2222(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses that SSGI also cover non- economic activities which are not and should not be subject to the rules of the internal market; and which contribute to the objective of territorial cohesion of the European Union;
Amendment 17 #
2009/2222(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. AdvocatesEncourages thinking about minimum standards for social protection throughout the EU; also favours implementing a Voluntary European Quality System for SSGI.
Amendment 1 #
2009/2152(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Reiterates that man-made greenhouse gases have wide-ranging impacts on the complex dynamics of the marine environment and that marine ecosystems already under pressure from pollution and overillegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing are also being affected by warmer temperatures, rising sea levels, changes in salinity and acidification and possible changes in ocean currents;
Amendment 2 #
2009/2152(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Welcomes the publication of the European Commission’s White Paper on ‘Adapting to climate change: Towards a European framework for action’; emphasises that climate change presents a challenge with a marked regional impact that calls for a coordinated approach at European Union level, both between the various Community policies and between the various levels of intervention: European, national, regional and local;
Amendment 6 #
2009/2152(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Points out that rapid depletion of European fish stocks as a result of fishing practicethe fishing industry must adapt to climate change, whilst respecting the economic, social and environmental dimensions of sustainable development; stresses that depletion of European fish stocks is eroding the ecological and economic basis of fisheries and is making marine ecosystems more vulnerable to climate change and thus less capable of adapting;
Amendment 12 #
2009/2152(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Notes that climate change will have potentially severe economic implications for European industrial and small-scale fisheries, requiring a reduction in industrial fishing-fleet capacitybetter regulation and organisation of fisheries and a shift towards sustainable fishing and aquaculture practices; notes the need to assess the impact of climate change on the various fish stocks and marine ecosystems by carrying out specific scientific research;
Amendment 16 #
2009/2152(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Takes the view that only close cooperation at all levels of governance - European Union, Member States and regional authorities - will enable the European Union to implement an adaptation strategy from 2013;
Amendment 18 #
2009/2152(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Notes that small-scale coastal fleets, particularly artisanal fleets, may contribute significantly to the resilience of coastal communities, adaptation to climate change and food security, provided that sustainable fishing practices are applied; points out that these practices and the accompanying efforts on the part of fishermen investing in more environmentally friendly equipment should be encouraged for all types of fleet;
Amendment 21 #
2009/2152(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Recognises, therefore, the need to ensure that the adaptation strategy is integrated into, and coherent with, all European Union policies; emphasises the key role played by local and regional authorities and the need for a bottom-up approach taking account of the differences between natural habitats in Europe, in full accordance with the subsidiarity principle, since it; is convinced that local authorities will be better-equipped to find political solutions to their own needs;
Amendment 22 #
2009/2152(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Deplores the fact that mature and well- functioning Integrated Coastal Zone Management involving all relevant levels of government is still rarely put into practice1 and strongly urges the Commission to ensure that the Integrated Coastal Zone Management recommendations2 are updated, strengthened and implemented; 1 Communication from the Commission - Report to the European Parliament and the Council on evaluation of Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM) in Europe (COM(2007)0308). 2 Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2002 concerning the implementation of Integrated Coastal Zone Management in Europe OJ L 148, 06 06 2002 p. 24 . . , in the wider context of an integrated maritime policy at European level, bringing together all the sectoral policies linked to the sea and oceans and the fight against climate warming; Or. fr , .
Amendment 25 #
2009/2152(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Strongly urges the Commission to ensure that marine strategies, applying an ecosystem-based approach to the management of human activities, are developed and implemented in order to achieve a good environmental status in the marine environment, as provided for in Directive 2008/56/EC; 1 Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2002 concerning the implementation of Integrated Coastal Zoncalls on the Commission, with this aim in mind, to carry out studies designed to assess the phenomenon of green algae and its impact on the fishing industry; calls, further, for a study to be carried out on the influence that changes in currents as a result of climate warming have on the movement of certain marine species; calls, finally, on the Commission to lead scientific research into fishery resources in the northern seas, and to promote the sustainable Mmanagement in Europe, OJ L 148, 06 06 2002, p. 24 .of fisheries in the area in accordance with the precautionary principle, advocating a moratorium on all new fisheries in the Arctic pending appropriate regulation within the framework of regional fisheries organisations (RFOs); Or. fr .
