543 Amendments of Sophie AUCONIE
Amendment 30 #
2013/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 18 a (new)
Citation 18 a (new)
- having regard to the European Parliament resolution of 15 March 2012 on a ‘Roadmap for moving to a competitive low carbon economy in 2050’ 1 , __________________ 1 Texts adopted, P7_TA(2012)0086.
Amendment 35 #
2013/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 18 b (new)
Citation 18 b (new)
- having regard to ‘Renewable Energy: a major player in the European energy market’ COM(2012)271,
Amendment 37 #
2013/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 18 c (new)
Citation 18 c (new)
- having regard to European Parliament resolution of 21 November 2012 on ‘the environmental impacts of shale gas and shale oil extraction activities’ 2, __________________ 2 Texts adopted, P7_TA(2012)0443.
Amendment 53 #
2013/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas climate targets, security of supply, and competitiveness and climate objectives are of the utmost importance for the EU, are inextricabnd deeply linked and, they must be equally addressed and considered on an equal footing;
Amendment 161 #
2013/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H a (new)
Recital H a (new)
Ha. whereas the Commission has repeatedly called on Member States to shift tax burden from labour to other tax bases, such as environmental pollution and consumption; whereas internalising negative externalities of production and transport is a pivotal element of EU policy objectives; whereas measures which only apply to domestic products, transporters or producers would put additional pressure on the competitiveness of domestic businesses, in particular in energy-intensive industries or the transport sector, compared with businesses operating outside the EU which are not subject to internalisation levies;
Amendment 219 #
2013/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Notes the recent publication of the "first part of the fifth assessment report of the International Panel on Climate Change", adopted on September 27th 2013, confirming that global warming is for 95% due to human activities (90% in the 2007 fourth report) and warning on the consequences inaction might imply for the stability of our ecosystem;
Amendment 236 #
2013/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Asks the Commission to take a multifaceted approach, the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of which ought to be enhanced byCalls on the Council to adopt and the Member States and the Commission to implement, for the EU 2030 climate and energy framework, an approach combining coordinated and, coherent policies that address in equal measure issues such as competitiveness, energy security and climate objectives (e.g.and ambitious binding targets in terms of GHG emissions reduction, renewable energy sources anddevelopment of RES and development of energy efficiency);
Amendment 249 #
2013/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Asks the Commission to better take advantage of the interactions between these three targets in order for them to boost and strengthen competitiveness and energy security in the EU;
Amendment 276 #
2013/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls on the European Council to keep up the progress made at EU level and, in order to maintain the continuity of the progress realised at the EU scale, to set ambitious butand realistic objectivetargets for the 2030 EU policies that take account of the economic, social, environmental, international and technological contexts, and to establish a clear, stable, long-term andclimate and energy policies in a cost- effective framework for industries and investorsmanner;
Amendment 299 #
2013/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Calls on the Commission to study the feasibility and the technological and financial appropriateness of setting an indicative target for the development of carbon capture and storage technologies in Europe in order to mobilise stakeholders and the necessary funding for the development of a strong and effective European technology sector in the fight against climate change;
Amendment 301 #
2013/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Reiterates that the EU 2030 climate and energy framework must support the long-term objective of reducing the EU's greenhouse gas emissions by 80-95% by 2050 and therefore provide a clear, stable and cost-effective long-term framework for industries and investors;
Amendment 309 #
2013/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Considers that to keep the EU in the lead in terms of the development of technologies for a future low carbon economy, the EU shall set a binding target in terms of GHG emissions reduction in its 2030 framework;
Amendment 313 #
2013/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 c (new)
Paragraph 3 c (new)
3c. Considers that the EU binding target in terms of GHG emissions reduction shall be at least 40% by 2030;
Amendment 318 #
2013/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 d (new)
Paragraph 3 d (new)
3d. Is of the opinion that the development of RES contributes to the achievement of the GHG emissions reduction target, to decrease the need for fossil fuel imports and to increase the diversification of our energy sources; Therefore, considers that the EU shall set a binding target in terms of RES in its 2030 framework;
Amendment 320 #
2013/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 e (new)
Paragraph 3 e (new)
3e. Considers that the EU binding target in terms of RES shall be at least 30% by 2030;
Amendment 322 #
2013/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 f (new)
Paragraph 3 f (new)
3f. Considers that the development of energy efficiency contributes to decrease the energy bill, to reduce our energy dependency and our energy trade balance, to the creation of new and non- relocatable activities, to face the rising energy prices and fight climate change; Recalls that the cheapest energy is the energy that is never used; Therefore, considers that the EU shall set a binding target for energy efficiency in its 2030 framework;
Amendment 323 #
2013/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 g (new)
Paragraph 3 g (new)
3f. Considers that the EU binding target in terms of energy efficiency shall be at least 40% by 2030;
Amendment 391 #
2013/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Notes that the investments necessary to achieve industrialisation of the next generation of renewables are currently being withheld due to the uncertainty about European political ambitions in the field of renewables;
Amendment 474 #
2013/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Notes that as one of the cornerstones of the EU’s climate and energy package, the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) should be able to best fulfil its main function, the reduction ofthe EU Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) is currently the main instrument for reducing industrial GHG emissions, and respond efficiently to promoting investments in low-carbon tecohnomic downturns and upturns; recalls that the main objectivelogies; Notes therefore that structural improvement of the EU ETS is to reduce GHG emissions and not to provide investors winecessary in order to increase the sufficient incentives to invest in low-carbon tcheme's ability to respond efficiently to echonologies, as these should be seen merely as a secondary objective and not as a basis for evaluating if the scheme works as intendedmic downturns and upturns and restore investors' certainty thanks to a predictable and reliable system in the long-term;
Amendment 497 #
2013/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Notes that the EU needs a comprehensive policy framework for 2030 that encourages investment ins and the long- term decarbonisation ofin non-ETS sectors; Underlines the significant unused potential of energy efficiency in specific sectors such as building or transport; Asks therefore calls on the Commission and the Member States to review the non- ETS targets while preserving the flexibility for Member States to define their own ways of meetachieving their effort sharing targets;
Amendment 635 #
2013/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Underlines the importance of an energy strategy focused on boostingincreasing the EU's energy security and, economic and industrial competitiveness in the EU, jobs creation, social aspects and environmental sustainability by means ofthrough measures such as the diversification of supply routes, suppliers and sources and by increasing the, promoting energy efficiency and the increased deployment of RES;
Amendment 653 #
2013/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Stresses that, when bringing about security of supply, Member States must be able to take advantage of all of their shall be addressed through the increased deployment of RES and energy efficiency and the completion of the internal energy market which are recognised as no-regret options, and that exploration, extraction and use of indigenous energy resources in accordance withmust respect policies that ensure the safe andsafe, sustainable exploration, extraction and use of these resourand environmental-friendly practices;
Amendment 781 #
2013/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28 a (new)
Paragraph 28 a (new)
28a. Believes that a clear 2030 framework including, binding renewable and energy efficiency targets, will drive private investment beyond 2020 in low carbon technologies, increasing the potential of the job creation in the sectors; Therefore, asks the Commission to better underline the potential of low carbon employment in each Member State in the European semester framework, increasing low carbon skills intelligence and strengthening partnerships between national labour market actors;
Amendment 784 #
2013/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28 b (new)
Paragraph 28 b (new)
28b. Asks the Commission to implement its set of key employment actions for the low carbon economy, to promote greater use of the EU financial instruments available for Member States, regional and local levels as well as for private sectors for smart low carbon investments, for instance by engaging with the European Investment Bank to further boost its capacity to lend in the field of resource efficiency and renewable energy;
Amendment 785 #
2013/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28 c (new)
Paragraph 28 c (new)
28c. Underlines that the building sector counts for 40% of the EU energy gross consumption and that, according to the International Energy Agency, 80% of the energy efficiency potential in the building sector, and more than 50% in the industry sector, remain unexploited; Sees here a significant potential for reducing energy bills while creating unrelocatable jobs in the EU;
Amendment 797 #
2013/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Calls on the Commission to launch a study analysing new and cost-efficient market designs with a view to ensuring reasonably pricedthe lowest possible electricity toprices for consumers and to preventing carbon leakage; aAsks therefore the Commission to come forward as soon as possible with an additional assessment and recommendations for further actions to prevent the risk of carbon leakage notably for the electricity intensive sectors, caused by reallocation of production facilities outside the EU, focusing in particular on additional scenarios in which limited or no further global action is taken on carbon emission reduction taking into account the international context;
Amendment 820 #
2013/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 a (new)
Paragraph 30 a (new)
30a. Points out that CCS deployment could be key to achieving the CO2 reduction targets at a lower cost by 2050, in particular for those industrial sectors which are the biggest CO2 emitters and which face strong international competition; calls on the Commission to take the necessary measures for the development of this technology, in view of its real potential;
Amendment 821 #
2013/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 a (new)
Paragraph 30 a (new)
30a. Calls on the Commission to examine a proportional and non-discriminatory carbon equalisation system as referred to in Directive 2009/29/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 23 April 2009, internalising the negative externalities of production and transport, such as a European border tax adjustment (BTA) levied by Member States on import products, calculated on the basis of the life-cycle carbon cost of products, and including a rebate mechanism for exports; stresses that in order for a carbon equalisation system applied to import products to be compatible with WTO rules domestic carbon taxation should apply to similar products and should not be imposed directly on producers or transporters; acknowledges that due to its practical complexity a BTA should be carefully designed and gradually implemented in line with international trade agreements, e.g. through a pilot project in sectors which are most affected by domestic environmental levies; believes that a BTA would benefit both the competitiveness of EU businesses and the environmental sustainability of international production and transport; points out that revenues from a BTA could be used to decrease taxes, in particular on labour, and/or support the development of sustainable technologies.
Amendment 822 #
2013/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 a (new)
Paragraph 30 a (new)
30a. Underlines the risk of "low carbon leakage" where investments in low carbon technology flee Europe due to uncertainty concerning EU ambitions towards further decarbonisation; notes in this context, that the EU's current share of global low carbon tech patents filed has fallen to a third, from almost half in 1999.
Amendment 831 #
2013/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
31. Invites the Commission to developelaborate a way of measuring competitiveness between the EU and its main competitors, which could, for example, be based on fiscal policies, R&D, innovation, industriallevels of research and development, industry energy prices, environmental and energy prolicies and regulatory burden, wage and productivity levels, geological circumstances, infrastructure, and other relevant factors;
Amendment 849 #
2013/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 a (new)
Paragraph 32 a (new)
32a. Underlines that energy prices vary between different regions according to geological, political and fiscal differences, and that the best way to ensure low energy prices is to take full advantage of the EU's domestic, sustainable energy resources;
Amendment 850 #
2013/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 b (new)
Paragraph 32 b (new)
32b. Notes that the EU is a resource constraint continent, and that the EU imports approximately 60 % of its gas consumption, over 80 % of oil consumption and almost 50 % of coal used for energy production; Insists in this regards on a 2030 framework with a strong focus on sustainable and renewable energy resources within the EU.
Amendment 73 #
2013/2113(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses that the EU legislation on plastic waste should define: specific targets for collection and sorting and mandatory criteria for recyclability (clarifying the distinctions between mechanical/organic recycling and recovery/incineration; the aim should be an incentive target of at least 75 % of recycled plastic by 2020); specific labelling of materials in order to inform consumers concerning their mechanical or organic recyclability; and, finally, criteria for the replacement of single-use and short-lived plastic products by reusable and more durable materials;
Amendment 153 #
2013/2113(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Believes that bolder steps must be taken to tackle illegal exports of plastic waste, including stricter enforcement of EU shipment regulations, as well as stricter monitoring and inspections schemes at ports and all waste treatment facilities; notes that the application of the extended producer responsibility principle, as well as consumer awareness, have a role to play in preventing illegal exports; believes furthermore that the EU should promote a coherent waste management approach in all possible international forums, agreements and institutions, particularly in connection with marine litter; also considers it essential to have access to reliable, comparable data on waste streams, flows in and out of Europe, volumes and management systems;
Amendment 163 #
2013/2113(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Calls for a debate on the phenomenon of planned obsolescence of industrial products;
Amendment 16 #
2013/2104(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Believes that regional aid can only play an effective role if it is used sparingly and proportionately, and is concentrated on the most disadvantaged regions of the EU where it is needed the most; believes, consequently, that State aid policy and cohesion policy are, to a large extent, complementary and mutually reinforcing; , emphasizes the structural contribution of aid to regional development, particularly in the current context of deep economic crisis; calls on the European Commission to reintroduce the crisis criterion in the economic analysis on the basis of which aid is granted.
Amendment 19 #
2013/2104(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Is of the opinion that excluding large enterprises companies from State aid rules in areas covered by Article 107(3)(c) TFEU is not justified given their contribution to employment, the supply- chains that they create with SMEs, their common involvement in research and development, and the role they play in the economic crisis; takes the view that the presence of large undertakings is often key to the success of SMEs that benefit from clusters led by large companies and from their sub-contracting activities; underlines that such a decision may lead to job losses and reduced economic activity in the regions and to the relocation of companies to other regions either within and outside the EU; considers that eligibility of large enterprises has to cover State aids aimed at both greenfield and brownfield investments.
Amendment 1 #
2013/2091(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 1
Citation 1
– having regard to the five-point action plan1 presented by the Commission in March 2013 following the discovery of a vast network of fraudsters passing off horsemeat fraudas beef, __________________ 1 http://ec.europa.eu/food/food/horsemeat/pl an_en.htm
Amendment 14 #
2013/2091(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas, at the same time, recent food fraud cases have damaged consumer trust in the food chain, having a negative impact on the agro-food sector, as individual casethese scandals damage the overall image of this key sector of the EU economy; whereas restoring consumer confidence is of paramount importancethe confidence of consumers of European agri-foods both inside and outside the European Union is of paramount importance; whereas, however, it must be stressed that the vast majority of European agri-foods are of excellent quality and therefore deserve international recognition;
Amendment 22 #
2013/2091(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas recent fraud cases include the marketing of ordinary flour as organic flour, of battery cage eggs as organic eggs, of road salt as food salt and, of horsemeat as beef, of the meat of racehorses treated with phenylbutazone as edible horsemeat and the use of methanol- contaminated alcohol in spirits;
Amendment 44 #
2013/2091(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. AcknowledgesDeplores the fact that combating food fraud is a relatively new issue on the European agenda, and that in the past it has never been a key priority for legislation and enforcement at EU or national levellevel; calls for all necessary steps to be taken now in order to guarantee an optimum level of food safety for consumers;
Amendment 105 #
2013/2091(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Recalls that Parliament has previously called on the Commission to undertake impact assessments on origin labelling for fresh meat and products containing meat; urges the Commission rapidly to present its impact assessments and report on this issue; stresses that origin labelling is not per se a tool for combating food fraud, although it may indirectly lead to a better-informed and more transparent supply chain; but is an effective way of improving the traceability of meat and of making the food chain more transparent and thus safer for consumers; calls, therefore, on the Commission to propose legislation making the indication of the origin of meat in pre-prepared dishes mandatory; calls on the Commission and the Member States, further, as regards the origin labelling of fresh sheepmeat, pigmeat, goatmeat and poultrymeat, to base the new rules on those already applicable to non-processed beef and veal and thus to ensure that consumers are informed about animals’ places of birth, rearing and slaughter;
Amendment 140 #
2013/2091(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Welcomes the Commission proposal to strengthen penalties in order at least to offset the economic advantage sought through the violation, but considers that this is not dissuasive enough; believes that the Member States should set penalties for food fraud which are at least double the amount of the economic advance sought through the fraudulent activity; seems it necessary, as an extra deterrent, to set even higher penalties for fraudulent cases in which public health is deliberately endangered; proposes, furthermore, that in the event of repeated offencesfraud the food business operator’s registration be withdrawn, temporarily when the first offence is committed and definitively if there is any repeat;
Amendment 24 #
2013/2079(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recognises that CCS deployment is needed for the EU to meet its 2050 low- carbon aspirations at least cost; recalls that the Roadmap for moving to a competitive low carbon economy in 2050 describes CCS as a necessary instrument for ‘decarbonising’ high CO2 emitting industries; affirms the urgent need to develop a range of full- chain CCS flagship projects; appreciates that instruments in addition to the EU ETS are needed to drive forward their development;
Amendment 27 #
2013/2079(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Stresses the need to ensure equal treatment of the different kinds of low-carbon technology, as this is indispensable for the development of geological sequestration of carbon dioxide;
Amendment 32 #
2013/2079(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls on the Commission to propose a 2020, in its energy-climate change package for 2030, a target for CCS deployment that should include coal and gas power generation and a range of industrial sectors; suggests an ambition of having sufficient projects in operation and under construction jointly to capture and store 10 Mt of CO2 per annum;
Amendment 84 #
2013/2079(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Considers the development of CCS demonstration projects to be largely dependent on the financial instruments available, including those connected with the auctioning of CO2 allowances; calls for an increasing proportion of the revenue from such auctions to be allocated to the development of CCS;
Amendment 77 #
2013/0371(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 6 a (new)
Recital 6 a (new)
(6a) Very lightweight plastic carrier bags used to wrap loose or unpackaged dry foods, such as fruits, vegetables or confectionery fulfil functions other than that of simply providing a means of carrying the goods in question. However, these bags can contribute significantly to the accumulation of litter. The use of these bags should therefore be reduced, or they should be gradually replaced by carrier bags made from recycled materials or biodegradable materials produced from renewable resources.
Amendment 106 #
2013/0371(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 2
Article 1 – point 2
Directive 94/62/EC
Article 4 – paragraph 1a – subparagraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 1a – subparagraph 1
Member States shall take measures to achieve a reduction in thwhose consumption rate of lightweight plastic carrier bags on their territory within two years of entry into force of this Directiveis greater than 40 units per person per year shall take measures to reduce this figure on their territory within two years of entry into force of this Directive, in order to meet the target of 40 bags per person per year. Other Member States shall also be encouraged to continue their efforts to reduce the consumption of lightweight plastic carrier bags on their territory.
Amendment 144 #
2013/0371(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 2
Article 1 – point 2
Directive 94/62/EC
Article 4 – paragraph 1 c (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 c (new)
Amendment 27 #
2013/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17 a (new)
Recital 17 a (new)
(17a) Given the economic situation of the Member States and the stepping up of coordination measures at European level, there is a need to develop an integrated approach and ever more reliable statistical indicators so as to best serve the policies adopted;
Amendment 28 #
2013/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17 b (new)
Recital 17 b (new)
(17b) Following the recent discovery of breaches in the protection of European citizens’ and Member States’ data, there is a need to enhance the security of the modes of transmission of sensitive statistical data, including economic data;
Amendment 197 #
2013/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) The aim of this Regulation is to implement the commitments and visions provided for in that Animal Health Strategy, including the "One health" principle, as advocated in particular by the World Organisation for Animal Health (OID), and to consolidate the legal framework for a common Union animal health policy through a single, simplified, and flexible regulatory framework for animal health.
Amendment 198 #
2013/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7 a (new)
Recital 7 a (new)
(7a) Since contagious pathogens can easily be spread from one holding to another, as the Commission stresses in its communication on a new Animal Health Strategy for the EU, a collective approach to preventive and biosafety measures should be adopted, involving all stakeholders.
Amendment 227 #
2013/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 155
Recital 155
(155) The rules laid down in the legislative acts referred to in recital 154 are to be replaced by this Regulation and by subsequent Commission acts to be adopted pursuant to this Regulation. Accordingly, those legislative acts should be repealed. Howev, except very recent and still under negotiation ones. In order, to ensure legal clarity and avoid a legal vacuum, the repeal should only take effect when the relevant delegated and implementing acts are adopted pursuant to this Regulation. It is therefore necessary to provide the Commission with the empowerment to determine the dates when the repeal of those legislative acts should take effect.
Amendment 228 #
2013/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 158
Recital 158
(158) In order to ensure legal certainty as regards the application of rules for identification and registration of animals, disease control measures for certain zoonoses and non-commercial movements of pet animals, 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 the date on which Regulations (EC) No 1760/2000, (EU) No XXX/XXX [Ex-998/2003] and (EC) No 21/2004 and Directives 92/66/EEC, 2000/75/EC, 2001/89/EC, 2002/60/EC, 2003/85/EC, 2005/94/EC and 2008/71/EC cease to apply.
Amendment 389 #
2013/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 258 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – indent 1
Article 258 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – indent 1
Amendment 390 #
2013/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 258 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – indent 19
Article 258 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – indent 19
Amendment 392 #
2013/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 259 – title
Article 259 – title
Transitional measures related to the repeal of Regulation (EC) No 1760/2000, Regulation (EC) No 21/2004 and Directive 2008/71/EC
Amendment 393 #
2013/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 259 – paragraph 1
Article 259 – paragraph 1
1. Notwithstanding Article 258(2) of this Regulation, Regulations (EC) No 1760/2000, and (EC) No 21/2004 and Directive 2008/71/EC shall continue to apply until the date to be determined in a delegated act adopted in accordance with paragraph 2 of this Article.
Amendment 397 #
2013/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – point 1
Annex III – point 1
Amendment 398 #
2013/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – point 18
Annex III – point 18
Amendment 44 #
2013/0025(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) The use of the gambling sector to launder the proceeds of criminal activity is of concern. In order to mitigate the risks related to the sector and to provide parity amongst the providers of gambling services, an obligation for all providers of gambling services to conduct customer due diligence for single transactions of EUR 2 .000 or more should be laid down. Member States should consider applying this threshold to eithe collection of winnings as well as wagering a staker or both wagering a stake and collection of winnings, depending upon characteristics and specific vulnerabilities of the various forms of gambling and betting. Providers of gambling services with physical premises (e.g. casinos and gaming houses) should ensure that customer due diligence, if it is taken at the point of entry to the premises, can be linked to the transactions conducted by the customer on those premises.
Amendment 48 #
2013/0025(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13 a (new)
Recital 13 a (new)
(13a) The use of the sport sector to launder the proceeds of criminal activity is also of concern. Given the increasing amounts and the variety of money flows and financial transactions in this sector, as well as the opaque networks of stakeholders and interdependence between the different actors which is an impediment to establish the identity of the beneficial owners, legal and natural persons involved in professional sport should be subject to the provisions of this Directive.
Amendment 84 #
2013/0025(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point f a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point f a (new)
(fa) natural or legal persons involved in professional sport, in particular sport organisations, clubs and sport managers, sportsmen and sportswomen and players' agents.
Amendment 124 #
2013/0025(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Each Member State shall take appropriate steps to identify, assess, understand and mitigate the money laundering and terrorist financing risks involved in any new gambling or betting service prior to authorizing its exploitation. Member States shall abstain from authorizing the most dangerous forms of gambling and betting in this respect.
Amendment 128 #
2013/0025(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) The use of the gambling sector to launder the proceeds of criminal activity is of concern. In order to mitigate the risks related to the sector and to provide parity amongst the providers of gambling servica major issue in the preservation of public order, whatever types of games, an obligation for all providers of gambling services to conduct customer due diligence for single transactions of EUR 2 000 or more should be laid down. Member States should consider applying this threshold to the collection of winnings as well as wagering a stake. Providers of gambling services with physical premises (e.g. casinos and gaming houses) should ensure that customer due diligence, if it is taken at the point of entry to the premises, can be linked to the transactions conducted by the customre involved. Nevertheless, these games’ characteristics and the fact that they are particularly vulnerable to specific types of money laundering techniques must be taken into account. That is why specific appropriate procedures must be provided for each of the three categories of casinos, providers of online gambling services and other providers on those premisf gambling services.
Amendment 134 #
2013/0025(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13 a (new)
Recital 13 a (new)
(13a) The use of the sport sector to launder the proceeds of criminal activity is also of concern. Given the increasing amounts and the variety of money flows and financial transactions in this sector, as well as the opaque networks of stakeholders and interdependence between the different actors which is an impediment to establish the identity of the beneficial owners, legal and natural persons involved in professional sport should be subject to the provisions of this Directive.
Amendment 149 #
2013/0025(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) for providers of gambling services, when carrying out occasional transactions amounting to EUR 2 000 or more, whether the transaction is carried out in a single operation or in several operations which appear to be linkedwhereby either or both the winnings or the stakes amount to EUR 2 000 or more;
Amendment 190 #
2013/0025(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point f
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point f
(f) providers of gambling servicecasinos.
Amendment 198 #
2013/0025(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point f a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point f a (new)
(fa) providers of online gambling services;
Amendment 199 #
2013/0025(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point f b (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point f b (new)
(fb) other providers of gambling services.
Amendment 200 #
2013/0025(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point f a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point f a (new)
(fa) natural or legal persons involved in professional sport, in particular sport organisations, clubs and sport managers, sportsmen and sportswomen and players' agents.
Amendment 232 #
2013/0025(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 44 – paragraph 3
Article 44 – paragraph 3
3. In respect of the obliged entities referred to in Article 2(1)(3) (a), (b), (d), (e) and (eg), Member States shall ensure that competent authorities take the necessary measures to prevent criminals or their associates from holding or being the beneficial owner of a significant or controlling interest, or holding a management function in those obliged entities.
Amendment 295 #
2013/0025(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) for providers of gambling servicecasinos, when carrying out occasional transactions amounting to EUR 2 000 or more, whether the transaction is carried out in a single operation or in several operations which appear to be linked; for on-line gambling when establishing the business relationship; for other providers of gambling services, when paying out winnings of EUR 3 000 or less;
Amendment 468 #
2013/0025(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 44 – paragraph 3
Article 44 – paragraph 3
3. 3. In respect of the obliged entities referred to in Article 2(1)(3) (a), (b), (d), (e) and (eg), Member States shall ensure that competent authorities take the necessary measures to prevent criminals or their associates from holding or being the beneficial owner of a significant or controlling interest, or holding a management function in those obliged entities.
Amendment 73 #
2012/2322(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
Ea. Whereas a sustainable financing model for the promotion of horseracing and sport and the organisation of sport events, on which bets are placed and gambling operators earn an income, must be ensured;
Amendment 124 #
2012/2322(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Calls on the Commission, in carrying out the ongoing infringement procedures and the analyses of national regulations, to recognise that Member States are allowed to ensure that a fair share of the benefits of gambling are directed towards the financing of professional and grass- roots sports and the equine sector; calls for the specific features and the sustainable contributions from lotteries to society to be recognised and taken into account in any coordinated approach at EU level;
Amendment 397 #
2012/2322(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Considers that establishing a legal link between sports event organisers and online gambling operators, with a view to exerting an ethical and financial control over bets that are placed on sports events, will help strengthen the integrity of sport;
Amendment 407 #
2012/2322(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 b (new)
Paragraph 18 b (new)
18b. Highlights the importance of the support of the European Union to the ongoing work within the Council of Europe towards the negotiation of an international Convention on the Protection and the promotion of sports integrity, and calls on the European Commission to propose a uniform definition of sports fraud as a criminal offence, which should be included in the law of all Member States;
Amendment 416 #
2012/2322(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 c (new)
Paragraph 18 c (new)
18c. Calls for the adoption at national level of effective measures in order to prevent conflicts of interests, notably by avoiding wagers of all stakeholders from the world of sports on bets organized on competitions in which they are involved; invites Member States to ban the most dangerous forms of betting, in particular betting exchanges and spread betting;
Amendment 1 #
2012/2295(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the world population will increase from 7 billion to more than 9 billion in 2050, resulting in a 70% increase in the demand for food and putting strong pressure on water reserves;
Amendment 58 #
2012/2295(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Considers it necessary to ensure that an integrated and interdisciplinary approach is taken to the bioeconomy and calls for the harmonisation of the different EU policies involved in its various sectors (Horizon 2020, cohesion policy, common agricultural policy, Renewable Energy Directive, Water Framework Directive, Waste Framework Directive, Packaging Directive, specific measures on biowaste) and the establishment of a uniform and stable regulatory environment both at EU level and nationallyto provide predictability for stakeholders both at EU level and nationally; calls for early legislative changes to be limited to a strict minimum, notably to changes promoting the development of the bioeconomy, such as reform of the scheme for trading in greenhouse gas emission allowances;
Amendment 92 #
2012/2295(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Calls on the Commission to promote measures to increase the availability of biomass for industrial purposes, preventing incentives for the transformation of biomass into energy from creating market distortions and reducing its availability for producers; in areas close to methanisation units; (Too often the biomass is transferred thousands of kilometres away from local methanisation units.)
Amendment 94 #
2012/2295(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Considers that, in keeping with the guidelines of the new European industrial policy strategy, the bioeconomy can make an important contribution to combating the process of de-industrialisation that is currently afflicting Europe and can help to reverse it by means of new strategies to stimulate the market and restore EU competitiveness; competitiveness to European industry by ensuring that European enterprises are ahead of their international competitors in the various sectors of tomorrow's green economy;
Amendment 23 #
2012/2258(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Encourages the Commission’s proposal to adopt the definition of active and healthy ageing, as formulated by the WHO; however, emphasises that active and healthy ageing encompasses the entire lifespan and that the particularities of the EU context should be part of the definition and more specifically the EU priorities in regard to healthy and ecologically sustainable environmental conditions, health prevention and awareness, physical exercise and health literacy and eHealth, food safety and adequate nutrition, gender equality, and sustainable socio-economic conditions, social security systems and social protection schemes;
Amendment 53 #
2012/2258(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Invites the Commission to apply a holistic approach in regard to prevention; points out the systematic correlation between socio-economic status and health outcomes throughout life; invites the Commission and the Member States to tackle structural issues and to eliminate socio-economic inequalities (which lead to health inequalities); further, questions the responsibility and pressure put on individuals to improve their health status, that is, without appropriately tackling structural issues, including health illiteracy; therefore, invites the Commission and the Member States to create structural conditions which tackle health inequalitiesregrets the lack of education programmes in the field of health and sport; calls on the Commission and Member States accordingly to take action to remedy health inequalities and encourage European citizens to take up sport as a means of improving public health and social cohesion at every age;
Amendment 59 #
2012/2258(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 c (new)
Paragraph 6 c (new)
6c. Stresses the importance of individual habits and daily choices (physical exercise, diet, etc) in preventing health problems;
Amendment 78 #
2012/2258(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Welcomes the Commission’s intention to implement individual case management schemes and care plans; however, while acknowledging that a client-/patient- centred approach is necessary, the cost for such an approach in terms of deploying trained care providers and utilizing appropriate ‘tools’, should not be solely attributed to the individual but should be considered as a societal responsibility, guaranteeing inter- and intra-generational solidarity;
Amendment 104 #
2012/2258(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Supports the Commission’s aim towards the creation of age-friendly environments so as to avoid older people’s potential and (remaining) capacities being hindered by their surroundings; however,stresses the importance of adapting the physical surroundings of the elderly with a view to preventing domestic accidents; calls on the Commission and Council to ensure that the elderly are eligible for European funding for home conversion ; stresses that these surroundings should also be understood in a broad context, not only incorporating the built environment but also the social, psychological, cultural and natural environment; (Home conversion remains the best means of preventing domestic accidents which can cause serious disability, result in heavy costs to public services and families and make it harder to ensure active ageing in good health; the value of such an initiative can be easily assessed and its impact on existing homes will help achieve the objective of two more years of life in good health by 2020.)
Amendment 16 #
2012/2103(INI)
Draft opinion
Section 1 – paragraph 2
Section 1 – paragraph 2
2. Finds it regrettable that the Commission has based all decarbonisation scenarios on the assumption of global climate action and has not carried out any analysis to identify the EU's ambitions in the event that global action is delayed; also regrets that the Commission has omitted to look into a scenario based on high levels of efficiency and renewable energy, which would be the most resilient to a higher oil price;
Amendment 28 #
2012/2103(INI)
Draft opinion
Section 1 – paragraph 3
Section 1 – paragraph 3
3. Supports the conclusion that decarbonisation of the EU by 2050 is feasible and will require high levels of investments; calls on the Commission to create clarity and stability for investors by reducing over-regulation and by setting a clear, technology-neutral goalambitious and binding targets for emissions reductions, efficiency and renewable energy, based on a high efficiency and renewables scenario for 2030;
Amendment 41 #
2012/2103(INI)
Draft opinion
Section 1 – paragraph 4
Section 1 – paragraph 4
4. Calls on the Commission to propose a clear 2030 goal by setting a singlen ambitious target for CO2 reduction which takes into account renewable energy and efficiency targets; reiterates the need to at the minimum meet the milestones for emission reduction stated in the low-carbon roadmap and to put forward all needed measureppropriate levels for the various targets promptly;
Amendment 54 #
2012/2103(INI)
Draft opinion
Section 1 – paragraph 5
Section 1 – paragraph 5
5. Calls on the Commission to develop sound ways of financing the energy transition, including a strengthened ETS, innovation initiatives such as Horizon 2020, an increased involvement of the EIB in the finance of renewable energy and energy efficiency projects and market- based mechanisms;
Amendment 56 #
2012/2066(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Takes the view that the feared effects of endocrine disruptors are so serious that the absence of precise knowledge, including exact knowledge of causal links, should not prevent us – without overstepping the proportionality principle – from taking measures to protect humans and animals;
Amendment 91 #
2012/2066(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Calls on the Commission to introduce in all relevant EU legislation appropriate testing requirements for the identification of substances with endocrine-disrupting properties; considers that the validated and internationally recognised testing methods that have been developed in (for example) the OECD must be implemented; notes that the OECD programme of testing methods covers sex hormones and thyroid hormones as well as steroidogenesis; points out, on the other hand, that there are no tests for other areas of the endocrine system, e.g. insulin and growth hormones; considers that testing methods and guidance documents should be developed so as to take better account of endocrine disruptors, possible combination and low-dose effects and non- monotonic dose-response relationships;
Amendment 107 #
2012/2066(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Calls on the Commission, in its review of EU strategy on endocrine disruptors, to place greater emphasis on the precautionary principle and, observing the proportionality principle, to work towards reducing human exposure to endocrine disruptors;
Amendment 116 #
2012/2066(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Calls on the Commission to carry out a systematic examination of all relevant current legislation and, where necessary, to propose new legislation so as to reduce the exposure of human beings, particularly foetuses, babies, children and teenagers, to hormone disruptors, following the example of the ban on the use of bisphenol A in the manufacture of babies’ feeding- bottles; calls on the Commission to submit legislative proposals for chemicals in textiles and building materials, and stresses in particular the importance of reviewing legislation on materials and products intended to come into contact with food, so as to reduce human exposure to endocrine disruptors;
Amendment 10 #
2012/2043(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Welcomes the inclusion of a European Animal Welfare Framework Law in the Strategy; reiterates that such a Framework Law should be based on up-to-date validated science and should cover all animals, whether domesticated or stray, as well as invasive alien species, and fish;
Amendment 18 #
2012/2043(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Urges the Commission, where there is clear scientific evidence demonstrating animal welfare problems and where economically justified and financially attainable solutions can be found, to adapt or introduce new policy instruments to resolve these problems, including the cases of dairy cattle, farmed fish and live animal transport;
Amendment 28 #
2012/2043(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses that the list of actions included in the Strategy mustcould include:
Amendment 53 #
2012/2043(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls on the Commission to adopt an EU-wide strategy for the development and use of alternative non-animal testing methods, in the context of the revision of EU legislation and of new technologies; points out, however, that consumer safety must remain the priority;
Amendment 68 #
2012/0366(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) In accordance with Article 114(3) of the Treaty of the Functioning of the European Union (hereinafter: "Treaty"), a high level of health protection should be taken as a basis, regard being had, in particular, to any new developments based on scientific facts. Tobacco products are not ordinary commodities and in view of the particularly harmful effects of tobacco, health protection should be given high importance, in particular to reduce smoking prevalence among young people. In accordance with the principle of producer responsibility, manufacturers of tobacco products should therefore be made responsible for all health costs arising as a consequence of tobacco consumption.
Amendment 93 #
2012/0366(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 41 a (new)
Recital 41 a (new)
(41a) Member States should supplement the legislative provisions of this Directive with any measures that are useful to help protect the health of European citizens. The gradual harmonisation of the taxation of tobacco products in the Union and information campaigns in the media and for young people in educational institutions are two essential tools in combating the dangers of smoking among young people.
Amendment 94 #
2012/0366(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 14 a (new)
Recital 14 a (new)
(14a) In order to protect human health, the safety of additives for use in tobacco products should be assessed (risk assessment) and they should receive authorisation from the Commission prior to being marketed in the Community. Additives should only then be permitted for use in tobacco products if they are included in an EU list of authorised additives.
Amendment 95 #
2012/0366(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 41 b (new)
Recital 41 b (new)
(41b) The Member States should cover the health costs related to tobacco consumption by a tax levied directly on tobacco products;
Amendment 153 #
2012/0366(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 23 a (new)
Recital 23 a (new)
(23a) Tobacco products have been shown to contain and emit many noxious substances and known carcinogens hazardous to human health when burnt. Scientific studies have clearly proven that passive smoking is a cause of death, illness and disability and that passive smoking is dangerous in particular to unborn children and infants. It can cause or aggravate respiratory problems in persons inhaling smoke. The health warnings should therefore also draw attention to the dangers to health of passive smoking.
Amendment 240 #
2012/0366(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 41 a (new)
Recital 41 a (new)
(41a) Member States shall supplement the legal provisions of this Directive with any measures to protect the health of European citizens. The gradual harmonisation of the taxation of tobacco products in the Union and information campaigns in the media and for young people in educational institutions are two essential tools in protecting young people against the dangers of smoking.
Amendment 422 #
2012/0366(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. First and foremost, Member States shall examine tobacco product ingredients so as to assess the need to take measures under Regulations (EC) No 1907/2006 (REACH) and (EC) No 1272/2008 (CLP). On the basis of those examinations, and taking account of the precautionary principle, Member States shall submit scientific dossiers to the European Chemicals Agency, in particular pursuant to Articles 59(3) and 69(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 and Article 37(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008. Member States shall report regularly to the Commission on the measures under examination in connection with tobacco product ingredients and on the steps which they have taken, where appropriate, on that basis. Every three years, the Commission shall publish a report on the progress made by Member States in this connection.
Amendment 425 #
2012/0366(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
The list shall be accompanied by a statement setting out the reasons for the inclusion of such ingredients in those tobacco products. The list shall indicate their status, including whether the ingredients have been registered under Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) as well as their classification under Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on classification, labelling and packaging of substances and mixtures. The list shall also be accompanied by the toxicological data available to the manufacturer or importer regarding these ingredients in burnt or unburnt form as appropriate, referring in particular to their effects on health of consumers and taking into account, inter alia, any addictive effects. The list shall be established in descending order of the weight of each ingredient included in the product. Within one year following the entry into force of this Directive, manufacturers and importers of tobacco products shall submit the list of ingredients and all the accompanying information referred to above. Member States shall penalise manufacturers and importers of tobacco products who fail to submit that list and the accompanying information by the time limit. Other than for tar, nicotine and carbon monoxide and for emissions referred to in Article 4 paragraph 4, the manufacturers and importers shall indicate the measurement methods used. Member States may also require manufacturers or importers to carry out other tests as may be laid down by the competent national authorities in order to assess the effects of substances on health, taking into account, inter alia, their addictiveness and toxicity.
Amendment 601 #
2012/0366(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 6
Article 7 – paragraph 6
6. Member States shall notmay increase the size of the health warnings including by introduction of an obligation to surround the health warnings by a border. The actual size of the health warnings shall be calculated in relation to the surface on which they are placed before the unit packet is opened.
Amendment 668 #
2012/0366(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) cover 750 % of the external area of both the front and back surface of the unit packet and any outside packaging;
Amendment 801 #
2012/0366(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
This tobacco product canis damageing to your health and is addictive
Amendment 1257 #
2012/0366(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 19 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 19 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
This product can damages your health.
Amendment 1354 #
2012/0366(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex 1 – point 14 b (new)
Annex 1 – point 14 b (new)
(14 b) Smoking during pregnancy causes premature birth
Amendment 1355 #
2012/0366(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex 1 – point 14 c (new)
Annex 1 – point 14 c (new)
(14 c) Children that are forced to smoke passive are more vulnerable to asthma and meningitis
Amendment 176 #
2012/0305(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point b
b) persons who install, service, maintain, repair or decommission high-voltage electrical switchgear that contains SF6 in systems which are not hermetically sealed;
Amendment 225 #
2012/0305(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. By 1 January 2018 the Commission shall determine whether an effective, reliable alternative exists which will enable SF6 to be replaced, at a reasonable cost, in new medium-voltage secondary switchgear and whether the use of SF6 in new equipment can be prohibited;
Amendment 240 #
2012/0305(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
3. The use of fluorinated greenhouse gases, or of mixtures that contain fluorinated greenhouse gases, with a global warming potential of 2500 or more, to service or maintain refrigeration equipment designed to operate at a temperature of 50°C or more with a charge size equivalent to 540 tonnes of CO2 or more, shall be prohibited from 1 January 20205, unless the gases have been recovered or recycled.
Amendment 265 #
2012/0305(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission shall ensure, where alternatives which are reliable and technically and economically viable and are designed to operate in the different climatic conditions of the Member States are available, that the quantity of hydrofluorocarbons that producers and importers are entitled to place on the market in the Union each year does not exceed the maximum quantity for the year in question calculated in accordance with Annex V. Each producer and importer shall ensure that the quantity of hydrofluorocarbons calculated in accordance with Annex V that it places on the market does not exceed the quota allocated to it pursuant to Article 14(5) or transferred to it pursuant to Article 16.
Amendment 273 #
2012/0305(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – point a
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – point a
(a) amending the maximum quantities set out in Annex V in the light of developments of the market in hydrofluorocarbons and related emissions, as long as a feasible, reliable, technically and economically viable alternative exists on the market, taking into account the different climatic conditions of the Member States; and
Amendment 88 #
2012/0297(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) The environmental report of a project to be provided by the developer should include an assessment of reasonable alternatives relevant to the proposed project, including the likely evolution of the existing state of the environment without implementation of the project (baseline scenario), as a means to improve quality of the assessment process and to allow integrating environmental considerations at an early stage in the project’s design.
Amendment 106 #
2012/0297(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 1 – point a
Article 1 – point 1 – point a
Directive 2011/92/EU
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent 1
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent 1
Amendment 137 #
2012/0297(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 2
Article 1 – point 2
Directive 2011/92/EU
Article 2 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 2 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
3. PIn the case of projects for which the obligation to carry out assessments of the effects on the environment arises simultaneously from this Directive and other Union legislation shall be subject toMember States shall seek to introduce coordinated or joint procedures fulfilling the requirements of the relevant Union legislation where this seems appropriate.