Amendment 29 #
2009/2152(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Considers it essential to pursue policies, not least at regional and local level, that make both public and private investment and certain administrative acts (such as planning permission and development plans) subject to a climate impact assessment, so as to blockencourage investment in unsustainable infrastructure of high environmental quality;
Amendment 31 #
2009/2152(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9a (new)
Paragraph 9a (new)
9a. Calls on the Commission to introduce measures to ensure the sustainable exploitation of resources, and in particular to introduce European ecolabels for fishery and aquaculture products that will make it possible to ensure sustainable fishing, better quality products and information for consumers who are concerned to protect the environment;
Amendment 39 #
2009/2152(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Asks the Commission to ensure that the next financial perspective includes sufficient funding to implement effective climate change adaptatRecognises the need for the regions to address the effects of climate change; recommends that the Member States and the regions take into account the possibility of harnessing the mechanisms provided by the structural funds for developing longer-term sustainable projects; emphasises that the European Union pSolicies at all levels of governancedarity Fund (EUSF) exists to address urgent needs and to express EU solidarity with regions affected.
Amendment 4 #
2009/2151(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Stresses that a proactive approach is more effective and less costly than one based simply on reacting to disasters; takes the view that knowledge of the local geographic, economic and social context is fundamental to the prevention of natural and man-made disasters;
Amendment 13 #
2009/2151(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses that the effects of disasters are not confined within the formal and administrative boundaries of regions and Member States; believes, therefore, that the identification of particularly risk-prone areas, such as the isolated and extremely remote regions and certain other regions or islands in the European Union which have special characteristics and specific needs linked to their geography, their topography and the economic and social conditions under which their inhabitants live, should go hand in hand with establishing priority objectives and cooperation mechanisms in such areas; calls on regions to build on already existing territorial cooperation networks in order to develop cooperation focusing more specifically on disaster prevention; believes that the macro-regions, with their functionally-oriented cooperation independent of administrative boundaries, can become effective platforms for cooperation in the field of disaster prevention;
Amendment 14 #
2009/2151(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses that the effects of disasters are not confined within the formal and administrative boundaries of regions and Member States; believes, therefore, that the identification of particularly risk-prone areas should go hand in hand with establishing priority objectives and cooperation mechanisms in such areas; calls on regions to build on already existing territorial cooperation networks in order to develop cooperation focusing more specifically on disaster prevention; believes that transfrontier cooperation structures, such as the macro-regions, with their functionally-oriented cooperation independent of administrative boundaries, can become effective platforms for cooperation in the field of disaster prevention;
Amendment 20 #
2009/2151(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Welcomes the Commission proposal to extend the lessons learnt exercises to disaster prevention; calls for particular attention to be paid to the lessons learnt in parts of Europe, such as the extremely remote regions, which face a combination of risks (flooding, cyclones, volcanic eruptions, earthquakes);
Amendment 3 #
2009/2108(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls on the Commission to adopt a model network of marine protected areas (MPAs) making it possible to reconcile preserving the environment and practising sustainable fishing; asks it to report regularly on the progress made by Member States in implementing the Habitats and Birds Directives, in particular the establishment of the Natura 2000 network in the marine environment, since currently less than 10% of protected areas are marine sites, as well as on the reporting and monitoring obligations of the Member States;
Amendment 5 #
2009/2108(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Considers that a reduction in discards must be a major objective of the CFP and calls on the Commission to identify the causes of discards and to work out solutions specific to each fishery, in particular through the introduction of multi-species or biomass quotas, through the selectivity of gear, such as the general use of square-meshed nets, and spatial management of stocks;
Amendment 6 #