Amendment 151 #
2012/0297(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 2
Article 1 – point 2
Directive 2011/92/EU
Article 2 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 4
Article 2 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 4
Amendment 166 #
2012/0297(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 3
Article 1 – point 3
Directive 2011/92/EU
Article 3 – point a
Article 3 – point a
(a) population, human health, and biodiversity, with particular attention to species and habitats protected under Council Directive 92/43/EEC(*) and Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Councilhuman beings, fauna and flora;
Amendment 171 #
2012/0297(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 3
Article 1 – point 3
2011/92/EG
Article 3 – point b
Article 3 – point b
(b) land, soil, water, air and, climate changand the landscape;
Amendment 180 #
2012/0297(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 3
Article 1 – point 3
Directive 2011/92/EU
Article 3 – point c
Article 3 – point c
(c) material assets, and the cultural heritage and the landscape;
Amendment 193 #
2012/0297(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 4 – point a
Article 1 – point 4 – point a
3. For projects listed in Annex II, the developer shall, where necessary and appropriate, provide information on the characteristics of the project, its potential impact on the environment and the measures envisaged in order to avoid and reduce significant effects. The detailed list of information to be provided is specified in Annex II.A.
Amendment 207 #
2012/0297(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 4 – point a
Article 1 – point 4 – point a
Directive 2011/92/EU
Article 4 – paragraph 4
Article 4 – paragraph 4
4. When a case-by-case examination is carried out or thresholds or criteria are set for the purpose of paragraph 2, the competent authority shall, where necessary, take account of selection criteria related to the characteristics and location of the project and its potential impact on the environment. The detailed list of selection criteria to be used is specified in Annex III.
Amendment 212 #
2012/0297(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 4 – point b
Article 1 – point 4 – point b
Directive 2011/92/EU
Article 4 – paragraph 5 – introductory part
Article 4 – paragraph 5 – introductory part
5. The competent authority shall make its decision pursuant to paragraph 2, on the basis of the information provided by the developer and taking into account, where relevant, the results of studies with which it is familiar, preliminary verifications or assessments of the effects on the environment arising from other Union legislation. The decision pursuant to paragraph 2 shall:
Amendment 215 #
2012/0297(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 4 – point b
Article 1 – point 4 – point b
Directive 2011/92/EU
Article 4 – paragraph 5 – point a
Article 4 – paragraph 5 – point a
Amendment 242 #
2012/0297(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 5
Article 1 – point 5
Directive 2011/92/EU
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1
1. Where an environmental impact assessment must be carried out in accordance with Articles 5 to 10, the developer shall prepare an environmental report. The environmental report shall be based on the determination pursuant to paragraph 2 of this Article and include the information that may reasonably be required for making informed decisions on the environmental impacts of the proposed project, taking into account current knowledge and methods of assessment, the characteristics, technical capacity and location of the project, the characteristics of the potential impact, reasonable alternatives to the proposed projectconsidered by the developer which, taking into account the specific features of the project, could achieve its main objectives to the same extent, and the extent to which certain matters (including the evaluation of alternatives) are more appropriately assessed at different levels including the planning level, or on the basis of other assessment requirements. The detailed list of information to be provided in the environmental report is specified in Annex IV.
Amendment 254 #
2012/0297(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 5
Article 1 – point 5
Directive 2011/92/EU
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
2. The competent authority, after having consulted the authorities referred to in Article 6(1) and the developer, shall determine the scope and level of detail of the information to be included by the developer in the environmental report, in accordance with paragraph 1 of this Article, if the operator asks for this. In particular, it shall determininclude:
Amendment 275 #
2012/0297(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 5
Article 1 – point 5
Directive 2011/92/EU
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point d
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point d
(d) reasonable alternatives relevant to the proposed project and itsdefined in paragraph 1 and their specific characteristics;
Amendment 296 #
2012/0297(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 5
Article 1 – point 5
(a) the developer shall ensure that the environmental report is prepared by accredited and technically competent experts orpersons, who have the required level of expertise and/or experience (experts in the field),
Amendment 306 #
2012/0297(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 5
Article 1 – point 5
Directive 2011/92/EU
Article 5 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 5 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) if deemed necessary due to obvious technical deficiencies in the environmental report, the competent authority shall ensure that the environmental report is verified by accredited and technically competent expertsons and/or expert committees of national experts.
Amendment 322 #
2012/0297(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 5
Article 1 – point 5
Directive 2011/92/EU
Article 5 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Where accredited and technically competent experts assisted the competent authority to prepare the determination referred to in Article 5(2), the same experts shall not be used by the developer for the preparation of the environmental report.
Amendment 324 #
2012/0297(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 5
Article 1 – point 5
Directive 2011/92/EU
Article 5 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
Article 5 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
Amendment 359 #
2012/0297(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 8
Article 1 – point 8
Directive 2011/92/EU
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) ) the main reasons for choosing the project as adopted, in the light of the other alternatives considered, including the likely evolution of the existing state of the environment without implementation of the project (baseline scenario);
Amendment 372 #
2012/0297(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 8
Article 1 – point 8
Directive 2011/92/EU
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
1. If the consultations and the information gathered pursuant to Articles 5, 6 and 7 conclude that a project will have significant adverse environmental effects, the competent authority shall, as early as possible and in close cooperation, discuss with the authorities referred to in Article 6(1) and the developer, shall consider whether the environmental report referred to in Article 5(1) should be revised and the project modified to avoid or reduce these adverse effects and whether additional mitigation or compensation measures are needed under the relevant law.
Amendment 377 #
2012/0297(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 8
Article 1 – point 8
Directive 2011/92/EU
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
If the competent authority decides to grant development consent, it shall, in accordance with the relevant legislation, ensure that the development consent includes measures to monitor the significant adverse environmental effects, in order to assess the implementation and the expected effectiveness of mitigation and compensation measures, and to identify any unforeseeable adverse effects.
Amendment 383 #
2012/0297(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 8
Article 1 – point 8
Directive 2011/92/EU
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
Amendment 387 #
2012/0297(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 8
Article 1 – point 8
Directive 2011/92/EU
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 4
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 4
Amendment 404 #
2012/0297(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 8
Article 1 – point 8
Amendment 436 #
2012/0297(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 11
Article 1 – point 11
Directive 2011/92/EU
Articles 12 a and 12b
Articles 12 a and 12b
Amendment 455 #
2012/0297(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3
Article 3
Projects for which the request for development consent was introduced before the date referred to in the first subparagraph of Article 2(1) and for which the environmental impact assessment has not been concluded before that date shall be subject to the obligations referred to in Articles 3 to 11 of Directive 2011/92/EU as amended by this D, pending entry into force of the amended directive.
Amendment 478 #
2012/0297(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex – point 1
Annex – point 1
Directive 2011/92/EU
Annex II.A
Annex II.A
Amendment 507 #
2012/0297(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex – point 2
Annex – point 2
Directive 2011/92/EU
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point g
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) impacts of the project on climate change (in terms of greenhouse gas emissions including from land use, land- use change and forestry)the local climate, contribution of the project to an improved resilience, and the impacts of climate change on the project (e.g. if the project is coherent with a changing climate);
Amendment 554 #
2012/0297(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex – point 2
Annex – point 2
Directive 2011/92/EU
Annex IV – paragraph 2
Annex IV – paragraph 2
2. A descriptionn outline of the technical, locational or other aspects (e.g. in terms of project design, technical capacity, size and scale) of the alternatives considered, including by the identification of the least environmentally impacting one,veloper and an indication of the main reasons for the choice made, particularly taking into account the environmental effects.
Amendment 555 #
2012/0297(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex – point 2
Annex – point 2
Directive 2011/92/EU
Annex IV – paragraph 2
Annex IV – paragraph 2
2. A description, of the technical, locational or other aspects (e.g. in terms of project design, technical capacity, size and scale) of the alternatives considered, including by the identification of the least environmentally impacting one,veloper and an indication of the main reasons for the choice made, taking into account the environmental effects.
Amendment 560 #
2012/0297(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex – point 2
Annex – point 2
Directive 2011/92/EU
Annex IV – paragraph 3
Annex IV – paragraph 3
3. A description of the relevant aspects of the existing state of the environment and the likely evolution thereof without implementation of the project (baseline scenario). This description should cover any existing environmental problems relevant to the project, including, in particular, those relating to any areas of a particular environmental importance and the use of natural resources.
Amendment 80 #
2012/0288(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) Article 3(4) of Directive 2009/28/EC on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable energy sources and amending and subsequently repealing Directives 2001/777/EC and 2003/30/EC requires Member States to ensure that the share of energy from renewable energy sources in all forms of transport in 2020 is at least 10% of their final energy consumption. The blending of biofuels is one of the methods available for Member States to meet this target, and is expected to be the main contributor. However, in the light of new findings about the value-for-money aspect of biofuels, their development – and therefore the percentage of fuel which must, by 2020, be derived from renewable sources – should be scaled back. The Commission will have to assess whether additional measures are needed in order to meet the 20% target for renewable energy as a proportion of overall EU energy consumption.
Amendment 113 #
2012/0288(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) Based on forecasts of biofuel demand provided by the Member States and estimates of indirect land-use change emissions for different biofuel feedstocks it is likely that greenhouse gas emissions linked to indirect land use change are significant, and could negate some or all of the greenhouse gas savings of individual biofuels. This is because almost the entire biofuel production in 2020 is expected to come from crops grown on land that could be used to satisfy food and feed markets. In order to reduce such emissions, it is appropriate to distinguish between crop groups such as oil crops, cereals, sugars and other starch containing crops accordingly. New types of advanced biofuel unrelated to food crops, such as ligno-cellulosic residues, should also be developed.
Amendment 126 #
2012/0288(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) Liquid renewable fuels are likely to be required by the transport sector in order to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions. Advanced biofuels, such as those made from wastes and algae, provide high greenhouse gas savings with low risk of causing indirect land use change and do not compete directly for agricultural land for the food and feed markets. It is appropriate, therefore, to encourage greater production of such advanced biofuels as these are currently not commercially available in large quantities, in part due to competition for public subsidies with established food crop based biofuel technologies. Further incentives should be provided by increasing the weighting of advanced biofuels towards 10% target for transport set in Directive 2009/28/EC compared to conventional biofuels. In this context, oEstablishing progressively more ambitious mandatory targets for advanced biofuels will send a clear signal of support for them at Union level. Mandatory targets for advanced biofuels should thus be established according to a timetable so as to offer investors stability and allow them to plan ahead. Only advanced biofuels with low estimated indirect land use change impacts and high overall greenhouse gas savings should be supported as part of the post 2020 renewable energy policy framework.
Amendment 174 #
2012/0288(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) The 5% limit set up in Article 3(4)d does not affect the Member States'’ freedom to arrange their own trajectory as to compliance with this prescribed share of conventional biofuels within the overall 10% target for the percentage of fuel that has to be derived from renewable sources. As a consequence, the access to the market of the biofuels produced by the installations in operation before the end of 2013 remains fully open. Therefore this amending directive does not affect the legitimate expectations of the operators of such installations.
Amendment 213 #
2012/0288(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) In order to permit adaptation to technical and scientific progress of Directive 2009/28/EC, 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 the list of biofuel feedstocks that are counted multiple times towards the target set in Article 3(4), the energy content of transport fuels, criteria and geographic ranges for determining highly biodiverse grassland, the methodology for the calculation of indirect land-use change emissions, and the methodological principles and values necessary for assessing whether sustainability criteria have been fulfilled in relation to biofuels and bioliquids.
Amendment 282 #
2012/0288(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 3 – point a
Article 1 – point 3 – point a
Directive 98/70/EC
Article 7d – paragraph 6
Article 7d – paragraph 6
6. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts pursuant to Article 10a concerning the adaptation to technical and scientific progress of Annex V, including by the revision of the proposed crop group indirect land-use change values; the introduction of new values at further levels of disaggregation; the inclusion of additional values should new biofuel feedstocks come to market as appropriate, review the categories of which biofuels are assigned zero indirect land-use change emissions; and the development of factors for feedstocks from non-food cellulosic and ligno-cellulosic materials.' As far as possible, these delegated acts shall favour the development of innovative and efficient technologies responding to the environmental challenges.’
Amendment 333 #
2012/0288(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – point 2 – point c – point -i (new)Directive 2009/28/EC
Article 2 – point 2 – point c – point -i (new)Directive 2009/28/EC
Article 3 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
-i) The first subparagraph is replaced by the following: ‘4. Each Member State shall ensure that the share of energy from renewable sources in all forms of transport in 2020 is at least 8 % of final consumption of energy in transport in that Member State.’
Amendment 337 #
2012/0288(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – point 2 – point c – point -i (new)Directive 2009/28/EC
Article 2 – point 2 – point c – point -i (new)Directive 2009/28/EC
Article 3 – paragraph 4 – subparagraphs 1 a and 1 b (new)
-i) the following subparagraphs are inserted after the first subparagraph: ‘In 2020, at least 2% of the final consumption of energy in transport shall be met with energy from advanced biofuels. In 2025, at least 4% of the final consumption of energy in transport shall be met with energy from advanced biofuels.’
Amendment 369 #
2012/0288(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – point 2 – point c – point iii
Article 2 – point 2 – point c – point iii
Directive 2009/28/EC
Article 3 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2 – point e
Article 3 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2 – point e
Amendment 472 #
2012/0288(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3
Article 3
The Commission shall, before 31 December 2017, submit a report to the European Parliament and to the Council reviewing, on the basis of the best latest available scientific evidence, the effectiveness of the measures introduced by this Directive in limiting indirect land- use change greenhouse gas emissions associated with the production of biofuel and bioliquids. The report shall, if appropriate, be accompanied by a legislative proposal based on the best available scientific evidence, for introducing estimated indirect land use change emissions factors into the appropriate sustainability criteria to be applied from 1st January 2021 and a review of the effectiveness of the incentives provided for biofuels from non- land using feedstocks and non-food crops under Article 3(4)d of Directive 2009/28/EC.
Amendment 524 #
2012/0288(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex II – point 3
Annex II – point 3
Directive 2009/28/CE
Annex IX
Annex IX
Amendment 140 #
2012/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Where a genetic resource has been incorporated into a new plant variety that has been placed on the market, the requirements set out in paragraphs 1 to 3 shall not apply to users of that new plant variety. The requirements applicable to the first user incorporating the genetic resource are therefore waived.
Amendment 65 #
2012/0202(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Directive 2003/87/EC
Article 10 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Article 10 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
In the first subparagraph of Article 10(4) of Directive 2003/87/EC the following sentence is added: "Tis added: "Where an assessment shows for the individual industrial sectors that no significant impact on sectors or subsectors exposed to a significant risk of carbon leakage is to be expected or subject to EU policy measures being proposed with a view to compensating the potential increase of indirect costs, the Commission shallmay, where appropriate, adapt the timetable for eachthe period so as to ensure an orderly functioning of the market." referred to in Article 13(1) beginning on 1 January 2013 for a maximum number of 900 million allowances. The Commission shall make only one such adaptation until the year 2020."
Amendment 35 #
2012/0190(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) In recognition of the disproportionate impacts on the smallest manufacturers resulting from compliance with specific emissions targets defined on the basis of the utility of the vehicle, high administrative burden of the derogation procedure and only marginal benefit in terms of avoided CO2 from the vehicles sold by these manufacturers, producers responsible annually for less than 51 000 new passenger cars are excluded from the scope of the specific emissions target and the excess emissions premium.
Amendment 46 #
2012/0190(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) To enable the automotive industry to carry out long-term investments and innovation it is desirable to provide indications of how this Regulation should be amended for the period beyond 2020. These indications should be based on an assessment of the necessary rate of reduction in line with the Union's long term climate goals and the implications for the development of cost effective CO2 reducing technology for cars. It is therefore desirable for these aspects to be reviewed, t as soon as the new test procedures have been laid down and a better insight has been gained into ongoing technological developments. The Commission towill then make a report and, if appropriate, make proposals made for targets beyond 2020.
Amendment 81 #
2012/0190(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 2
Article 1 – point 2
Regulation 2009/443/EC
Article 2 – paragraph 4
Article 2 – paragraph 4
4. Article 4, Article 8(4)(b) and (c), Article 9 and Article 10(1)(a) and (c) shall not apply to a manufacturer which is responsible together with all of its connected undertakings for less than 51 000 new passenger cars registered in the EU in the previous calendar year.
Amendment 150 #
2012/0190(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 10 – point c
Article 1 – point 10 – point c
Regulation 2009/443/EC
Article 13 – paragraph 5
Article 13 – paragraph 5
5. By 31 December 20147, the Commission shall review the specific emissions targets, modalities and other aspects of this Regulation in order to establish the CO2 emission targets for new passenger cars for the period beyond 2020.”
Amendment 21 #
2012/0066(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) The existing exemption for that use should continue to apply until 31 December 20158 in order to enable industry to furtherproducers, the recycling industry and the consumers concerned to adapt to the relevant substitute technologies across all the regions of the Union in a uniform manner.
Amendment 35 #
2012/0066(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 1
Article 1 – point 1
Directive 2006/66/CE
Article 4 – paragraph 3 – point c
Article 4 – paragraph 3 – point c
(c) cordless power tools, until 31 December 20158.
Amendment 70 #
2012/0042(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) The Union land use, land use change and forestry (‘LULUCF’) sector is a net sink that removes from the atmosphere greenhouse gasses in an amount equivalent to a significant share of total Union emissions. It results in anthropogenic emissions and removals of greenhouse gases as a consequence of changes in the quantity of carbon stored in vegetation and soils. The increased sustainable use of harvested wood products can substantially limit emissions and enhance removals from the atmosphere. Emissions and removals of greenhouse gases resulting from the LULUCF sector are not counted towards the Union's 20 % greenhouse gas emission reduction targets for 2020 pursuant to Decision No 406/2009/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the efforts of Member States to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions to meet the Community's greenhouse gas emission reduction commitments up to 202020 and Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 October 2003 establishing a scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community and amending Council Directive 96/61/EC21 , though they count in part towards the Union's quantified emission limitation and reduction target pursuant to Article 3(3) of the Kyoto Protocol (‘Kyoto Protocol’) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (‘UNFCCC’), approved by Council Decision 2002/358/EC22 .
Amendment 71 #
2012/0042(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Recital 1 a (new)
Recital 1 a (new)
(1a) In accordance with the Roadmap for moving to a competitive low carbon economy in 2050, it is necessary to consider all land uses in a holistic manner and to address LULUCF within the Union's climate policy.
Amendment 82 #
2012/0042(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) The 17th Conference of the Parties of the UNFCCC, meeting in Durban in December 2011, adopted Decision - /CMP.7 of the Conference of the Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol (‘Decision -/CMP.7’). That decision set out rules for accounting for the LULUCF sector as of a second commitment period under the Kyoto Protocol. This Decision should be fully in line with that decision to ensure an appropriate level of coherence between the Union's internal rules and methodologies agreed within the UNFCCC. This Decision should also reflect the particularities of the Union LULUCF sector.
Amendment 93 #
2012/0042(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) The LULUCF accounting rules should reflect efforts made in the agriculture and forestry sectors to enhance the contribution of changes made to the use of land resources to the reduction of emissions. This Decision should provide for accounting rules applicable on a mandatory basis to the forestry activities of afforestation, reforestation, deforestation and forest management, and to the agricultural activities of grazing land management and cropland management. It should also provide for accounting rules applicable on a voluntary basis to revegetation and, wetland drainage and rewetting activities, and the agricultural activities of grazing land management and cropland management.
Amendment 100 #
2012/0042(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Recital 5 a (new)
Recital 5 a (new)
(5a) Accounting rules based on Decision 2/CMP.7, and Decision 16/CMP.1 do not allow for accounting the substitution effect of using harvested wood products for energy and material purposes, since this would lead to double accounting. However, these are important contributions of forestry to climate change mitigation. For this reason, and for informative purposes, Member States may calculate emissions avoided through substitution effects of forest management. This would increase policy coherence.
Amendment 128 #
2012/0042(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) 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 to update the definitions laid down in Article 2 in the light of changes to definitions adopted by the bodies of the UNFCCC or the Kyoto Protocol or other multilateral agreement relevant to climate change concluded by the Union, to amend Annex I to add accounting periods and ensure consistency between those accounting periods and the relevant periods applicable to Union emission reduction commitments in other sectors, to amend Annex II with updated reference levels in accordance with the proposed reference levels submitted by Member States pursuant to Article 6 subject to corrections made in accordance with this Decision, to revise the information specified in Annex III in accordance with scientific progress and to revise the conditions relating to the accounting rules for natural disturbances laid down in Article 9(2) in the light of scientific progress or to reflect revisions to acts adopted by the UNFCCC or Kyoto Protocol bodies. It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert levels of the involved sectors. The Commission, when preparing and drawing-up delegated acts, should ensure a simultaneous, timely and appropriate transmission of relevant documents to the European Parliament and Council.
Amendment 233 #
2012/0042(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 7 – paragraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 1
1. Harvested wood products as such shall not be considered as emissions of greenhouse gas. Member States shall reflect in their accounts pursuant to Article 3(1) emissions from harvested wood products containing carbon on 1 January 2013 even where such harvested wood products were harvested prior to this date.
Amendment 243 #
2012/0042(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 7 – paragraph 4
Article 7 – paragraph 4
4. Where Member States reflect in their accounts emissions resulting from harvested wood products that were harvested for energy purposes, they shall do so also on the basis of the instantaneous oxidation method. For informative purposes, the emissions avoided through the use of this biomass may be calculated.