2009/2108(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. CStresses the essential role played by fisheries from an economic and social point of view in coastal development and from an environmental point of view in marine ecosystems; considers that the CFP must not hinder but facilitate Member States’ compliance with biodiversity legislation, in particular the establishment of adequate protection measures in marine Natura 2000 sites;
Amendment 9 #
2009/2108(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Notes that marine species and habitats enjoy less protection than terrestrial species and habitats in EU biodiversity legislation, and therefore calls on the Commission to assess the weaknesses in the legislation and to develop MPAs in which economic activities including fishing are the subject of strengthened ecosystem-based management;
Amendment 15 #
2009/2108(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Considers that regional fisheries management organisations are responsible for the management of fisheries, but that if RFMOs clearly fail and guarantors of responsible fishing on the high seas; considers that it ins their duty to conserve commercially important marine species then there is a role for CITES to adopt a ban on international trade in those speciesrefore essential to strengthen their powers, in particular with regard to controls and deterrent penalties, and that it is first and foremost up to RFMOs to manage the stocks of certain marine species of commercial importance and to prevent stock collapsequire the use of catch certificates;
Amendment 12 #
2009/2107(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas the sustainable aquaculture sector can make a major contribution to ensuring high-quality food supplies as regards fish products and thus to reducing the pressure on wild speciediversifying the supply of fisheries and aquaculture products, as well as playing an important role as regards food security, economic activities and employment, especially in rural and coastal regions,
Amendment 41 #
2009/2107(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital O
Recital O
O. whereas EU products currently face fierce competition from imports from non- EU countries (above all, Turkey, Chile, Vietnam and China), where companies can operate with much lower overheads, as they are not subject to the same stringent environmental and, plant health and social legislation, thereby putting the EU aquaculture sector under further pressure,
Amendment 76 #
2009/2107(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Calls on the Commission to set out in that regulation specific criteria and general rules, together with provision for maximum harmonisation of environmental impact criteria at Community level in order to avoid any distortion of competition between Member States, for the various product categories, with which every aquaculture establishment in the Community must comply, but to delegate responsibility for the implementation phase to the competent territorial authorities, in full accordance with the principle of subsidiarity e.g. parameters on environmental impact, water supply, feeding of farmed fish, molluscs and crustaceans, product traceability and labelling, and fish health and respect for feeding habits, etc.;
Amendment 95 #
2009/2107(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Hopes that this Fund will take into due account the need to provide financial support for SMEs and family-run enterprises, for young people setting up in aquaculture and for the development of tools to cover the climate-, health- and market-related risks to which aquaculturists are exposed;
Amendment 127 #
2009/2107(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Calls on the Commission to propose specific criteria in relation to the well- being of farmed fish, such as maximum levels of farming density, the quantity of vegetable and animal proteins that can be used in feedstuffs on fish farms, and which take into account the nutritional requirements of the fish species farmed – on the understanding that the long-term goal must be to replace animal proteins with vegetable proteins –, the phases in their life cycle and the environmental conditions, and to promote transportation and slaughter practices which limit sources of stress, and the changing of water in fish ponds in such a way as to guarantee the well-being of the fish being farmed there;
Amendment 33 #
2009/2106(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
I. whereas, in order to be effective, the CFP should be restructured with a view to the multidisciplinary involvement of all groups directly or indirectly connected with the sector, in particular fishermen, vessel owners, processors, aquaculture producers, the scientific community and politicians,
Amendment 51 #
2009/2106(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital L
Recital L
L. whereas fishing is essential to the livelihood of many coastal communities, which have engaged in this activity for several generations and have thus, in addition, contributed to the economic and social dynamic of the regions concerned and the EU's cultural heritage,
Amendment 67 #
2009/2106(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital N
Recital N