Amendment 267 #
2012/0042(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
No later than six months after the beginning of each accounting period specified in Annex I, Member States shall draw up and transmit to the Commission draft LULUCF Action Plans to limit or reduce emissions and maintain or increase removals resulting from the activities referred to in Article 3(1). Member States shall ensure that a broad range ofinterested stakeholders are consulted. LULUCF action plans are meant to be understood as an integral part of the national low carbon development strategies.
Amendment 274 #
2012/0042(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
An ad hoc working group of experts shall be constituted in order to assist the Commission in the evaluation of the national action plans.
Amendment 326 #
2012/0042(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Annex IV – point g – indent 5
Annex IV – point g – indent 5
– increasing the harvested wood products pool. Wood products derived from harvested timber are also significant carbon pools, wooden material should be seen as substitute for energy-intensive materials. Increasing the use of harvested wood products should be supported in construction, renovation and in public procurement;
Amendment 38 #
2011/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas any type of fossil fuel and mineral extraction involves potential risks for the environment; whereas it is essential that athe precautionary principle and, if necessary, the ‘polluter pays’ principle, be applied to any future development of resources in Europe in order to minimise such risks via continuous research, proper management, regulation and monitoring at all stages of the exploration and exploitation process and in cases where pollution occurs;
Amendment 83 #
2011/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Recognises that industry bears primary responsibility for preventing and, where necessary, reacting to accidents; welcomes the progress made by the industry in setting high environmental and safety standards; stresses the importance of monitoring the industry’s compliance by means of regular inspections carried out by trained specialists; considers that, in cases of environmental pollution, the ‘polluter pays’ principle should apply;
Amendment 104 #
2011/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Recognises the relatively high water volumes involved in hydraulic fracturing; points out, however, that such volumes are not as significant in comparison to the needs of other industrial activities; highlights the need for strategic consideration of the water resources and requirements of citizens and various local economic operators as well as advance water provision plans based on local hydrology;
Amendment 126 #
2011/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Believes thatCalls for water recycling, as far as possible, to be carried out in an on-site closed-loop water recyclingsystem, using steel storage tanks, which offers the most environmentally sound way of treating flow-back water by minimising water volumes, the potential for surface spills and costs/traffic/road damage relating to water treatment transportation;
Amendment 157 #
2011/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Recognises that drilling activities could temporarily worsen living conditions and calls, therefore, for this issue to be taken into account at the time of the necessary authorisation for the sourcing and exploitation of hydrocarbon resources and for all the necessary measures to be taken, in particular by the industry, to minimise the adverse consequences of such activities;
Amendment 21 #
2011/2297(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas trends in water use are often unsustainable due to inefficient practices resulting in water wastage, and whereas water infrastructure systems are often outdated, whether in the most developed regions or in the less developed regions, and there is a lack of information about actual performance and losses;
Amendment 49 #
2011/2297(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses that the efficiency and sustainability of water use by the agriculture sector can be improved by the introduction of innovative technologies and practices; recognises that with regard to the challenges of climate change and food security, adequate water resources must be mobilised for agriculture, for example, by developing water storage;
Amendment 91 #
2011/2297(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Stresses the need for better consistency and better integration of water-related objectives into the legislation at the EU, national and regional levels; calls for a full evaluation of the effects on water resources to be taken into account in the design of the common agricultural policy and cohesion policy frameworks, in order to achieve a thematic concentration of available financing on water issues and to mainstream the issue of water into all policy areas to improve the quality of water in all European regions;
Amendment 112 #
2011/2297(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Urges the Commission to stimulate intersectoral dialogue and, the Member States and regional authorities to stimulate intersectoral dialogue as well as dialogue between the various economic operators and citizens on issues related to water and to foster full and transparent participation of local communities and stakeholders at all levels in the development of water policy; highlights the importance of effective multi-level governance in the field of water, water stewardship and exchange of best practices;
Amendment 124 #
2011/2297(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Encourages local authorities to devote a proportion of the levies collected from users for the supply of water and sanitation services to decentralised cooperation measures; also draws attention to the principle of ‘1 % solidarity for water’ adopted by some Member States as a possiblen example to promote and to implement;
Amendment 129 #
2011/2297(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 quater (new)
Paragraph 20 quater (new)
20c. Calls on the Commission, on behalf of the European Union and the Member States, to accede to the 1997 United Nations Convention on International Watercourses and to promote the entry into force of the amendments to the 1992 Helsinki Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes, in order to extend the scope of this instrument beyond the UNECE countries alone, and to encourage wider ratification of the Protocol on Health and Water to the 1992 Helsinki Convention, with a view to promoting the coordinated and fair management of water in national and international basins;
Amendment 130 #
2011/2297(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 quinquies (new)
Paragraph 20 quinquies (new)
20d. Welcomes the active participation of the European Union in the 6th World Water Forum on 12–17 March 2012 in Marseille; calls on the European Union to continue its commitment on improving water access throughout the world, particularly with a view to the 7th World Water Forum which will take place in South Korea in 2015;
Amendment 60 #
2011/2175(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Is of the opinion that excessive ‘quality requirements’ (whether imposed by European or national legislation or by internal company rules) are at the basis of many unnecessary discards, which increasemay be at the basis of unnecessary discards, which increase the amount of food wasted, at both the trade and the consumption stages; calls for initiatives to be developed to collect such food which is still fit for consumption, for the benefit of the amount of food wastedst deprived sections of society;
Amendment 71 #
2011/2175(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Calls for the continuation of the European food aid programme for the most deprived persons, which makes it possible to use Common Agricultural Policy intervention stocks and at the same time to supply food and thus provide food security for millions of people in Europe;
Amendment 81 #
2011/2175(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Takes the view that the use of incineration can only be acceptable if it is linked to energy recovery and prevents the production of GHG emissionsshould be limited to the minimum possible, unless it results in efficient energy recovery;
Amendment 1 #
2011/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Emphasises that top priority must be given to a preventive approach when promoting health and safety at work and that this approach must be firmly rooted both in the EU strategy and in the national strategies, when promoting health and safety at work, the EU and the Member States must give priority to a preventive approach and enable all workers fully to reconcile work and private life;
Amendment 4 #
2011/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Calls on the EU and the Member States to develop a European programme for the monitoring of occupational hazards (in particular musculoskeletal and psychosocial problems), based on health indicators, definitions and epidemiological tools common to the 27 Member States; stresses the need for an integrated approach to monitoring, taking into account both the career paths of current employees and the state of health of those who have retired;
Amendment 7 #
2011/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Emphasises that work-related accidents are more frequent amongst certain categories of workers than others – e.g. young, older and migrant workers, and those with precarious jobs (including fixed-term contracts and temporary or part-time jobs) – are more frequently exposed to occupational hazards; calls therefore on the Commission and Member States to adopt more specific preventive measures for these target groups;
Amendment 14 #
2011/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 c (new)
Paragraph 2 c (new)
2c. Points out that the main aims of the Community strategy for 2007-2012 include both guaranteeing the proper implementation of EU legislation and improving and simplifying existing legislation, inter alia through the implementation of non-binding instruments; also notes that, under Article 4 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, the EU enjoys only shared competence with the Member States in the fields of employment and public health, and that in its 2007 communication the Commission emphasises the development and implementation of national strategies; stresses, therefore, the need to adapt EU legislation to social changes in a coherent manner and to avoid legislating unnecessarily at EU level;
Amendment 19 #
2011/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Points out that the framework directive on health and safety at work (89/391/EEC) is already over 20 years old but has yet to see any substantial amendments, so it needs to be adapted to the new challenges posed by changes in the working environment, such as the increase in mental health problemnew occupational hazards, such as musculoskeletal problems, mental health problems and other psychosocial hazards;
Amendment 29 #
2011/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Regrets that the European framework agreement on harassment and violence at work (2007) is not binding and for this reason calls on the Commission to submit a proposal for a directive on the prevention of violence at worke fact that there is no single common definition of moral harassment at the European level; calls on the Commission and the Member States to develop effective national strategies for combating violence at work which are based on a definition of moral harassment common to the 27 Member States;
Amendment 33 #
2011/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Emphasises that the incidence of physicalmen and womental stress factors differs between men and women and these factors result in different pressures, complaints and work-related illnesse are affected to differing degrees by occupational hazards, be these psychosocial or physical (including musculoskeletal problems); also points out that precarious employment contracts, in particular temporary or part-time jobs, may be linked to increased physical and psychosocial occupational hazards; for this reason, urges the Member States to mainstream gender aspectstake account, in their national strategies, of the gender dimension and the hazards associated with different types of employment contract;
Amendment 37 #
2011/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7b. Points out that in its 2007 communication the Commission stated that one of its aims was to support small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in the implementation of EU legislation and of their risk prevention policies; stresses, therefore, the need to support European SMEs and protect them from any unwarranted or inappropriate penalties, especially during the current recession;
Amendment 9 #
2011/2146(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas SGEI are services that cannot always be provided, or cannot be provided adequately, without state intervention,
Amendment 17 #
2011/2146(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas Protocol No 26 TFEU establishes that SGEI should be characterised by a high level of quality, safety and affordability, equal treatment and the promotion of universal access and of user rights, and explicitly recognises the right of regional and local authorities to managessential role and extensive discretionary powers of national, regional and local authorities to provide them, have them carried out and organise them,
Amendment 35 #
2011/2146(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses that reform of the EU rules on state aid for SGEI is only part of an urgently required horizontal legislative framework for SGEI, and that such a framework offers the only means of affording the requisite legal certainty and clarity in relation to EU law on SGEI; emphasises that a new legal basis for such a horizontal legislative framework has been created with Article 14 TFEU; points out that the Commission undertook, in the Single Market Act, to bring forward by the end of 2011, in addition to its communication, a series of measures on SGEI; calls on the Commission, therefore, to submit a proposal for the horizontal legislative frameworkthe necessary clarification of the legal provisions which apply to SGEI; emphasises that a new legal basis has been created with Article 14 TFEU which will make it possible to achieve more satisfactory legal certainty; calls on the Commission to bring forward by the end of 2011 a series of measures on SGEI, as it undertook to do in the Single Market Act;
Amendment 47 #
2011/2146(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Asserts emphatically that public services must be of a high quality and accessible to all sections of the population; views with concern, in this regard, the restrictive stance taken by certain Member Statesthe Commission, which, in relation to state aid for social housing associations, classifyies the services provided by such associations as social services of general interest (SSGI) only if they are reserved for socially disadvantaged persons or groups, this restrictive interpretation being at odds with the higher goal of fostering an appropriate social mix;
Amendment 53 #
2011/2146(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Commission to include investment costs for infrastructure necessary to the functioning of SGEI within the costs that compensatory payments may cover and to devote attention to the fact that the provision of SGEI is sometimes based on long-term public investment aid rather than on annual operating subsidies;
Amendment 55 #
2011/2146(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Welcomes the Commission’s concern to ensure, through a more diverse approach to the application of state aid rules, that the administrative burden placed on the public authorities is proportionate to the potential impact of the measure concerned on competition in the internal market; calls therefore, with reference to Article 106(2) TFEU, for the provisions to be framed in such a way as to ensure, on the one hand, that they are applied correctly and, on the other, that the undermake it easier to understand and predict the right to State aid to SGEI and attakings entrusted with the operation of services of general interest can perform in full the specific tasks assigned to them greater legal certainty for public authorities and operators;
Amendment 58 #
2011/2146(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Calls on the Commission to clarify the concept of 'public procurement procedure', which should include all procedures that involve organising publicity and competition with respect being ensured for the principles of transparency and equal treatment; the concept of 'least cost', which should be interpreted as making it possible to take into account not just price but various criteria linked to the subject of the contract, such as qualitative, environmental or social criteria; the concepts of 'economic activity' and 'non- economic activity', 'impact on trade between Member States' and 'reasonable profit';
Amendment 64 #
2011/2146(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Calls on the Commission, as part of the promised simplification of state aid rules, to introduce greater flexibility in the monitoring of over-compensation, on the basis, in particular, of measures to prevent over-compensation, as this would result in significant time and cost savings for both service providers and the public authorities; suggests, to this end, that, in the case of multiannual contracts, checks for over-compensation should be carried out only at the end of the contractual period;
Amendment 68 #
2011/2146(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Calls on the Commission to ensure the effectiveness of the ‘Guide to the application of the European Union rules on state aid, public procurement and the internal market to services of general economic interest, and in particular to social services of general interest’ of 7 December 2010 for the benefit of the public authorities and operators; calls on the Commission, if it proves necessary, to make available to public authorities and operators a methodology for instruction to guide them towards the proper application of these rules;
Amendment 72 #
2011/2146(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Welcomes the Commission’s intention to introduce a ‘de minimis’ arrangement in respect of small-scale state aid to undertakings entrusted with the operation of SGEI where the locally limited scale of the activity means that only a negligible impact on trade between Member States is likely and where it is ensured that the compensation is used exclusively for the operation of the SGEI in questionsmall-scale SGEI of a social nature; asks the Commission to ascertain whether SGEI in the field of culture and education should also be the subject of a special arrangement;
Amendment 76 #
2011/2146(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Calls on the Commission to propose appropriate thresholds for the ‘de minimis’ arrangement; suggests as a possible reference in this respect the combined indices of size of municipality, amount of compensation payment and level of turnover of the undertaking entrusted with the operation of the serviceconsiders that the amount of the aid is the only criterion which will ensure easy and equitable application; considers furthermore that a threshold calculated over three financial years affords the requisite flexibility;
Amendment 97 #
2011/2146(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Welcomes the Commission’s assertion that it wishes to exempt in principle further categories of SSGI from the requirement that aid to them be the subject of notification; calls for an assessment as to whether such an exemption should extend to care facilities for elderly people or people with disabilities, or to healthas is already the carse facilitieor hospitals;
Amendment 101 #
2011/2146(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Considers that the special remit and character of SSGI should not only be protected but should also be clearly defined under sector-specific rulesand clearly defined; calls on the Commission therefore to assess what would be the most effective way of attaining this objective;
Amendment 108 #
2011/2146(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Points out that if the undertakings entrusted with the operation of SGEI are selected on the basis of efficiency criteria then the fourth condition set by the Court of Justice ruling in the Altmark case is fulfilled, and that, subject to observance of the three remaining conditions, the compensatory payments do not, according to the case law of the Court, constitute state aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU; recalls, in this connection, that the use of an equitable and transparent procedure remains the best way of assessing these efficiency criteria a priori;
Amendment 4 #
2011/2096(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Points out that a sustainable and environmentally friendly transport network is the nervous system of the European economy which should be given the necessary incentives forand that proper legislative and/or financial incentives should be provided for it so as to enable a transition to non-fossil fuel propulsion to be made where possible;
Amendment 15 #
2011/2096(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Takes note of the fact that in the recent past improvements in emissions from fossil fuel propelled means of transport have always been offset by higher demand, resulting in congestion and in air pollution still exceeding the legal limits; hence insists on the need for a switch to a different technology or the best possible fossil fuel technology and accordingly supports research carried out with or without the financial support of the EU aiming at accelerating the introduction of eco-innovations and new technologies in transport;
Amendment 20 #
2011/2096(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 24 #
2011/2096(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Takes note of the fact that several regions in the EU with unmet transport needs still have to ‘catch up’ and will still show a big growth in transport once the infrastructure has been finalised and the economy is picking up; considers for this reason that it is also important to focus future actions on the elimination of disparities in infrastructure development between various European regions/countries, applying EU regional policy to that end;
Amendment 35 #
2011/2096(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the European Commission to support, promote and provide financial support for the Europe-wide rolling highwayan transport networks;
Amendment 48 #
2011/2096(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. ConsiderNotes that the Single European Sky and SESAR show how fuel consumption can be reduced by +/- 10% in addition to the launch of new, fuel-efficient and relatively silent aircraft;
Amendment 50 #
2011/2096(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Points out that railways and high- speed lines in particular could make a major contribution to a competitive, resource-efficient transport system providing fast links between Europe’s regions;
Amendment 26 #
2011/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C c (new)
Recital C c (new)
Cc. whereas the European low carbon economy roadmap can only be realised when taking close account of global developments and international carbon reduction commitments,
Amendment 42 #
2011/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recognises the benefits to Member States of developing a low carbon economy; therefore endorses the Commission'’s Roadmap to a competitive low carbon economy in 2050, together with its trajectory, the specific milestones for domestic emission reductions of 40%, 60% and 80% for 2030, 2040 and 2050 respectively, and the ranges for sector- specific milestones, as the basis for proposing legislative and other initiatives on economic and climate policy; Recognises that the trajectory and milestones are based on PRIMES modelling and the pre-set target and needs to be further developed by bottom- up, sector specific impact assessments and roadmaps;
Amendment 63 #
2011/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes that the worldwide development and application of low carbon technologies is increasing rapidly, and Europe'’s future competitiveness will depend upon it increasing levels of investment that currently lag far behind countries such as China as a proportion of GDPin research and innovation of these technologies;
Amendment 69 #
2011/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 d (new)
Paragraph 3 d (new)
3d. Recognises that climate change is a global issue and recalls that the EU unilateral action is not sufficient and that the extensive involvement of big emitters is necessary,
Amendment 70 #
2011/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 e (new)
Paragraph 3 e (new)
3e. Recalls the need for a clear timeline for an international post-2012 agreement and for firm and more ambitious commitments from big emitters to adopt ambitious and sufficient targets for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions;
Amendment 166 #
2011/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 h (new)
Paragraph 9 h (new)
9h. Stresses the need to step up energy efficiency in the building sector and the major contribution which could be made by European funds in this respect;
Amendment 169 #
2011/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Calls on the Commission to develop a biomass supply policy as part of the upcoming 2050 energy roadmap to encourage sustainable biomass production; insists that meeting the EU'’s target for the use of biofuels must not result in the release of disproportionate quantities of greenhouse gases;
Amendment 178 #
2011/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 b (new)
Paragraph 10 b (new)
10b. Calls upon the Commission to develop sustainability criteria for biomass that include the efficiency of the use of biomass, and focus the policies on a future where first value is created out of biomass raw materials, only after which biomass is used for energy;
Amendment 188 #
2011/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 b (new)
Paragraph 11 b (new)
11b. Calls on the Commission to ensure that Horizon 2020 and the European Innovation Partnerships under the Innovation Union prioritize the need to develop all kinds of low carbon technologies to spur EU competitiveness;
Amendment 219 #
2011/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 b (new)
Paragraph 14 b (new)
14b. Expects the Commission and member states to support those sectors that have made roadmaps to further develop the initiatives and partnerships that follow from these roadmaps, for the development of breakthrough technologies to decarbonise these energy intensive industries;
Amendment 256 #
2011/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 d (new)
Paragraph 17 d (new)
17d. Calls for greater involvement of the maritime and air transport sectors through the introduction at international level of a market mechanism (tax or market in licences);
Amendment 299 #
2011/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 i (new)
Paragraph 19 i (new)
19i. Draws attention to the fact that the current 20% target is based on contribution made by nuclear power to the energy mix in number of Member States; notes that the IEA’s World Energy Outlook 2011 includes a Lower-Nuclear Case according to which the projected increase of world-wide CO2 emissions would be substantially higher in the medium-term due to an increased use of fossil fuels; states that according to the IEA, achieving the 2 degrees Celsius goal would require an acceleration of the development and deployment of CCS technologies, which are however at premature stage, thus calls for an increased support for the development and application of breakthrough technologies in order to increase energy efficiency and decouple economic growth from energy consumption;
Amendment 1 #
2011/2087(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital 1 (new)
Recital 1 (new)
(1) whereas Article 165 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union entrusts to the European Union the task of ‘developing the European dimension in sport, by promoting fairness and openness in sporting competitions and cooperation between bodies responsible for sport, and by protecting the physical and moral integrity of sportsmen and sportswomen, especially the youngest sportsmen and sportswomen’,
Amendment 2 #
2011/2087(INI)
Draft opinion
Citation 1
Citation 1
– whereas sport, in addition to being a socio-cultural phenomenon, is a dynamic economic sector capable of generating significant revenues and could contribute to the Europe 2020 strategy,
Amendment 2 #
2011/2087(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas sport hais a very important social and financial impact in the EUdynamic growth sector and constitutes a real instrument of social cohesion, and whereas gambling services are excluded from the scope of the Services Directive (2006/123/EC) and the new Consumer Rights Directive (approved by the European Parliament on 23 June 2011), due to their specificity,
Amendment 3 #
2011/2087(INI)
Draft opinion
Citation 2
Citation 2
– whereas sport does not behave like a typical economic activity because of its specific characteristics and its organisational structures underpinned by federations, which do not operate as commercial companies, and whereas a distinction must be made between sporting and commercial interests,
Amendment 12 #
2011/2087(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the Commission study on the implications of internal market policies on the funding of grassroots sports and calls for a bridging of the gap between ‘rich’ and ‘poor’ sports by means of financial solidarity mechanismsNotes that the risk of fraud in sports competitions – although present since the outset – is exacerbated by the growth of the online sport betting sector, and therefore constitutes a proven danger to the integrity of sport, which is a value that needs to be secured;
Amendment 15 #
2011/2087(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 c (new)
Paragraph 2 c (new)
2c. Calls on Member States and local authorities to afford broad access to sports facilities and to exchange good practices in this respect;
Amendment 18 #
2011/2087(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Recalls that the EU is, in accordance with Article 165 TFEU, committed to promoting the equity and protecting the integrity of sport; considers therefore that the EU should introduce European-level structural cooperation in order to coordinate the fight against fraud and corruption in sport;
Amendment 20 #
2011/2087(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Supports any form of self-regulation in the sport sectors aimed at reinforcing accountability, transparency and financial stability; considers it essential, for the credibility of this kind of regulation, that an effective system of scrutiny and a balanced mix of sanctions and incentives be implemented; calls on the Commission to examine the possibility of a legislative instrument, on the basis of Article 114 TFEU, aimed at ensuring the existence of harmonised rules of sound financial management for European professional sports clubs;
Amendment 20 #
2011/2087(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. IConsistders that the right to grant exclusive rights fore contributions made by lotteryies and other numbermoney games remain with the Member States, given that umbrella sports organisations in the EU consider the contributions made by national lotterieand sports bets to the financing of sport and especially grassroots sports to be indispensable;
Amendment 22 #
2011/2087(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Stresses that sport can make a worthwhile contribution to achieving the objectives of the Europe 2020 strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth; adds that, as such, it must be fully incorporated into that strategy;
Amendment 25 #
2011/2087(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Calls on the Commission to put forward specific proposals to remedy the shortcomings and discrepancies in the legislation concerning the activities – which are by their nature, cross-border – of sports agents which were documented by the independent study carried out in 2009 on behalf of the Commission;
Amendment 25 #
2011/2087(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Respects the right of Member States to draw up penalising measureput in place penal sanctions to repress illegal online gambling; calls for a regulatory principle whereby a gambling company can only operate (or bid for the necessary national licence) in a Member State if it does not contravene the law in any other EU Member State;
Amendment 28 #
2011/2087(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Stresses the importance of education in sport, and encourages initiatives by sporting organisations and games operators to teach sportspeople good sport betting practice;
Amendment 32 #
2011/2087(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls onReiterates its position that sports bets are a form of commercial use of sporting competitions, and recommends that the Commission and the Member States to ensure that intellectual property rights, such as the partial redistribution of revenue derived from the exploitation of IPR in sports and merchandising, are taken into accountprotect sporting competitions from any unauthorised commercial use, notably by the introduction of a system for acquiring betting rights and the recognition of sports bodies’ intellectual property rights over the competitions they organise, not only in order to secure a fair financial return for their sectors, but also to combat match-fixing;
Amendment 40 #
2011/2087(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Recalls that, under the terms of Article 165 of the TFEU, the European Union has a duty to promote fairness and protect the integrity of sport; takes the view, therefore, that the European Union should establish structural cooperation at European level to coordinate the fight against fraud and corruption in sport; calls, furthermore, on the Commission to study the desirability of a legislative instrument based on Article 114 of the TFEU seeking to secure harmonised rules on sound financial management for European professional sports clubs;
Amendment 47 #
2011/2087(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Calls for a European Agency for Sstructural cooperation to be established at European Union level to defend sporting Iintegrity and Ffairness to be established, with due regard for Articles 6, 83 and 165 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, whose remit would be toith the aim of coordinateing the combating of fraud and corruption in sport and to combating doping, without prejudice to the rules of the World Anti-Doping Agency or to how it operates.
Amendment 8 #
2011/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the Internet gambling market is growing constantly, and whereas this sector is unlike other markets on account the risks involved in terms of consumer protection and the fight against organised crime, as the CJEU has acknowledged on more than one occasion,
Amendment 25 #
2011/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas market fragmentation not only makes it difficult for regulated providers to supply legal offerings on a cross-border basis, but also makes it virtually impossible to protect consumers and combat the crime associated with gambling at the European level,
Amendment 28 #
2011/2084(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. calls for the introduction of statutory minimum consumer protection standards without prejudice to the right of Member States to adopt more stringent rules;
Amendment 43 #
2011/2084(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. considers that more effective coordination against illegal sites is also necessary to discourage illicit operations; urges the Commission therefore to consider the possible introduction of interoperable EU standards regarding fraud detection and prevention with a view to improving global market monitoring;
Amendment 50 #
2011/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas Internet gambling and betting, if not properly regulated, involve a greater risk of addiction and dangers than traditional physical, location- based gambling,
Amendment 63 #
2011/2084(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. takes the view that the proliferation of on-line gambling represents a threat to the integrity of sport; stresses that keeping sporting events credible and honest is vital to the sports industry as a whole; stresses that this can only be done effectively at transnational level; considers that the European Union must therefore play a more prominent role in safeguarding the integrity of sport, a goal to be pursued bylongside all stakeholders;
Amendment 65 #
2011/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
I. whereas it is essential to ensure the integrity of sport and prevent further betting fraud, while ensuring a fair financial return for the sports and racing industries,
Amendment 71 #
2011/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -1 (new)
Paragraph -1 (new)
-1. Welcomes the fact that the Commission has taken the initiative of launching public consultation in connection with its Green Paper on online betting and gambling, which will facilitate pragmatic and realistic consideration of the future of this sector in Europe;
Amendment 74 #
2011/2084(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. calls, therefore, for the establishment of a European Agency for Istructural cooperation at EU level for the defence of integrity and Ffair Pplay in Ssport consistent with Articles 6, 83 and 165 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, with a specific remit to for the purpose of promoteing player education and coordinateing action against fraud and corruption in sport by sharing information and expertise and by applying the common definition of offences and sanctions;
Amendment 81 #
2011/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point 2
Paragraph 1 – point 2
(2) containmbat the illegal gambling market,
Amendment 83 #
2011/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point 3
Paragraph 1 – point 3
(3) guarantee effective protection for young people and vulnerable gamblers,
Amendment 90 #
2011/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point 6
Paragraph 1 – point 6
(6) that risks tospecific measures are promoted to guarantee the integrity of sporting competition are precluded and
Amendment 92 #
2011/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point 6 a (new)
Paragraph 1 – point 6 a (new)
(6a) that part of the value of bets goes to sports and horse-racing bodies, and
Amendment 102 #
Amendment 104 #
2011/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Is of the opinion that the gambling sector has been very much shapEmphasises that any regulation of the gambling sector is subject to, and must be underpinned by, the Member States' different traditions and cultures and that gambling markets are very differently regulated, giving the subsidiarity principle a particularly important role in this sectorsubsidiarity principle; considers, however, that this principle must be understood to imply ‘active subsidiarity’ entailing cooperation among the national administrations to achieve closer harmonisation of practice;
Amendment 129 #
2011/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Respects the decision by a number of Member States to ban Internet gambling totally; is opposed to government monopolies over on-line gambling, howevercognises the Member States’ discretion in determining how gambling is organised, while observing the basic EU Treaty principles of non-discrimination and proportionality; notes in this context the decision by a number of Member States to ban Internet gambling totally;
Amendment 154 #
2011/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Is of the opinionEmphasises that the principle of mutual recognition of licences on the gambling market does not apply, but that nevertheless, in keeping with the internal market, simplified licence application procedures should be set up in some Member States; nonetheless recognises the need to avoid unnecessary red tape with regard to licence applications, while ensuring the pre- eminent role of the regulator in the Member State in which the application has been submitted; considers, therefore, that mutual confidence among national regulators needs to be enhanced through closer administrative cooperation;
Amendment 203 #
2011/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Calls therefore foronsiders the establishment of a regulator with suitable powers in each Member State to be a necessary step towards more effective regulatory cooperation; encourages, in this context, cooperation between national regulatory bodies to be considerably expanded, with the Commission as coordinator, so as to develop common standards and take joint action against the unregulated black market; states that, in particular for identifying gamblers and combating money laundering, national standalone solutions are not successful; states that the Gaming Regulators European Forum (GREF) network and the Internal Market Information System could serve as the basis for this administrative cooperation;
Amendment 221 #
2011/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Calls on the Commission to review Directive 2005/60/EC1 on money laundering with a view to extending its scope to encompass all Internet betting and gambling
Amendment 227 #
Amendment 230 #
2011/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Notes that bthe risk of fraud in sports competiting on, in particular,ons – although present since the outset – has been exacerbated since the emergence of the on-line sports betting sector; stresses that this risk is particularly acute in minor-sports competitions may, and therefore represents a risk to the integrity of sport; is therefore of the view that sport fraud and betting fraud should be penalised throughout Europe;
Amendment 239 #
2011/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. Reaffirms its position that sports bets are a form of commercial use of sporting competitions, and recommends that the European Commission and Member States protect sporting competitions from any unauthorised commercial use, notably by setting up a system for acquiring betting rights and by recognising sports bodies’ property rights over the competitions they organise, not only to secure a fair financial return for the benefit of all levels of professional and amateur sport, but also as a means to strengthen the fight against sports fraud, particularly match-fixing;
Amendment 248 #
2011/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 b (new)
Paragraph 16 b (new)
16b. Calls for instruments to increase cross-border police and judicial cooperation and, at the same time, for a framework for cooperation with organisers of sports competitions to be considered with a view to facilitating the exchange of information between sports disciplinary bodies and state investigation and prosecution agencies, by setting up, for example, dedicated national networks and contact points to deal with cases of match-fixing;
Amendment 250 #
2011/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 c (new)
Paragraph 16 c (new)
16c. Urges Member States to ensure that the fraudulent manipulation of results for financial gain or other advantage is prohibited by establishing as a criminal offence any threat to the integrity of competitions, including those linked to betting operations;
Amendment 252 #
2011/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 d (new)
Paragraph 16 d (new)
Amendment 135 #
2011/2071(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Is concerned that draft recommendations to member states under the European Semester contained to undermine the specific regulation of holidays and Sundays; asks the Commission and the Council to respect and support these achievements, especially for the work-family balance;
Amendment 30 #
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 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 criteriahistorical benchmarks used to date for allocating funding under the direct payments scheme;
Amendment 69 #
2011/2051(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Points out that the current rules for the allocation of second-pillar funding were agreed on the basis of the cohesion criterion, i.e. the agricultural and rural development disparities existing between individual Member States and regions; believes, in view of the fact that those disparities still exist, that the current criteria and funding arrangements for rural development should be retained, in particular in the context of expanding the second pillar to take account of the Europe 2020 strategy objectives; points out that this will require appropriateexcellent coordination and the appropriate distribution of tasks between the CAP and cohesion policy.
Amendment 13 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 17 a (new)
Citation 17 a (new)
- having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the ‘Fifth Cohesion Report’, adopted on 1 April 2011,
Amendment 20 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas the purpose of cohesion policy is to foster the development of an innovative and protective Europe of solidarity in the face of the challenges associated with globalisation,
Amendment 21 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A b (new)
Recital A b (new)
Ab. whereas cohesion policy represents a genuine citizens’ issue, bringing Europe into people’s daily lives and making it tangible and visible across the EU,
Amendment 24 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the cohesion and structural policies have proved flexible in crisis situations and have made a defining contribution to various national recovery and training programmes, and whereas it is important to maintain this flexibility,
Amendment 31 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas gearing the structural funds to the Lisbon Strategy objectives has proved effective, as is evident from the impressive commitment rates for the Convergence and the Regional Competitiveness and Employment objectives, although it is regrettable that onlynd whereas 20% of projects under the heading of Territorial Cooperation accord with the Lisbon aims,
Amendment 43 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas the existing system of cohesion and structural policy objectives (Convergence, Regional Competitiveness and Employment, and European Territorial Cooperation), combined with a multi-level governance approach and security to plan on the basis of reliable funding and an agreed time frame (seven years), has basicoverally proved its worth, but whereas there have been considerable delays in programme planning as a result of protracted financial and legislative negotiations and substantial changes in the rules applying to cohesion policy,
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 56 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H a (new)
Recital H a (new)
Amendment 57 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H b (new)
Recital H b (new)
Hb. whereas towns and cities are places of wealth creation, but also places where the most acute economic and social problems are concentrated,
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 120 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Emphasises that cohesion policy must continue to focus on regional (territorial) cohesion and points out that the Lisbon Treaty added the objective of territorial cohesion to those of economic and social cohesion; affirms that this aim remains indissociable from the challenges of economic and social cohesion; emphasises that ‘territorial cohesion’ is also relevant at the sub-regional level, particularly in urban areas (urban districts facing difficulties, uncontrolled urban sprawl), even within regions considered to be rich;
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 162 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Stresses the key role of towns and cities in achieving the economic, environmental and social EU 2020 objectives; encourages the dynamic process launched during the previous programming period for Integrated Urban Programmes and stresses the importance of the experiments currently under way; calls for support for ideas and projects which can serve as models, on the basis of integrated development plans, and for the upgrading of urban-rural links;
Amendment 178 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Rejects the use ofproliferation of applications for quotas in particular for national allocations under ESF/ERDF programmes, for urban development, for the countryside or otherwise according to categorisation on the basis of population density or territorial function; also regards as questionable the requirement to specify already at operational programme level which urban and other areas are to be eligible for support, and calls for the Member States and regions to be allowed to organise competitive selection procedures in this respect as well;
Amendment 200 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Emphasises that support from the cohesion and structural funds must be more strongly oriented towards the educational and socio-political challenges of the EU 2020 strategy; takes the view, however, that across-the-boardfull ‘Europeanisation’ of the relevant policy areas is not desirable and would be a doomed endeavour purely onfor obvious financial groundreasons; calls, therefore, for the further development of approaches that could serve as models, while retaining existing national and regional competences;
Amendment 222 #
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 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 connection with the third objective of European Territorial Cooperation;
Amendment 223 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. supports economic development and employment in SMEs and micro- enterprises; therefore requests that the fundamentals of the Small Business Act for Europe (SBAE), i.e. "Think Small First" and "Only once ", are considered as one of the bases of cohesion policy and considers that these principles should be applied by Member States and regions in the definition of their operational programs;
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 256 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Calls for cohesion policy to continue, in accordance with the Lisbon Treaty, to target as a priority those regions that lag furthest behind; stresses that the neediest regions should be granted an appropriate share – commensurate with the seriousness of their development problems – of the funding under Objective 1 (Convergence)the convergence objective;
Amendment 260 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Calls for a dependable and appropriate phasing-out arrangement for areas formerly eligible for maximum support underthe creation of a new intermediate category for regions with per capita GDP between 75% and 90% of the EU average, in order to resolve political problems (unequal treatment of regions in spite of their similar situations) and practical problems (difficulty of managing degressive funding) linked to the current phasing-out arrangement; considers that the creation of such a category will be made possible by the fact that a large number of regions have passed the threshold of 75% of the EU average per capita GDP and will thus automatically cease to be covered by the convergence objective; stresses that this change to the architecture of the cohesion policy should neither penalise regions currently benefiting from the Cconvergence objective (convergence regions)and the competitiveness objective, nor lead to an increase in the cohesion policy budget; considers that this new category will make it possible to strengthen the justice and solidarity which are the fundamental principles 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 277 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
Amendment 288 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Takes the unequivocal view that efforts under Othe objective 3 (of European Territorial Cooperation) need to be stepped up at all EU internal borders and at all three levels of such cooperation (cross-border, inter- regional and trans-national) and calls for the relevant share of the structural funds to be increased to 7%contribution by the ERDF to this objective to be increased to a level equivalent to 7% of the total budget for cohesion policy; stresses the importance of the border regions in terms of achievement of the EU 2020 objectives; considers there is a need for closer linkage with the TEN networks – in line with European priorities – and with cross-border infrastructure, and calls for a corresponding increase in funding for all border regions;
Amendment 302 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)
Paragraph 24 a (new)
24a. Considers that EGTCs represent a unique, highly valuable territorial governance instrument which responds to the needs for structured cooperation, and must be promoted as a tool to set up systems of cross-border governance, ensuring the ownership of the different policies at regional and local level;
Amendment 310 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Calls for the ESF, as a component of cohesion policy, to continue to foster social integration, economic growth and employment; regards the ESF as the Union’s most important labour-market and employment-policy tool; attaches particular importance to developing skills and mobility, enhancing equality of opportunity between the sexes, – with priority being assigned to training which meets local needs –, enhancing equality of opportunity between the sexes and people with disabilities, integrating and socially reintegrating people who are disadvantaged and supporting SMEs and the self-employed;
Amendment 325 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Calls for a common strategy framework for the ERDF, the ESF, the Cohesion Fund, the EAFRD and the EFF, for the post-2013 funding period; takes the view that the model of a standard regulatory approach (covering administration, eligibility, auditing and reporting rules) must be further strengthened by means of a joint framework regulatDoes not affect the English version;.