N. whereas it is now generally accepted that there are alternative number of instruments offering a different approach to fisheries management mechanisms which can usefully supplement the existing systems and play a significant role in the Community’s management of the sector,
Amendment 100 #
2009/2106(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Welcomes also the two main principles set out by the Commission with a view to an effective and successful reform of the CFP, namely the need to give more responsibility to the sector, based on the establishment of conditions favourable to good fishing practice and to makeadjust management models more flexible in order to create alternatives totools that will complement the traditional single system of TACs and quotas;
Amendment 253 #
2009/2106(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)
Paragraph 26 a (new)
26a. Stresses the need to ensure that the common commercial policy is consistent with the objectives pursued under the CFP, so as to ensure that new EU concessions (multilateral, regional or bilateral) as regards external tariff and non-tariff protection for fisheries and aquaculture products do not cancel out or jeopardise the efforts made to secure Community production outlets at sufficiently remunerative prices;
Amendment 254 #
2009/2106(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 b (new)
Paragraph 26 b (new)
26b. Believes that everything possible should be done to avoid increasing the EU's already very heavy dependence on third-country imports for its supplies of fisheries and aquaculture products;
Amendment 260 #
2009/2106(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Reiterates the need to provide for strict monitoring and certification of fishery products entering the Community market, including imports, in order to ascertain that they come from sustainable fisheries and, as far as imported products are concerned, satisfy the health, environmental and social requirements imposed on Community products, the aim being to create a level playing field on the Community market;
Amendment 298 #
2009/2106(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Urges the Commission to carefully explore the possibility of adopting new fisheries management mechanisms, as opposed to the TAC and quota system, for example fishing effort management and the use of transferable fishing rights, since such arrangements would enable the fleet to be adapted in a more flexible way, in line with the actual diversity and distribution of stocks, and could be supported by structural implementing measures, without neglecting the more vulnerable small-scale sector; recommends, however, that management mechanisms should be tailored to individual fisheries models and that in particular the more vulnerable small-scale sector should be exempt from any possible use of transferable fisheries rights;
Amendment 334 #
2009/2106(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 a (new)
Paragraph 34 a (new)
34a. Stresses that the concepts of 'non- industrial fishing' and 'industrial fishing', which will be used to adjust the management mechanisms geared to the characteristics of individual fisheries models, need to be defined in a precise, objective and concerted manner, while accepting, if necessary, that the definitions may vary from one region to another;
Amendment 102 #
2009/0116(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 a (new)
Article 14 a (new)
Article 14a Review of the Regulation The Commission shall review this Regulation following the biennial meetings of CITES and the annual meeting of the ICCAT and propose any necessary amendments.
Amendment 103 #
2009/0116(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II - paragraph 2 - line 7
Annex II - paragraph 2 - line 7
Number of fish, total round weight, and average weight1 ____________________ 1 Weight must, if possible, be reported as live weight. If live weight is not used, specify the type of product (e.g. GG) in the 'Total Weight' and 'Average Weight' sections of the form.
Amendment 111 #
2009/0116(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II - paragraph 6 - line 8
Annex II - paragraph 6 - line 8
Estimates of number of fish, total weight, and average weight 1 ____________________ 1 Weight must, if possible, be reported as live weighte. If live weight is not used, specify the type of product (e.g. GG) in the 'Total Weight' and 'Average Weight' sections of the form.
Amendment 113 #
2009/0116(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II - paragraph 6 - line 9
Annex II - paragraph 6 - line 9
ICCAT Regional Observer information
Amendment 115 #
2009/0116(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II - paragraph 6 - line 10
Annex II - paragraph 6 - line 10
Name, titleICCAT number, signature
Amendment 120 #
2009/0116(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II - paragraph 7
Annex II - paragraph 7
7. Harvest from farms information Harvesting description Date of harvest Number of fish, total (round) weight, and average weight Tag numbers (if applicable) ICCAT Regional Observer information Name, ICCAT number, signature Estimated size composition (<8 kg, 8-30 kg, >30 kg) Government validation Name of authority and signatory, title, address, signature, seal and date
Amendment 124 #
2009/0116(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III a (new)
Annex III a (new)