Amendment 354 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31 a (new)
Paragraph 31 a (new)
31a. Calls on States to take strict account of the partnership principle in the future partnership and development contracts which replace the former national strategic framework plans; considers that the quality of this strategic document will derive from compliance with the partnership principle; calls on the Commission to ensure that this multi-level partnership is a reality in the negotiation, drafting and assessment of these future partnership contracts;
Amendment 360 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
33. Calls for the mandatory involvement of federal Länder and regionsregional and local authorities, in accordance with constitutional and institutional set up of Member States, in drawing up development partnerships and operational programmes; considers it essential to make appropriate provision for this in the regulations governing the Structural Funds;
Amendment 369 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Supports the system of thematic priorities that the Commission is proposing; points out that the lower the level of development in a Member State or region, the more wide-ranginglonger the list of priorities there needs to be, taking into account specific regional development needs; stresses the need for this system of thematic priorities to be flexible and negotiable, in order to take account of the variety of regional contexts;
Amendment 379 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
35. Calls, in the event that certain binding priorities are set for all Member States, for these to cover innovation, infrastructure and resource management and to be tailored in each case to regions'’ specific needs; stressNotes that SMEs are the main source of jobs in the EU and a breeding ground for business ideas; stresses that support to SMEs must be continued and strengthened in light of the key role they can play in the implementation of the EU 2020 Strategy stresses that in terms of the flagship innovation Union a broad concept of "innovation" has to be applied while the SME access to finances must still be facilitated, notes that it must be possible to suggest and pursue additional priorities on a voluntary basis and in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity; calls for suggested priority areas to include energy, education and training, and combating poverty;
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 412 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38
Paragraph 38
38. Welcomes the Commission’s proposal for a stronger focus on results, to be achieved through the ex-ante establishment of appropriate objectives and indicators; stresses that such indicators must be few in number, that they must all be clearly defined, measurable and related directly to the impact of the funding, and that they should be established by agreement with the regions/Member States; considers, however, that all instruments and criteria proposed to measure performance should maintain a qualitative vision of the programmes;
Amendment 440 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41
Paragraph 41
Amendment 446 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42
Paragraph 42
42. Calls, in the case of direct subsidies to undertakings, for it to be recognised that Cohesion Policy funding, rather than influencing decisions by companies – and particularly bigger companies – to open a plant in a given location, tends to be pocketed by companies which have already taken such decisions (deadweight effect), and calls, therefore, for support for undertakings to focus on investment in research and development or for it to be provided, in more cases, indirectly through infrastructure financing; also calls for clear provisions to be included in the general regulation governing the Structural Funds ruling out EU support for the relocation of undertakings within the Union, and for a substantial lowering of the threshold for review of relocation investments;
Amendment 447 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42
Paragraph 42
42. Calls, in the case of direct subsidies to undertakings, for it to be recognised that Cohesion Policy funding, rather than influencing decisions by companies – and particularly bigger companies – to open a plant in a given location, tends to be pocketed by companies which have already taken such decisions (deadweight effect), and calls, therefore, for support for undertakings to focus on investment in research and development or for it to be provided, in more cases, indirectly through infrastructure financing; also calls for clear provisions to be included in the general regulation governing the Structural Funds ruling out EU supportthe provision of any EU funding for the relocation of undertakings within the Union, and for a substantially lowering of the threshold for review of relocation investments;
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 525 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 54 a (new)
Paragraph 54 a (new)
54a. Is concerned at the fact that red tape is preventing small companies and organisations from gaining access to structural funding; calls for the relevant rules and technical documentation to be made as clear as possible, and asks the Commission and the Member States to set up technical working parties with a view to identifying appropriate simplification measures;
Amendment 534 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 55
Paragraph 55
55. Supports the Commission’s proposal that national authorities should not receive reimbursement until the EU funding has been paid out to the beneficiaries; envisages that this will speed up payment procedures and will be a crucial incentive to carry out stringent national auditing; notes, however, that cashflow problems could potentially arise at Member State or federal-stateregional level and that appropriate hedging arrangements will have to be made;
Amendment 568 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 60
Paragraph 60
Amendment 41 #
2011/2034(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Insists on the integrity of cohesion policyStresses the integrated approach of cohesion policy, which draws together several different funds, and calls on the Commission to refrtain from creating new sectoral funds, e.g. for energy or climatethat approach; encourages the Commission to learn from experience with cohesion policy when establishing measures for energy policy, in particular with regard to project selection;
Amendment 1 #
2011/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 a (new)
Citation 1 a (new)
- having regard to Article 122 of the Treaty on the functioning of the European Union,
Amendment 2 #
2011/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 b (new)
Citation 1 b (new)
- having regard to Article 222 of the Treaty on the functioning of the European Union (the solidarity clause) which lays down that ‘the Union and the Member States shall act jointly in a spirit of solidarity if a Member State is the object of a terrorist attack or victim of a natural or man-made disaster’,
Amendment 3 #
2011/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 c (new)
Citation 1 c (new)
- having regard to Article 23 of the Treaty on the functioning of the European Union,
Amendment 4 #
2011/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 d (new)
Citation 1 d (new)
- having regard to the 1994 Oslo Guidelines on the use of foreign military and civil defence assets in disaster relief,
Amendment 7 #
2011/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the European Union and its Member States are faced with seven major risks: earthquakes and tsunamis; fires, including forest fires; flooding and landslides; industrial and nuclear accidents; terrorist attacks; natural disasters; and major pandemics; whereas there has been a dramatic increase in the number and severity of these natural and man-made disasters affecting the Union and its citizens, as well as other countries and regions around the world, as tragically demonstrated by the recent severe catastrophe in Japan which was hit by a combination of earthquake, tsunami and nuclear catastrophe, with a corresponding increase in the loss of life and in economic, social and environmental damage and damage to cultural heritage,
Amendment 11 #
2011/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the recent tragedies, notably the Haiti earthquake and the Pakistan floods, have demonstrated that the main tools available to the EU for responding to disasters (humanitarian aid and the EU Civil Protection Mechanism) proved to be working well for what they were designed for and given the circumstances, but whereas there is scopea vital need for improvement in terms of effectiveness, efficiency, coherenceordination and visibility of the EU assistance as a whole,
Amendment 14 #
2011/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas, moreover, during a number of crises, particularly the tsunami of 26 December 2004, many questions were raised about the lack of systematic scenarios or protocols at European level for responding to these seven major risks and the inadequate visibility of Europe's action in relation to the overall effort,
Amendment 21 #
2011/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas immediate coordination, coherence and communication within the EU and with international actors is crucial, duplicating efforts and overlaps must be avoidedwhereas the current European coordination on the ground of several teams with differing chains of command inevitably leads to duplicating efforts and overlaps and proves costly in terms of human resources, coordination and efficiency; and twhe right type of aid must reach affected populations quicklyreas, given the context of the economic and financial crisis, the European Union must develop a protection system based on the sharing and rationalisation of existing resources without any increase in overall expenditure,
Amendment 28 #
2011/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas an integrated European all- hazards approach aimed at responding to crises at all stages of their life cycle is the most effective strategy to deal with disasters; whereas this approach should linking disaster prevention (including mitigation and risk reduction), preparedness, response and recovery is the most effective strategy to deal with disasters,
Amendment 38 #
2011/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Underlines the need to rationalise and simplify the functioning of the current European disaster response and to optimise resources available for common benefit, whilst encouraging all Member States to contribute and thus guarantee European solidarity; considers, accordingly, that the EU’s reaction capacity should form part of an integrated multi-risk approach based on ‘bottom-up’ delegated management, on the voluntary sector and on Member States’ specialisations in one or more risk areas;
Amendment 52 #
2011/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Further calls for the EU’s disaster reaction capacity to make use of Europe’s outermost regions and overseas territories which can form bases for facilitating logistics operations and for pre- positioning its resources in every ocean;
Amendment 59 #
2011/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Re-affirms theEmphasises that the European disaster response system should respect of the principle of double subsidiarity concerning the capability of the Member States to use their own assets, especially in any case of conflicting national needsvis-à-vis the Member States and the United Nations, i.e. that it should respect the national and regional competences of each Member State on the one hand, and the coordinating role played by the United Nations in disaster relief operations on the other; points out that this strategy should live up to the expectations of the United Nations, which see clear value added in creating a European pole with a response capability;
Amendment 68 #
2011/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Considers advance planning and the preparation of operations by developing reference scenarios, mapping Member States’ assets potentially available for deployment in EU disaster relief operations and contingency planning as key elements of an enhanced EU disaster response and essential for rapid deployment and immediate appropriate response to each emergency; calls on the Commission and the Member States to implement these measures immediately and without prejudice to other actions; calls, finally, on the Commission to launch a feasibility study on the merits of setting up, allocating European research budget funding to, and naming European reference laboratories to combat bioterrorism and identify victims;
Amendment 86 #
2011/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. CallsAsks that the existing relief systems coordinated by the United Nations be taken into account, whilst calling for improved, strengthened, more cost- effective and well-coordinated transport for all in-kind assistance to disaster sites, in particular through streamlined simplified procedures, an increased co-financing rate and the introduction of new ways of allowing access to additional transport capacities, possibly through framework contracts; considers that the complementary use of military resources should be systematically envisaged and analysed in future scenarios and protocols;
Amendment 90 #
2011/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Calls for a comprehensive communications strategy, involving all EU institutions and Member States, that will improve the overall visibility of the European actions; in the eyes of European citizens and the rest of the world; considers that this strategy should seek to simplify and standardise communication methods and tools; proposes to this end the establishment, for example, of a standard dress code and logo for all European staff, and the appointment of a single spokesperson responsible for communications on the emergency response;
Amendment 92 #
2011/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Calls on the Commission and Member States to develop a clear information and prevention system for all European citizens when they travel; proposes, to this end, that European passports bear the numbers of the crisis units in each of the Member States and a reference to Article 23 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union which lays down that ‘every citizen of the Union shall, in the territory of a third country in which the Member State of which he is a national is not represented, be entitled to protection by the diplomatic or consular authorities of any Member State (...)’.
Amendment 97 #
2011/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Calls for regular training for all experts involved to enhance the interoperability of different assets, as well as for further research and analysis of potential or identified gaponsiders that the dedicated training of European staff and experts in disaster response would make it possible, through ‘common core’ training and specialised modules, to develop awareness of common European working methods and response procedures;
Amendment 99 #
2011/0429(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – point 4
Article 2 – point 4
Directive 2008/105/EC
Article 8 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 1 a (new)
The Commission shall demonstrate evidence of EU and ecotoxicological relevance when identifying priority hazardous substances.The Commission shall establish criteria for the selection of PHS which shall take into account criteria defining persistence, bioaccumulation and toxicity in water and sediment as is contained in the relevant EU legislation, the EU specific legislation for substances where applicable, or relevant international agreements.
Amendment 124 #
2011/0429(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – point 6
Article 2 – point 6
Directive 2008/105/EC
Article 8 b – paragraph 2
Article 8 b – paragraph 2
2. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 10 concerning the drawing up of the watch list referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article. The Commission shall establish the criteria and procedure to remove from the watch list any substance for which monitoring indicates that there is not sufficient evidence or relevance at EU level or ecotoxicologically.
Amendment 229 #
2011/0429(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8 a (new)
Recital 8 a (new)
(8a) Studies show that medicine residues can pose risks to aquatic environments. This matter should therefore be dealt with at European level without delay in order to secure the best cost-benefit ratio. Risks should be assessed more thoroughly using accurate monitoring data comparable on a Union-wide basis. The watch list system under this Directive should enable the necessary data to be gathered for the future review of the list of priority substances. By virtue of Article 16(9) of Directive 2000/60/EC, the Water Framework Directive, the Commission is called upon to draw up a European strategy to combat pollution of water by medicines. It should accordingly submit proposals serving to improve risk assessment at the time when the drugs concerned are placed on the market and to identify the measures which could most effectively reduce the risks to an acceptable level. It should make use of the Common Implementation Strategy for the Water Framework Directive and of the bodies involved in the monitoring of emerging environmental substances (NORMAN) and the Joint Research Centre.
Amendment 244 #
2011/0429(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – point 6
Article 2 – point 6
Directive 2008/105/EC
Article 8 b – paragraph 2
Article 8 b – paragraph 2
2. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 10 concerning the drawing-upcompletion and any subsequent updating of the watch list referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article.
Amendment 245 #
2011/0429(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – point 6
Article 2 – point 6
Directive 2008/105/EC
Article 8 b – paragraph 3
Article 8 b – paragraph 3
3. The Commission shall draw up the first watch list as referred to in paragraph 1 by[…], containing the substances already listed in Annex II, shall be completed by the Commission by[…] and thereafter updated where necessary.
Amendment 248 #
2011/0429(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – point 6
Article 2 – point 6
Directive 2008/105/EC
Article 8 b – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Article 8 b – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
4. Member States shall monitor each substance in the watch list at selected representative monitoring stations over at least a 126-month period commencing within 3 months of its inclusion in the watch list.
Amendment 251 #
2011/0429(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – point 6 a (new)
Article 2 – point 6 a (new)
Directive 2008/105/EC
Article 8 c (new)
Article 8 c (new)
6a. The following Article 8c is inserted: ‘Article 8c Specific provisions for pharmaceutical substances Pursuant to Article 16(9) of Directive 2000/60/EC, the Commission shall, within two years, draw up a strategy against pollution of water by pharmaceutical substances. The strategy shall include: - proposals enabling, to the extent necessary, the environmental impacts of medicines to be taken into account more effectively in the procedure for placing medicinal products on the market (Directive 2001/83/EC, Directive 2011/83/EU, Regulation (EC) No 726/2004); - an assessment of the risks associated with the presence of medicines in aquatic environments and proposals to reduce them; - information with which to calculate the cost-effectiveness ratio of the measures proposed. In order to draw up the above strategy, the Commission shall make use of the committee referred to in Article 21 of Directive 2000/60/EC.
Amendment 256 #
2011/0429(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex I – table – row 46
Annex I – table – row 46
Directive 2000/60/EC
Annex X – table – row 46
Annex X – table – row 46
Amendment 258 #
2011/0429(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex I – table – row 47
Annex I – table – row 47
Directive 2000/60/EC
Annex X – table – row 47
Annex X – table – row 47
Amendment 260 #
2011/0429(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex I – table – row 48
Annex I – table – row 48
Directive 2000/60/EC
Annex X – table – row 48
Annex X – table – row 48
Amendment 286 #
2011/0429(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex II – table – row 46
Annex II – table – row 46
Amendment 288 #
2011/0429(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex II – table – row 47
Annex II – table – row 47
Directive 2008/105/EC
Annex I – table – row 47
Annex I – table – row 47
Amendment 290 #
2011/0429(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex II – table – row 48
Annex II – table – row 48
Directive 2008/105/EC
Annex I – table – row 48
Annex I – table – row 48
Amendment 295 #
2011/0429(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex II a (new)
Annex II a (new)
Directive 2008/105/EC
Annex II (new)
Annex II (new)
ANNEX II a ‘ANNEX IIa SUBSTANCES TO BE INCLUDED IN THE FIRST WATCH LIST DRAWN UP BY THE COMMISSION CAS number1 EU number2 Name of substance 1066-51-9 not applicable Amino-methyl phosphonic acid (AMPA) 298-46-4 206-062-7 Carbamazepine 57-12-5 not applicable Free cyanide 1071-83-6 213-997-4 Glyphosate 15687-27-1 239-784-6 Ibuprofen 3380-34-5 222-182-2 Triclosan 9029-97-4 231-175-3 Zinc and its compounds 57-63-6 200-342-2 17alpha-ethinylestradiol 50-28-2 200-023-8 17beta-estradiol 15307-79-6 239-346-4 Diclofenac __________________________ 1 CAS: Chemical Abstracts Service. 2 EU number: European Inventory of Existing Commercial Substances (EINECS) or European List of Notified Chemical Substances (ELINCS).’
Amendment 51 #
2011/0418(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24 a (new)
Recital 24 a (new)
(24 a) The ESMA and the competent authorities in Member States should be responsible for informing investors, investment fund managers and companies of the existence of the EuSEF.
Amendment 59 #
2011/0418(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) 'European Social Entrepreneurship Fund' (EuSEF) means a collective investment undertaking that invests an average of at least 70 percent of its aggregate called capital contributions and uncalled committed capital in assets that are qualifying investments over a maximum period of five years;
Amendment 69 #
2011/0418(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d – point i – indent 2
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d – point i – indent 2
– the undertaking employs a method of production of goods or services that embodies its social objective; or
Amendment 70 #
2011/0418(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d – point i – indent 2 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d – point i – indent 2 a (new)
- the undertaking finances and supports economic initiatives which create jobs and foster solidarity;
Amendment 81 #
2011/0418(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1
1. EuSEF managers shall ensure that, when acquiring assets other than qualifying investments an average of no more than 30 percent of the EuSEF's aggregate capital contributions and uncalled committed capital is used for the acquisition of assets other than qualifying investments over a maximum period of five years; short term holdings in cash and cash equivalents shall not be taken into account for calculating this limit.
Amendment 123 #
2011/0418(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 4
Article 16 – paragraph 4
4. ESMA shall submit those draft implementing technical standards to the Commission by [insert date]nine months at the latest after the entry in force of this regulation..
Amendment 126 #
2011/0418(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 1 a (new)
The ESMA and the competent authorities in Member States shall inform investors, investment fund managers and companies of the existence of the EuSEF.
Amendment 136 #
2011/0418(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 a (new)
Article 25 a (new)
Article 25a Amendment of Directive 2009/65/EC The following is to be added to Article 50(1): i) European Social Entrepreneurship Funds, as defined in Regulation (EU) No …/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of … on European Social Entrepreneurship Funds ((COD) 2011/0418), up to a maximum of 10%;
Amendment 307 #
2011/0302(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a – point iii a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a – point iii a (new)
(iii a) iv) enabling the decarbonisation of all modes of transport through transition to innovative low-carbon and energy efficient transport technologies as well as the introduction of alternative propulsion systems and the provision of the adequate infrastructure required to support the transition to a low-carbon economy and transport system.
Amendment 357 #
2011/0302(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) actions implementing the core network according to Chapter III of Regulation (EU) No XXXX/2012 [TEN-T Guidelines], including the deployment of new technologies ands well as innovation actions and approaches according to Article 39 of Regulation (EU) No XXXX/2012 [TEN-T Guidelines];
Amendment 446 #
2011/0302(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point b – point ii a (new)
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point b – point ii a (new)
(ii a) iii) actions, enabling the decarbonisation of all transport modes through the transition to innovative low- carbon and energy efficient transport technologies as well as the introduction of alternative propulsion systems and the provision of adequate support infrastructure to enable this transition; the amount of Union financial aid shall not exceed 20% of the eligible cost; the funding rate may be increased if necessary for actions concerning cross- border sections and of common EU interest;
Amendment 15 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2
Article 2
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 sustainable development and structural adjustment of regional economies, including the conversion of declining industrial regions and regions lagging behind.
Amendment 17 #
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, sports, health and educational infrastructure;
Amendment 20 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point d – point iv a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point d – point iv a (new)
(iva) investments to promote sustainable tourism and protect cultural heritage;
Amendment 21 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 37 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b – point ii
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b – point ii
ii) at least 610% of the total ERDF resources at national level shall be allocated to the thematic objective set out in point 4 of Article 9 of Regulation (EU) No […]/2012 [CPR].
Amendment 43 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – point 4 – point a
Article 5 – point 4 – point a
(a) promoting the production and distribution of renewable and low-carbon energy sources;
Amendment 44 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – point 4 – point e
Article 5 – point 4 – point e
(e) promoting low-carbon strategies for– including sustainable mobility and clean public transport – for all types of region, particularly urban areas;
Amendment 50 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – point 6 – introductory part
Article 5 – point 6 – introductory part
(6) protecting the environment, biodiversity and ecosystems and promoting resource efficiency:
Amendment 52 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – point 6 – point b
Article 5 – point 6 – point b
(b) addressing the significant needs for investment in the water sector to reduce leakage and meet the requirements of the environmental acquis;
Amendment 63 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – point 9 – point a
Article 5 – point 9 – point a
(a) investing in health, sports 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 10 #
2011/0229(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Title
Title
Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 1760/2000 as regards electronic identification of bovine animals and deleting the provisions on the system of voluntary beef labelling
Amendment 15 #
2011/0229(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) Regulation (EC) No 1760/2000 and more in particular bovine identification and the voluntary beef labelling system were listed as "information obligations with special importance in terms of the burdens they impose on businesses" in the Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on an "Action Programme for Reducing Administrative Burdens in the EU" .
Amendment 34 #
2011/0229(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) Member States have very different husbandry systems, farming practices and sector organisations. Member States should therefore be allowed to make EID compulsory on their territory only when they deem it appropriate, after considering all those factors and following consultation with organisations representing the beef industry.
Amendment 46 #
2011/0229(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) Section II of Title II of Regulation (EC) No 1760/2000 lays down rules for a voluntary beef labelling system which provide for the approval of certain labelling specifications by the competent authority of the Member State. The administrative burden and the costs incurred by Member States and economic operators in applying this system are not proportionate to the benefits of the system. That Section should therefore be deletedThe rules on the voluntary labelling system should therefore be deleted. The deletion should, however, be balanced by the formulation of general rules ensuring consumer protection.
Amendment 84 #
2011/0229(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 13 a (new)
Article 1 – point 13 a (new)
Regulation (EC) No 1760/2000
Title II – section 2 – title
Title II – section 2 – title
(13a) The Title of Chapter II, part II is replaced by the following: Voluntary labelling.
Amendment 94 #
2011/0229(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 14
Article 1 – point 14
(14) Articles 16, 17 and 18 are deleted is amended as follows: General rules Information other than that specified in part I of this Title which is added to labels by operators or organisations marketing beef must be objective, verifiable by the relevant authorities and comprehensible to consumers.
Amendment 97 #
2011/0229(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 14
Article 1 – point 14
Regulation (EC) No 1760/2000
Articles 16 - 18
Articles 16 - 18
(14) Articles 16, 17 and 18 are deleted.
Amendment 39 #
2011/0172(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 33 a (new)
Recital 33 a (new)
(33a) Under the Commission’s legislative proposals of 6 October 2011 concerning the future of the European Union’s cohesion policy, it is likely that there will be a significant increase in the financial support for energy efficiency provided by the Structural Funds and the Cohesion Fund in the 2014-2020 period compared to the 2007-2013 period. Such funding will make a decisive contribution to the attainment of this Directive’s objectives
Amendment 129 #
2011/0172(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a (new) Member States shall draw up national roadmaps to provide details about national strategies to reduce carbon emission of the building stock by 80% in 2050 compared to 1990 levels. These national shall be adopted by January 1, 2014 (for public buildings), by January 1, 2015 (for commercial buildings), and by January 1, 2017 (for private buildings), and will also establish intermediary targets for average energy consumption of the building stock 2020, 2030, and 2040.
Amendment 137 #
2011/0172(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Member States shall ensure that, as far as possible, public bodies purchase only products, services and buildings with high energy efficiency performance, as referred to in Annex III.
Amendment 155 #
2011/0172(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 5 – introductory part
Article 6 – paragraph 5 – introductory part
5. Within the energy efficiency obligation scheme, Member States mayshall be asked to:
Amendment 163 #
2011/0172(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 5 – point c
Article 6 – paragraph 5 – point c
(c) allow obligated parties to count savings obtained in a given year as if they had instead been obtained in any of the two previous or two following years, so as to enhance the system’s flexibility.
Amendment 187 #
2011/0172(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2
Article 7 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall ensure that enterprises not included in the second subparagraph of paragraph 1 are subject to an energy audit carried out in an independent and cost-effective manner by qualified and/or accredited experts at the latest by 30 June 2014 and every three years from the date of the previous energy audit. Audits may be carried out by in- house experts, provided that these are qualified and accredited, that they are not directly engaged in the activity audited, and that the Member state has put in place a scheme to assure and check their quality.
Amendment 342 #
2011/0172(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 19 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
Article 19 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
The Commission shall also monitor the impact of implementing this Directive on Directive 2003/87/EC, Directive 2009/28/EC as well as Directive 2010/31/EC. Until 30/06/2013 at the latest, the European Commission should come forward with a proposal to adjust the Effort Sharing Decision (Decision No 406/2009/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council).
Amendment 60 #
2011/0156(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Title
Title
Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on food intended for infants and young children and on, food for special medical purposes and other foods for specific nutritional purposes
Amendment 65 #
2011/0156(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) Directive 2009/39/EC foresees that specific provisions could be adopted regarding the two following specific categories of food falling within the definition of foodstuffs for particularspecialised nutritional uses: 'food intended to meet the expenditure of intense muscular effort, especially for sportsmen' and 'food for persons suffering from carbohydrate metabolism disorders (diabetes)'. With regard to food intended to meet the expenditure of intense muscular effort, no successful conclusion couldhas yet been reached as regards the development of specific provisions due to widely diverging views among Member States and stakeholders concerning the scope of the specific legislation, the number of sub- categories of the food to be included, the criteria for establishing composition requirements, compulsory information to ensure safe use of the food and the potential impact on innovation in product development. There is a real need for harmonisation of the category of food intended to meet the expenditure of intense muscular effort, especially for sportsmen. Harmonisation would remove the barriers to the free movement of these products and provide sportsmen with a high level of safety, at the same time ensuring the absence of doping substances. The Commission considers the matter of doping to be a priority in its communication entitled ‘Developing the European Dimension in Sport’ of 18 January 2011. As regards special provisions for food for persons suffering from carbohydrate metabolism disorders (diabetes), a Commission report concludes that the scientific basis for setting specific compositional requirements is lacking.
Amendment 66 #
2011/0156(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) Therefore, the concept of “‘foodstuffs for particular nutritional uses” should be abolished and for specific uses’ should therefore be maintained but strictly limited to products able to demonstrate their unique capacity to meet the specific nutritional needs of vulnerable groups of the population which would otherwise not be able to be placed on the market in a harmonised way under current EU law whilst fully complying with the rules on free movement. Directive 2009/39/EC should be replaced by the present act. To simplify its application and to ensure consistency throughout the Member States, the present act should take the form of a Regulation.
Amendment 75 #
2011/0156(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) A limited number of categories of food constitutes the sole source of nourishment of certain groups of the population or represent a partial source of nourishment; such categories of food are vital for the management of certain conditions and/or are essential to maintain the intended nutritional adequacy for certain well-established vulnerable groups of the population. Those categories of food include infant formulae and follow-on formulae, processed cereal-based food and baby food and food for special medical purposes, as well as food intended to meet the expenditure of intense muscular effort. Experience has shown that the provisions laid down in Commission Directive 2006/141/EC, Commission Directive 2006/125/EC, as well as Commission Directive 1999/21/EC ensure the free movement of such food in a satisfactory manner, while ensuring a high level of protection of public health. It is therefore appropriate that this Regulation focuses on the general compositional and information requirements for infant formula and follow-on formulae, processed cereal-based food and baby food for infants and young children and to food for special medical purposes, taking into account these three directivesas well as food intended to meet the expenditure of intense muscular effort, taking into account these three directives. The concept of ‘food for specific uses’ should therefore be maintained but strictly limited to products able to demonstrate their unique capacity to meet the specific nutritional needs of vulnerable groups of the population which would otherwise not be able to be placed on the market in a harmonised way under current EU law whilst fully complying with the rules on free movement.
Amendment 79 #
2011/0156(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) To ensure legal certainty, definitions laid down in Commission Directive 2006/141/EC, Commission Directive 2006/125/EC and Commission Directive 1999/21/EC should be transferred to this Regulation. However, the definitions of infant formulae and follow-on formulae, processed cereal-based food and baby food, and food for special medical purposes and food intended to meet the expenditure of intense muscular effort should be regularly adapted taking into account technical and scientific progress and relevant developments at international level, as appropriate.
Amendment 96 #
2011/0156(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) This Regulation should provide the criteria for the establishment of the specific compositional and information requirements for infant formula, follow-on formula, processed cereal-based food and baby food, and food for special medical purposes, as well as food intended to meet the expenditure of intense muscular effort, taking into account Commission Directive 2006/141/EC, Commission Directive 2006/125/EC and Commission Directive 1999/21/EC. In order to adapt the definitions of infant formula, follow-on formula, processed cereal-based food and baby food, and food for special medical purposes and food intended to meet the expenditure of intense muscular effort laid down in this Regulation taking into account technical and scientific progress and relevant developments at international level, to lay down the specific compositional and information requirements with respect to the categories of food covered by this Regulation and the procedure and timetable for placing on the market foodstuffs resulting from scientific and technological innovations, including for additional labelling requirements to, or derogations from, the provisions of Directive 2000/13/EC and for the authorisation of nutrition and health claims, 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. It is of particular importance that the Commission carries out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level. The Commission, when preparing and drawing-up delegated acts, should ensure a simultaneous, timely and appropriate transmission of relevant documents to the European Parliament and Council.
Amendment 105 #
2011/0156(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) It is appropriate to establish and update a Union list of vitamins, minerals, amino acids and other substances that may be addedsubstances that may be added for particular nutritional requirements to infant formula, follow-on formula, processed cereal-based food and baby food, and for infants and young children, food for special medical purposes and food intended to meet the expenditure of intense muscular effort, subject to certain criteria laid down in this Regulation. Given the fact that the adoption of the list implies the application of criteria set out in this Regulation, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission in that respect. Those powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member States of the Commission's exercise of implementing powers. The Commission should adopt immediately applicable implementing acts updating the Union list, where, in duly justified cases relating to public health, imperative grounds of urgency so require.
Amendment 118 #
2011/0156(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27 a (new)
Recital 27 a (new)
(27a) Low-calorie diets pursued in particular with specific food programmes are becoming more popular, a trend which is encouraged by modern lifestyles and media development. Such diets can cause nutritional imbalances and inequalities in the supply of the most essential nutrients (too little or too much) which are likely to endanger the health of those involved. Scientific studies point to clinical, biological, behavioural and psychological risks when these diets are based on misleading, erroneous or scientifically invalidated recommendations. The Commission must submit a report on low-calorie diets, taking into account Member States’ experience and after consulting the European Food Safety Authority. The report should aim to assess the impact of suitable measures to enable consumers wishing to undertake such diets to enjoy an appropriate level of protection.
Amendment 124 #
2011/0156(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. This Regulation establishes compositional and information requirements for the following categories of food for specific nutritional purposes:
Amendment 137 #
2011/0156(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) foods intended to meet the expenditure of intense muscular effort.
Amendment 141 #
2011/0156(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. This Regulation establishes rules for placing on the market of other foods for specialised nutritional purposes.
Amendment 148 #
2011/0156(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
(aa) ‘food for specialised nutritional purposes’ means foodstuffs which, owing to their special composition or manufacturing process, are clearly distinguishable from foodstuffs for normal consumption, which are suitable for their claimed nutritional purposes and which are marketed in such a way as to indicate such suitability;
Amendment 159 #
2011/0156(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point h
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point h
(h) '‘food for special medical purposes'’ means food specially treated or formulated and intended for the dietary management of patients to be used under medical supervision. It is intended for the exclusive or partial feeding of patients with a limited, impaired or disturbed capacity to take, digest, absorb, metabolise or excrete ordinary food or certain nutrients contained thereinof their ingredients or metabolites, or with other medically- determined nutrient requirements, whose dietary management cannot be achieved only by modification of the normal diet. Dietary foods for special medical purposes are classified in the following three categories: (a) nutritionally complete foods with a standard nutrient formulation which, used in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions, may constitute the sole source of nourishment for the persons for whom they are intended; (b) nutritionally complete foods with a nutrient-adapted formulation specific for a disease, disorder or medical condition which, used in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions, may constitute the sole source of nourishment for the persons for whom they are intended; (c) nutritionally incomplete foods with a standard formulation or a nutrient- adapted formulation specific for a disease, disorder or medical condition which are not suitable to be used as the sole source of nourishment. The foods referred to in points (a) and (b) may also be used as a partial replacement or as a supplement to the patient’s diet.
Amendment 165 #
2011/0156(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point h a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point h a (new)
(ha) ‘food intended to meet the expenditure of intense muscular effort’ means food specifically formulated and presented to compensate for expenditure sustained during intense muscular effort, in particular for sportsmen.
Amendment 172 #
2011/0156(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 3
Article 2 – paragraph 3
3. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 15 to adapt the definitions of 'infant formula', 'follow-on formula', 'processed cereal-based food' and 'baby food' and, 'food for special medical purposes' and ‘food intended to meet expenditure for intense muscular effort’ taking into account technical and scientific progress and relevant developments at international level, as appropriate.
Amendment 176 #
2011/0156(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3
Article 3
Food referred to in Article 1(1) and (2) may be placed on the market only if it complies with the provisions of this Regulation.
Amendment 180 #
2011/0156(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The composition, presentation and labelling of food referred to in Article 1(1) and 1(2) satisfy the nutritional requirements of the persons for whom they are intended. They give consumers sufficient information to promote risk- free use of these products and safe food, in line with generally-accepted scientific data.
Amendment 181 #
2011/0156(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. In the labelling, presentation and advertising of foodstuffs for normal consumption the following shall be prohibited: (a) the use of the words ‘specialised nutrition’, either alone or in conjunction with other words, to designate those foodstuffs; (b) all other markings or any presentation likely to give the impression that one of the products referred to in Article 1(1) and 1(2) is involved.
Amendment 183 #
2011/0156(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 1
1. Food referred to in Article 1(1) shall comply with any requirement of Union law applicable to food, save as regards changes made to them to ensure their conformity with the definitions given in Article 1.
Amendment 278 #
2011/0156(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 18 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. No later than ...*, the Commission shall submit to the European Parliament and the Council a report – accompanied, where appropriate, by a legislative proposal – on the need to control the marketing of low-calorie diets. ______________ * OJ: please insert date: three years after the entry into force of this Regulation.
Amendment 11 #
2011/0000(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses the urgent need to reduce tax barriers for cross-border workers and employers in order to facilitate citizens’their mobility;
Amendment 23 #
2011/0000(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Emphasises the importance of pursuing a European strategy to support social entrepreneurship, a sector marked by inclusive, smart and sustainable growth; considers that the regulation aiming to create a European social entrepreneurship fund label is a first step in this direction and welcomes it;
Amendment 30 #
2010/2304(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that the cost in administrative and planning terms of implementing national and European broadband support programmes is considerable; calls, therefore, on the Commission and the Member States to simplify conditions for support as well as procedures as far as possible, in order to step up the flow of funds and foster the economic development of the areas concerned;
Amendment 2 #
2010/2277(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. WObserves that European Union policies on the single market and regional development are highly complementary and are both conducive to a Europe marked by cohesion and competitiveness; welcomes the Commission’s proposals aimed at deepening the single market;
Amendment 8 #
2010/2277(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses that in a globalised world the single market has to ensure the best possible business environment for enterprises, and to take the specific nature and diversity of SMEs into account in order to foster job creation, innovation and entrepreneurship in all EU regions, including rural areas; welcomes, therefore, the planned assessment of the ‘Small Business Act’ and the reinforcement of the ‘Think Small First’ principle; draws attention to the importance of local businesses for social ties, employment and dynamism in disadvantaged areas, particularly urban districts facing difficulties or sparsely populated areas; calls for them to receive staunch support under the Union’s regional policy;
Amendment 17 #
2010/2277(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses that single market accessibility for all EU regions is a prerequisite for the free movement of people, goods, capital and services, and thus for a strong and dynamic single market; points out, in this connection, the essential role played by the Union's regional policy in terms of developing infrastructure, particularly in the less developed, border and outermost regions; advocates a regional approach making use of the Structural Funds to encourage investment in cross-border energy, transport, communication, health, environmental, research and education infrastructure in order to provide access to essential services for all and to ensure harmonious functioning of the internal market; calls for the development of innovative sources of funding (such as public-private partnerships, project bonds and user charges); calls on the Commission and the Member States jointly to address the complexity of the rules governing revenue- generating projects;
Amendment 33 #
2010/2277(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Underlines that regions situated on the internal borders of the single market are the first to experience the consequences of removing those borders; asks the Commission to take into account concerns regarding the ‘threshold effect’ between border regions that enjoy comparable degrees of development but receive significantly different levels of financial support under the Union's regional policy; calls for a debate on creating a fair and legitimate intermediate category betweto complement the current ‘convergence’ and ‘regional competitiveness and employment’ objectives;
Amendment 45 #
2010/2277(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Stresses that the single market requires an adequately funded regional policy for the period after 2013 and that its budget must on no account be less than that which applies during the current period, 2007-2013;
Amendment 49 #
2010/2277(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Takes the view that territorial cooperation (including European Groupings of Territorial Cooperation (EGTCs) and macro-regional strategies) makes a decisive contribution to removing visible and invisible internal borders within the single market and further developing that market; calls, in this connection, for the post-2013 budget for territorial cooperation to be increased; would like access to European regional cooperation funding to be simplified to facilitate participation, inter alia, by private parties;
Amendment 65 #
2010/2277(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. AWelcomes the role played by the Committee of the Regions in involving local and regional parties in the debate on the Single Market Act; asks the Commission furtherto continue to involve the Committee of the Regions and Parliament, and to work with them in order continuously to monitor the potential and actual consequences for regions of the deepening of the single market; welcomes, therefore, the idea of a single market forum.
Amendment 6 #
2010/2276(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recognises that Roma continue to be victims of persistentpopulation faces discrimination in many Member States and that this situation is exacerbated by the current economic and financial crisis; calls on those Member States which the EU Fundamental Rights Agency identified as having severe problems to fully exploit the EUfinancial resources available under the StructuralEU Funds, and in particular the ERDF, ESF and ESF;AFRD.
Amendment 9 #
2010/2276(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Encourages the use of EU funds for building of new houses or renovation of existing ones, improving of engineering infrastructure, local utilities, communication systems, education, measurements for access to the job market etc., which should lead to social and economic inclusion marginalised communities
Amendment 10 #
2010/2276(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Recalls that European programmes and funding are available and can be used for education, housing and employment of Roma people but that the local authorities, civil society and the potential target groups of these programmes are insufficiently informed about them; calls on the Commission and Member States to improve communication and the promotion of financing opportunities available in these fields;
Amendment 12 #
2010/2276(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Calls for better advice to project organisers eligible for European funding for the integration of Roma people, by creating platforms for information, analyses and exchanges of good practices;
Amendment 42 #
2010/2276(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Recommends Member States 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 (pre- schooling and for the whole period of schooling), and the acceptance of jobs offered by job mediators, in order to ensure their real, effective and sustainable integration.
Amendment 3 #
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; notes that the most dynamic technology industries are not necessarily located in or near capital cities but in the proximity of the most innovative universities;
Amendment 19 #
2010/2245(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Underlines the need to detect sleeping innovators, in particular among SMEs; points to the important role of intermediate organisations in detecting sleeping innovators, providing incentives, giving advice and supporting innovation; takes the view that these organisations should be strengthened and that a programme aimed at improving training, qualifications and expertise should be developed for them;
Amendment 28 #
2010/2245(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses the need to strengthen the links between EU budget instruments and EIB funding; recognises the investment leverage potential of these sources of funding and asks for them to be strengthened, especially as regards JEREMIE and JESSICA; emphasises the need to develop funding instruments that are geared to the specific circumstances and needs of the smallest firms and to considerably simplify the procedures for gaining access to the funding;
Amendment 39 #
2010/2245(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Considers that priority should be given to fostering the development at regional level of an innovation culture, both among entrepreneurs, young people undergoing vocational training and workers and among the partners who have an influence on business activities, such as regional public-decision makers, research centres, clusters and funding bodies, which in many cases are not sufficiently aware of the innovation capacities of the firms in their regions, in particular the SMEs (including micro- enterprises and craft firms);
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 18 #
2010/2211(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Points out that the success of economic and social cohesion policy can be clearly seen in the 271 regions of the 27 Member States and notes that the subsidiarity principle and multilevel governance and partnership are fundamental prerequisites for that success; reaffirms its position on best practice, as set out in its resolution of 24 March 2009 on best practices in the field of regional policy and obstacles to the use of the Structural Funds;
Amendment 27 #
2010/2211(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 – indent 1
Paragraph 5 – indent 1
we need sustainable economic growth which has a positive impact on the labour market in both urban and ruralurban, rural and extremely remote areas;
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 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 101 #
2010/2211(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Takes the view that, in addition to assisting the regions, cohesion policy measures also raise the EU's profile in the regions, and points out that better public relations work in the Member States could demonstrate this even morecommunication by all those involved – European institutions, Member States and local authorities - could make the added value of European action even clearlyer;
Amendment 3 #
2010/2206(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Points out that the Treaty of Lisbon grants new powers to the European Union with regard to tourism, particularly with a view to enhancing that sector’s competitiveness and capacity for dynamic and sustainable growthunder Article 195 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, the European Union now has powers in the field of tourism, complementing the action taken by the Member States, in order to promote the competitiveness of EU enterprises in this sector;
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 24 #
2010/2206(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Considers that social, economic and environmental sustainability are a prerequisite for developing and maintaining all tourism activity; urges the Commission to develop a ‘European label’, along the lines of the European Heritage Label, in order to create a profile for products and services of excellence and at the same time enhance Europe’s image worldwide;
Amendment 43 #
2010/2206(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Amendment 54 #
2010/2206(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Commissionsiders that the visibility and attractiveness of EU regions are enhanced by the activities of the cultural and creative industries; calls on, the Member States and the local and regional authorities to encourage and support the development of networks and the creation of partnerships for the exchange of good practicemake appropriate use of the sectoral or structural financial instruments and the financial engineering systems available at European level in order to encourage culture and creativity and to support the industries working in this sector; hopes that concrete initiatives will be undertaken in support of innovation and the development of new information technologies, and that access will be facilitated for stakeholders in the tourist industry, and particularly small– and medium–sized enterprises, to the relevant financial instruments; calls on the Commission, the Member States and the local and regional authorities to encourage and support the development of networks and the creation of partnerships for the exchange of good practice;
Amendment 6 #
2010/2155(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
I. whereas citizens must be placed at the centre of the priorities of territorial cooperation, in particular in the context of cross-border cooperation,
Amendment 59 #
2010/2155(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Believes that greater complementarity between the ‘territorial cooperation’ objective, on the one hand, and the ‘convergence’ and ‘competitiveness and employment’ objectives, on the other, is needed; suggests that regional operational programmes should participate in the cross-border and transnational projects that concern them by earmarking funding by territory fordefining a territorial approach to the allocation of funding, for the benefit of priority projects identified in advance and agreed with their partners in the programme partners, in accordance with the principles of multi-level governance and the partnership;
Amendment 65 #
2010/2155(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Encourages the Member States and regions to set up multi-regional operational programmes to address common territorial problems, such as the presence of a mountain range or a river basin which characterises the territory; invites the Commission consider the rule changes which would be needed so that cross- border multi-regional operational programmes could be established along similar lines;
Amendment 107 #
2010/2155(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22a. Takes the view that cross-border EGTCs offer an excellent opportunity to build Europe at territorial level with the involvement of EU citizens; calls on cross-border EGTCs to launch and run a ‘cross-border civil society forum’ and to support cross-border citizens’ initiatives;
Amendment 2 #
2010/2142(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that cohesion funds are subject to particularly complex rules and are implemented differently from other EU spending areas, which makes them more vulnerable to errors; draws attention to the fact that the error rate in cohesion spending remains the highest of all EU payments with greater than 5 % in 2009; is aware of thehighlights, nonetheless, the major decrease in the error rate in comparison to 2008;
Amendment 8 #
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, where it is demonstrated that this can bring improvements, while retaining procedures that have proved effective; 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;
Amendment 10 #
2010/2142(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to consider the advisability of developing the 'contract of confidence’ principle so as to be able to scale down checks on systems that have proved their worth in combating errors and fraud;
Amendment 51 #
2010/2139(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Notes that the current framework of cohesion policy has proven to allow a flexible and appropriate response to the rapidly deteriorating socioeconomic environment; underlines that Member States appreciated that the crisis measures could be tailored to their specific needs; calls nonetheless for greater flexibility in the rules to enable crises to be combated;
Amendment 64 #
2010/2139(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Highlights the particular added value of more synergies between ERDF and ESF, since and the rural development component of the EARFD; notes that experience clearly proves that successful performance of ESF- financed programmes is essential in order to maximise the effectiveness of ERDF funding for economic actions;
Amendment 85 #
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 andshould continue both at EU and Member State level, primarily through developing improved rules for the future negotiation of regulations applicable to the next programming period; considers that regional policy should be better adapted to the needs of users and that this simplification should contribute to the increased efficiency of this policy; regrets that, due to superfluous bureaucracy, overcomplicated rules and a lack of harmonised procedures, many funds remain unused;
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 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 1 #
2010/2088(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 (new)
Paragraph -1 (new)
-1. Emphasises that 'Measuring regional economic performance and prosperity' is clearly an aspect of cohesion and structural policy and thus falls within the sphere of responsibility of the Committee on Regional Development;
Amendment 7 #
2010/2088(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Approves the Commission’s proposal to make a set ofother indicators – in addition to GDP figures – available for EU policies with a view to improving both the circumstances in which decisions are taken and the response to the concerns of citizens in Europe’s various regions; points out, in that connection, that a number of national and international actors have acknowledged the relevance of indicators which supplement GDP figures; to that end, supports Eurostat’s activities;
Amendment 9 #
2010/2088(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Takes the view that the environmental and social orientation of the Structural Funds hitherto has been decisive in fostering sustainable regional development; calls for the pro-business, social and environmental aspects of the 2020 Strategy to be made more central to the approach underpinning the Structural Funds as well as from 2014;
Amendment 34 #
2010/2088(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. In the light of the ever closer degree of interdependence between economic, social and environmental issues, takes the view that focusing on GDP alone is likely to provide an incomplete impression that takes no account of the actual situations in the regions, and could result in poor choices being made and inappropriate decisions being taken;
Amendment 40 #
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’ vulnerabilitieseducation, health, protecting the well-being of citizens, social integration and environmental protection are issues underpinning the European model for development, which is based on a social market economy which seeks to guarantee smart, sustainable and inclusive growth;
Amendment 62 #
2010/2088(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls on the Commission, therefore, to introduce, as a matter of priority and urgency,, relevant 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 latestif possible by the start of the 2014-2020 programming period;
Amendment 86 #
2010/2088(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Proposes that in future the criteria governing regions’ eligibility for EU funding should be considered in the light of the set of relevant indicators that ismay be brought in; calls for environmental and social indicators to be given the same status astaken into account alongside GDP when it comes to classifying the regions.
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 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 #
2010/2072(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point 1
Paragraph 1 – point 1
1. Calls on the Commission to submit forthwith a report on the use made to date of the Globalisation Adjustment Fund, setting out in particular a detailed account of how the appropriations were used and what proportion of overall funding they accounted for by comparison with other national and company-specific support measures; calls on the Commission to draw initial conclusions from that report and rapidly submitHopes that the annual report and mid- term review will make it possible to gauge the results obtained through EGF co- funded measures and will include proposals for the improvement of the fund;
Amendment 6 #
2010/2072(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point 2
Paragraph 1 – point 2
Amendment 12 #
2010/2072(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point 3
Paragraph 1 – point 3
Amendment 16 #
2010/2072(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point 4
Paragraph 1 – point 4
4. Calls on the Commission to consider the introducetion of criteria by means of which the granting of EGF assistance can be linked as a matter of priority to restructuring measures designed to secure and create employment and ecologically sustainable and socially balanced development in the regions concernedwhich guarantee added value for the EGF over structural funds;
Amendment 21 #
2010/2072(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point 5
Paragraph 1 – point 5
5. Calls on the Commission, when allocating EGF assistance, to give the social partners a formal role in the decision-making proces to ensure that the social partners are closely involved in the application development and assessment phases;
Amendment 22 #
2010/2072(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point 6
Paragraph 1 – point 6
6. Calls on the Commission to broaden the criteria for mobilisation of the EGF, in keeping wirecommend an adjustment to the EGF operating procedures applicable beyond the the above-mentioned conditions, to cover delocalisation within the European Union and toemporary provisions, which will cease to apply at the end of 2011, together with a simplify the ied application procedure significantly, with a view to making it a more effective crisis response instrument;
Amendment 27 #
2010/2072(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point 7
Paragraph 1 – point 7
7. Calls on the Commission to increase significantly the financial framework for the EGF, in the light of the current economic and financial crisis and the Fund’s broader remit, and to create a separate title in the budget for the EGFrecommend the continuation of the EGF after 2013, and its endowments with a separate budget line.
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 66 #
2010/0377(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 22 a (new)
Recital 22 a (new)
(22 a) There needs to be a systematic evaluation of the need to adapt the annex to this Directive listing dangerous substances, following the adaptations to the technical progress of Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008. This would enable a functional link to be ensured between the Regulation and this Directive and would also provide for increased protection of human health and the environment.
Amendment 93 #
2010/0377(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 4
4. '‘new establishment'’ means an establishment that is newly constructed or has yet to enter into operation ;
Amendment 97 #
2010/0377(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 7
7. ‘installation’ means a technical unit, within an establishment, in which dangerous substances are produced, used, handled or stored, including underground, and includes all the equipment, structures, pipework, machinery, tools, private railway sidings, docks, unloading quays serving the installation, jetties, warehouses or similar structures, floating or otherwise, necessary for the operation of the installation;
Amendment 139 #
2010/0377(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall require the operator to draw up a document setting out the major-accident prevention policy (hereinafter: "MAPP") and to ensure that it is properly implemented. The MAPP shall be established in writing. It shall be designed to guarantee a high level of protection for human health and the environment. It shall be proportionate to the major-accident hazards. It shall include the operator's overall aims and principles of action, the role and responsibility of management and shall address safety culture with respect to the control of major-accident hazards.
Amendment 167 #
2010/0377(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) the authorities designated for that purpose by the Member State draw up an external emergency plan for the measures to be taken outside the establishment within onetwo years following receipt of the information from the operator pursuant to point (b).
Amendment 171 #
2010/0377(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1
Member States shall ensure that internal and external emergency plans are reviewed, tested, and where necessary revised and updated by the operators and designated authorities respectively and tested at suitable intervals of no longer than three years. TWhe review shall take into account changes occurring in the establishments concerned or within the emergency services concerned, new technical knowledge, and knowledge concerning the response to major accident necessary the plans shall be revised and updated by the operators and designated authorities.
Amendment 184 #
2010/0377(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that the information referred to in Annex V is permanently available to the public, including in an electronic format. The information shall be reviewed and where necessary updated at least once aevery three years.
Amendment 104 #
2010/0354(COD)
Proposal for a regulation - amending act
Article 1 - point 5 a (new)
Article 1 - point 5 a (new)
Regulation (EC) No. 1234/2007
Article 118 y - paragraph 3 - point a
Article 118 y - paragraph 3 - point a
5a. Article 118y(3)(a) shall be replaced by the following: "(a) where a traditional expression referred to in Article 118u(1)(a) appears on the label in accordance with the legislation of a Member State or the specifications referred to in Article 118c of this Regulation;”
Amendment 53 #
2009/2235(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Stresses that education, training, research and innovation are key instruments to foster the development of the EU and make it more competitive in the face of global challenges; is of the opinion that there must be regular investment in these fields and that innovation in particular should be measured by its results; calls in this regard for a better coordination of the structural funds and the Framework program to maximise the benefits of the funding for research and innovation in the future;
Amendment 5 #
2009/2234(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. stressing the fact that, based on the National Strategic Reports for 2009, the Member States appear to have made rather different uses of the instruments, means and methods for facilitating cohesion policy proposed by the Commission to combat the crisis and increase actual expenditure (such as use of 100% financing, changes to the strategic guidelines and the axes and financing for the operational programmes and the response to the simplification of implementing procedures);
Amendment 26 #
2009/2234(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Acknowledges the significant problem posed by the reduction in the contribution of national co-financing to programmes, which affects Objective 2, due to the major financial problems of many Member States, and supports Commission policy regarding a ‘100% compensation’ option, following a request by Member States concerning their public expenditure share in co-financed projects, and therefore considers it necessary for the amendment of Regulation 1083/2006 in its present form accepted by the Council to be adopted and implemented quickly in Parliament;
Amendment 42 #
2009/2233(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Endorses the views expressed in the Green Paper on Territorial Cohesion con the main factors in territorial cohesion; makes specific reference to respect for regioncerning competitiveness, which 'depends on building links with other territories to ensure that common assets are used in a cordinated and sustainable way' in order to release the potential inherent in the territorial diversity andof the development of regional potential and competitiveness, emphasising the importance of accessibility through public services and suitableEuropean Union; in that connection, emphasises the importance for competitiveness and the opening-up of all territories of the coordinated and integrated development of transport and ICTs and the pooling, where appropriate, of energy, healthcare, research, education and environmental protection infrastructure, and; calls on the Commission to bring forward concrete proposals for implementing the objective of territorial cohesion;
Amendment 51 #
2009/2233(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Takes the view that the Member States must support a place-based approach to framing and implementing cohesion policy; acknowledges that the role of the regions varies between Member States depending on their political and administrative structure; requests that an improvement be sought, by promoting the principle of decentralisation, over the current programming period, in which the regions are administering on average only 30.5% of the overall budget allocated to cohesion policy, with the remainder being administered by central governments;
Amendment 70 #
2009/2233(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Takes the view that if the key indicator in deciding which areas are eligible for EU financial assistance should be the level of GDP and that, the introduction of other indicators can only be admitted after studies have been conducted on their relevance and on the way in which that information is collected and processed;
Amendment 11 #
2009/2232(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to make these Member State databases fully searchable and compatible, so as to facilitate an EU-wide overview of the data presented, while preserving their local relevance; is of the view that, in this respect, dual-language versions (local language(s)-Englishone of the Commission’s working languages) should be considered;
Amendment 15 #
2009/2232(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls for additional essential information to be provided when publishing the lists of beneficiaries; recommends, therefore, that, besides the current minimum requirements, consideration be given to including location and comprehensive contact details, summaries of approved projects, types of support (e.g. loans, grants, venture capital, etc.) and a description of the project partners (e.g. legal status, size, etc.), summaries of approved projects and possible co-financers as elements of the disclosure of beneficiaries;
Amendment 22 #
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 regulationscloser scrutiny and sanctions in cases of non-compliance;
Amendment 30 #
2009/2232(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Stresses the importance of accurate and timely information delivery by the Member States as a preventive measure in the context of the control system, and thus the need to establish a link between the ETI and financial controls and auditing; reiterates its view that the early warning system (EWS) should also cover EU funds managed in partnership with Member Stateswork closely with the Central Exclusion Database;
Amendment 32 #
2009/2232(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Reiterates its request for the provision of information regarding recoveries and withdrawals under the ETI; urges the Member States to provide this information inand the Commission, when these procedures have been carried out fuoll, and the Commission to make it available to the budgetary authority and the public along with information on financial corrections and fraudowing a confirmed case of fraud, to make this information available to the budgetary authority and the public;
Amendment 35 #
2009/2232(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Urges auditors to take a tougher line on communication and information requirements, including ‘naming and shaming’ and the use of financial corrections in cases of non-compliance;
Amendment 40 #
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 phasat appropriate stages of cohesion programming and implementation at an early stage and to give them full access to all project documendocuments relevant to the projects, with a view to making better use of their experience and knowledge;
Amendment 43 #
2009/2232(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
Amendment 46 #
2009/2232(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Calls for the provision of better- targeted and more regular information to partner organisations, and for enhanced use of technical assistance to support partnership, inter alia by giving partner organisations the opportunity to take part in training events organised for delivery bodies; calls for these training events to be accessible in multimedia versions in order to broaden the target audience and to allow ex-post consultation by partner organisations; emphasises the usefulness of such a measure for the partners of the most distant regions of the Union, such as outermost regions;
Amendment 48 #
2009/2232(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Calls for the timely publication of online information, including direct access to projecrelevant documentation (application, feasibility study, cost-benefit analysis, environmental impact assessment, etc.) onon the European Union’s financial commitments as regards major projects, as soon as possible after the Commission receives an application for funding from a Member State and before it takes any decision on financing; this Commission webpage should allow the submission of comments regarding such projects;
Amendment 6 #
2009/2231(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital Ca (new)
Recital Ca (new)
Ca. whereas funding application procedures that are too complicated and an excessive number of checks are likely to discourage potential beneficiaries of cohesion policy,
Amendment 14 #
2009/2231(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses that multi-level governance allows better exploitation of the potential of territorial cooperation thanks to the relations developed among private and public actors across borders; urges those Member States which have not yet done so to adopt as soon as possible the necessary provisions allowing the setting up of European Groupings ofor Territorial Cooperation; recommends that the Commission promote exchange of information between the EGTCs already created and those in the process of being set up; congratulates the Committee of the Regions on the quality of its work on EGTCs and welcomes the provision of information on them through the EGTC Internet portal;
Amendment 28 #
2009/2231(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Calls on the Member States also to strengthen, where appropriate, the role of regional and local authorities in programme management and implementation, w and to build up the re appropriatesources at their disposal; recommends the adoption in the cohesion policy of the local development methodology based on local partnerships, in particular for projects related to urban, rural and cross-border issues;
Amendment 37 #
2009/2231(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Calls on the Commission to create a training and mobility schysteme for local and regional actors involved in running cohesion policy programmes, in order to raise the standard of proposed projects and meet the cohesion policy’s objective of efficiency;
Amendment 50 #
2009/2231(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Is convinced that compliance with the procedures cannot be at the expense of the quality of interventions; asks the Commission for a more result-oriented policy in the future, focused on quality performance and strategic project development rather than on controls; to this end, urges the Commission to develop objective and measurable indicators which are comparable across the Union and to give further consideration to the need for flexible rules in the event of economic crises;
Amendment 54 #
2009/2231(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Welcomes the ongoing simplification of the Financial Regulation and the Structural Funds regulations; calls for a simpler architecture for the Funds after 2013, not as a consequence of the economic crisis but as a general principle of the future cohesion policy, in order to avoid discouraging potential partners from taking part in projects; recommends that greater transparency in respect of the use of the EU Funds should not lead to a disproportionately increased administrative burden;
Amendment 59 #
2009/2231(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Calls on the Commission to take on board the principles of differentiation and proportionality in future regulations and to adapt requirements according to the size of programmes and nature of partners, especially when small public authorities are involved; asks for wider use of lump- sums and flat rates for all Funds, in particular for overheads and technical assistance; proposes that provision be made for more flexible evaluation criteria for innovative projects and softer control requirements for pilot projects; encourages the Commission to develop the principle of a ‘bond of trust’ with the Member States undertaking to and succeeding in making good use of the Funds;
Amendment 1 #
2009/2222(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 (new)
Paragraph -1 (new)
-1. considering Article 14 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and Protocol No 26 annexed to the treaties,
Amendment 4 #
2009/2222(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Given that social services of general interest make a major contribution to the achievement of the EU's goals as enshrined in the Treaties, particularly in terms of promoting economic, social and territorial cohesion, calls on the Commission to use the evaluation and revision of the Monti- Kroes package to strengthen legal security in the field of social services of general interest, using a tailored approach which can easily be applied by organising public authorities and takes into account the specific ways in which social services are organised, their legal status and their strongly local nature, as well as the responsibility of the Member States for organising and financing these services;
Amendment 9 #
2009/2222(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls on the Commission to adopt a communication establishing a methodology for organising local authorities setting out guidelines for applying European rules, while enabling local authorities to handle European rules flexibly considering their national and local specificities;
Amendment 12 #
2009/2222(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls on the Commission to consider the advisability of putting forward a de minimis regulation specific to social services of general interest or to adjust the de minimis threshold for such services, in order to focus EU checks on State aid on social services likely to have a significant impact on cross-border trade within the EU;
Amendment 13 #
2009/2222(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Urges the Commission to act in response to the lack of regulation curreneed for legal certaintly affecting SSGI, by creating an unambiguous legislative framework grounded in legal certainty, in line withfor those operating in the SSGI sector by establishing an unambiguous and functional legal framework, particularly by providing the public authorities which organise them wishes of all interested partith a methodology indicating how to apply European rules;
Amendment 18 #
2009/2222(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls on the Commission to clarify how the concepts of economic and non- economic activityies and effects on trade are to be applied to social services of general interest and the specific arrangements for applying the concept of the ‘'level of compensation needed (...) on the basis of an analysis of the costs which a typical undertaking, well run and adequately provided with means of transport (...) would have incurred’' (CJUE, C-280/00, Altmark);
Amendment 20 #
2009/2222(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses that wthere an official act of entrustment has been transparently drawn up and made public and includes parameters for calculating compensation based on coverage of the actual cost of providing social services of general interest, systematic monitoring of overcompensation should be replaced by intervention only following a substantiated complaint.is a guarantee of transparency which has to be maintained; asks the Commission to consider whether rules set for entrustment and monitoring of overcompensation are appropriate to the characteristics of social services and to take initiatives if they are not deemed appropriate;
Amendment 80 #
2009/2222(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Considers that experience demonstratEmphasises that quality in SSGI provision should be based around a suitable financing method apt to ensure innovative and efficient services; stresses that the profit maximisation objective of commercial providers of SSGImust not conflicts with the principles and objectives of SSGI;
Amendment 94 #
2009/2222(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Stresses that national and local authorities engaged in providing or mandating SSGI need a clear legal basis for their services and expenditures, and that while the information and clarification service developed by the Commission is essential, it should be flanked with a methodology made available to the organis insufficient and does not protect SSGI providers from legal challengeg authorities and containing a grid for the application of the EU rules;
Amendment 105 #
2009/2222(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Emphasises that SSGI are an indispensable investment for Europe’s future, and are under severe pressure due to the economic and banking crises and government austerity programmes, which are resulting in even greater demand for them;
Amendment 152 #
2009/2222(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Emphasises that the quality of services must be based around regular and integrated consultation of users, who are taxpayers, since services must first and foremost meet their needs;
Amendment 165 #
2009/2222(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Calls for clarification of basic principles on the control of state aid, and for a review of the criteria for calculating compensation of public service obligations, with an eye to transparency vis-à-vis the taxpayer;
Amendment 174 #
2009/2222(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Calls for the 2005 Monti-Kroes response to the Altmark case to be broadened so as to simplify the rules, improve flexibility in their application, and expand the derogations. The de minimis threshold should beCalls on the Commission to assess whether it is appropriate to raised to at least EUR 500 000 over a three-year cyclehe de minimis threshold applicable to SSGI;
Amendment 14 #
2009/2203(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Is alarmed by the ongoing and expected contraction of employment in the European Union despite the exceptional efforts of monetary and fiscal policy;
Amendment 21 #
2009/2203(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Welcomes the intensified coordinperation between the Council, the ECB and the Eurogroup;
Amendment 29 #
2009/2203(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Points out that the objective of price stability can be achieved effectively only if the root causes of inflation are properly addressed; considers that the definition of price stability should be reviewed facing new increases of energy and food prices;
Amendment 36 #
2009/2203(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Warns against focusing essentially onof the potential consequences for consumer purchasing power of using wage moderation as a wayn instrument to achieve price stability and maintain competitiveness; recalls that increased global competition has already contributed to a downward pressure on wages, while higher commodity prices have harmed the purchasing power of EU consumers;
Amendment 42 #
2009/2203(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
Amendment 66 #
2009/2203(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Calls upon countries with current account surpluses to stimulate employment and internal demand inter alia by ending wage moderation, introducing minimum wages and making additional sustainable investments while taking into account the rules of the SGP;
Amendment 70 #
2009/2203(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Calls upon countries with current account deficits to curb the excessive consumptiongrowth of these deficits and increase sustainable investment;
Amendment 75 #
2009/2203(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Considers that the European budget is not sufficiently large to limit the imbalances between Member States effectively and suggests reexaminviewing its size upwards;
Amendment 87 #
2009/2203(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Suggests using the excessive deficit procedure of the SGP to ensure that Member States avoid excessive deficits and current account surplusedeficits;
Amendment 96 #
2009/2203(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Expresses its deep concern over the unsustainable level of public debt and its predicted rapid increase in 2010 and 2011 which forms an even larger burden, bearing in mind that future generations will inherit the growing ecological and private financial debt;
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 29 #
2009/2151(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Calls on the European Commission to propose a more systematic pooling of existing national resources through the creation of a European civil protection force, in order to strengthen the effectiveness of EU prevention mechanisms.
Amendment 41 #
2009/0128(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6 a (new)
Recital 6 a (new)
(6a) Each institution performing authentication of euro coins may apply a handling fee in accordance with this Regulation in order to cover the institution’s expenses related to the process. The handling fee must not be a burden on private individuals.
Amendment 46 #
2009/0128(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 2 a (new)
(2a) The Commission shall publish guidelines within a reasonable time of this Regulation coming into force in order to ensure the technical applicability of the provisions of paragraph 1.
Amendment 50 #
2009/0128(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 4 a (new)
(4a) If an individual submission contains coins which have been damaged by hazardous substances to such an extent that they may be considered dangerous to those required to handle them, the fee withheld in accordance with paragraph 1 shall be supplemented by an additional fee equivalent to 20% of the nominal value of the euro coins submitted.
Amendment 5 #
2009/0105(COD)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) With the view to enhance the economic and social cohesion of the Community, it is necessary to support limited interventions for the renovation of existing buildings serving housing purposes in Member States that acceded to the European Union on or after 1 May 2004. Those interventions can take place under the conditions set out in Article 7 (2) of Regulation (EC) No 1080/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2006 on the European Regional Development Fund and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1783/1999.
Amendment 7 #
2009/0105(COD)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) In the Member States to which Article 7(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1080/2006 applies, aA large number of marginalised communities live also outside urban areas. Therefore, it is necessary to extend the eligibility of expenditures on housing interventions in favour of these communities living in rural areas.
Amendment 11 #
2009/0105(COD)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) In line with Principle No 1 of those Common Basic Principles, in order to limit the risks of segregation, housing interventions for marginalised communities should take place in the framework of an integrated and sustainable approach, which includes actions, in particular, in the fields of education, health, social affairs, employment and security.
Amendment 14 #
2009/0105(COD)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1
Article 1
Regulation (EC) N°1080/2006
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
2. Expenditure on housing, except for energy efficiency and the use of renewable energy as set out in paragraph 1a, shall be eligible only for those Member States that acceded to the European Union on or after 1 May 2004, shall be eligible where the following conditions are met: (a) expenditure shall be programmed within one of the following frameworks: (i) the framework of an integrated urban development approach for areas experiencing or threatened by physical deterioration and social exclusion; (ii) the framework of an integrated and sustainable approach for marginalised communities. (b) The allocation to housing expenditure shall be either a maximum of 3 % of the ERDF allocation to the operational programmes concerned or 2 % of the total ERDF allocation.
Amendment 119 #
Amendment 121 #
2008/0241(COD)
Council position
Article 14 – paragraph 1
Article 14 – paragraph 1
1. Member States may require producers to show purchasers, at the time of sale of new products, the costs ofIn order to raise users' awareness, Member States shall ensure that producers of EEE: (a) put in place, in conjunction with distributors, appropriate collection schemes for very small volume WEEE, which (i) enable end-users to discard very small volume WEEE at an accessible and visible collection point in the retailer’s shop; (ii) require retailers to take back very small volume WEEE at no charge; (iii) do not involve any charge to end- users when discarding very small volume WEEE, nor any obligation to buy a new product of the same type. (b) may show purchasers, at the time of sale of new equipment, the differing costs associated with collection, treatment and disposal of waste in an environmentally sound way. The costs mentioned shall not exceed the best estimate of the actual costs incurred. , in order to make the actual costs of collection and recycling of WEEE more transparent. These differing costs shall not exceed the best estimate of the actual costs incurred, based on how easily products and the strategic raw materials they contain can be collected and recycled. (c) actively inform end-users of where and how they may return their very small volume WEEE. Distributors who make EEE available on the market solely by means of distance communication directly to private households or users other than private households shall only be subject to the obligations under points (a)( ii) and (iii). The collection scheme put in place by these distributors shall enable end-users to return very small volume WEEE without those users having to incur any charges, including delivery or postal charges. No later than ...*, the Commission shall adopt, by means of delegated acts in accordance with Article 20, a definition of 'very small volume WEEE', taking into account the risk of such waste not being separately collected due to its very small size. The obligations in this paragraph shall not apply to micro enterprises operating on a very small surface area. No later than ...*, the Commission shall adopt, by means of delegated acts in accordance with Article 20, a definition of 'micro enterprises operating on a very small surface area'. ______ * 12 months after the entry into force of this Directive.