Activities of William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

This legislative report seeks to reduce the VAT compliance burden for small businesses. Although it does not support the EU VAT system of taxation, UKIP does not wish to impede any reduction in compliance costs and so abstained.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs voted to abstain on this technically non-legislative report. In the UK, this drug already falls under the criteria listed in the Psychoactive Substances Act 2016. Subjecting it to control measures in the EU will assist in reducing its availability on the UK market. For this reason, UKIP MEPs abstained in this vote.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this budgetary proposal. This would mobilise over EUR 33 million in EU funds for European countries that had suffered natural disasters such as flooding, fires, or earthquakes. UKIP voted against, as we are opposed to unaccountable EU institutions spending British taxpayersʼ money. The UK already has its own foreign aid budget for situations such as this.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this budgetary proposal. This is linked to a previous vote mobilising EUR 33 million in EU funds for various European countries that had suffered natural disasters, such as flooding, fires, earthquakes, etc. UKIP voted against, as we oppose unaccountable EU institutions spending British taxpayers’ money. The UK already has its own foreign aid budget for situations such as this.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs voted against this own-initiative, non-legislative report. We believe that there are other factors more decisive in the peace process than EU funding. Post 2020, the EU should not be funding the UK, especially with the intention of making itself more visible, in the context of Brexit.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs voted against this own—initiative, non-legislative report. This report discusses EU funding to Greece in the wake of the financial crisis, and more recently the migrant crisis. While helping those in need is an honourable intention, we cannot support the use of EU funds.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this non-legislative and non-binding report. This report deals with the implementation of EU legislation and intrudes on the domestic legislation of Member States. We believe firmly in national sovereignty, and any measures related to the reintegration of workers should be created by the governments of the Members States.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This non-legislative Report seeks to politicise decisions on whether third country legislation is ‘equivalent’ to that in the EU and to use those decisions to promote the EU’s extra-territorial tax and regulatory policies. Accordingly UKIP voted against.

2016/11/22

. ‒ UKIP MEPs voted against this own initiative, non-legislative report. Whilst we support better performance in border regions, this should not be done at an EU level and should be left to Member States. Additionally, harmonisation of rules and funding for EU projects are something we cannot vote in favour of.

2016/11/22

. ‒ UKIP MEPs voted against this legislative report. UKIP is against the concept of another EU voluntary scheme, which this legislation was seeking to formalise. There are currently already two other EU voluntary schemes in place, European Voluntary Service and the EU Aid Volunteers. The ESC is set to cost the taxpayer EUR 341.5 million for 2018-2020, and may intervene in national government schemes.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs voted against this legislative, first-reading report. We do not believe that EU funds should be used in order to support Member States adopting the euro. Likewise, there should not be an increase to such funds. UKIP MEPs voted in favour of a rejection amendment tabled by our delegation on behalf of the EFDD.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs voted against this legislative report. UKIP supports the use of nuclear energy – R&D in Europe should also focus on the improvement of nuclear energy research and production as well as nuclear safe waste disposal. However, UKIP is against any attempts of phasing out nuclear energy and against any further empowerment of EU institutions in this field.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs voted to abstain on this non-legislative report. There were various calls within this report for gender quotas, to unblock the women on boards’ directive and to introduce EU legislation, all of which UKIP opposes. However, the premise of this report is of a sensitive nature, and involves combatting sexual and psychological harassment and gender-based violence, which UKIP support.

2016/11/22

. ‒ UKIP MEPs voted against this non-legislative report. Whilst the diversity of languages is important, the EU wants to be at the forefront of language technology. This is more EU self-promotion, calling for investment and funding at the expense of the taxpayer.

2016/11/22

. ‒ UKIP MEPs voted against this non-legislative report. UKIP fully supports the responsible use of natural resources and recognises that there are numerous international organisations which help protect forest areas. This resolution, however, makes some strong suggestions including the establishment of an international police force. The resolution also seeks to politicise the EU’s trade with third countries in an attempt to bind them into sustainable development goals and to meet the commitments outlined in the Paris Climate Change Agreement. For these reasons, UKIP MEPs voted against this report.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs voted against this non-legislative report. UKIP does not support the European Commission, an unelected body, negotiating agreements with third countries on behalf of the EU. Moreover, UKIP has serious reservations about the lack of an impact assessment from the Commission with regard to both the necessity of the agreement and the data protection standards in Jordan.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs have voted against this non legislative report. UKIP does not support the European Commission, an unelected body, negotiating agreements with third countries on behalf of the EU. Moreover, UKIP has serious reservations about the lack of impact assessment from the Commission with regard to both the necessity of the agreement and the data protection standards in Israel.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs have voted against this non—legislative report. UKIP does not support the European Commission, an unelected body, negotiating agreements with third countries on behalf of the EU. Moreover, UKIP has serious reservations about the lack of impact assessment from the Commission with regard to both the necessity of the agreement and the data protection standards in Lebanon.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs have voted against this non-legislative report. UKIP does not support the European Commission, an unelected body, negotiating agreements with third countries on behalf of the EU. Moreover, UKIP has serious reservations about the lack of impact assessment from the Commission with regard to both the necessity of the agreement and the data protection standards in Egypt.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs voted against this recommendation. UKIP is against the financial implications of this project.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs abstained on this recommendation. UKIP is in favour of the promotion of scientific exchanges between the United States and the European Union. However, UKIP MEPs oppose the financial implications of this project.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs voted against this report (consultation procedure). UKIP is against further EU harmonisation dictated by the EU Commission. UKIP is also against the financial implications of this project.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this budgetary proposal. The proposal is to mobilise EUR 9 894 483 for 1 858 workers who have lost their jobs in France. The money will be spent on vocational training, business start-ups, and job search and mobility allowances. UKIP opposes the EUʼs using British taxpayers’ money as dole for poor economic decisions in other countries.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against. This report is calling for more opportunities for cities to obtain help in the tendering process in applying for EU funding. Furthermore, it is calling for councils to appoint a councillor responsible for European affairs.

2016/11/22

. ‒ UKIP voted against. This report is looking at the civil liability and property rights relating to 3D printing. The EU is looking to harmonise the rules on 3D printing, therefore not taking into consideration the legal requirements of the Member State.

2016/11/22

. ‒ UKIP MEPs voted against this legislative report. UKIP is against any further harmonisation dictated by the EU Commission in Brussels. UKIP MEPs are also against the financial implications of this project.

2016/11/22

. ‒ We oppose this legislation because the EU has tendentiously ‘weaponised’ data collection and use.

2016/11/22

. ‒ UKIP MEPs voted in favour of this legislative report. UKIP is in favour of repealing existing EU regulations and in favour of a more rational use of Member States resources.

2016/11/22

. ‒ UKIP does not approve of EU legislation, but nor does it approve of tax fraud, and accordingly abstained.

2016/11/22

. ‒ UKIP voted against this non-legislative and non-binding report. We are against attempts to develop an EU foreign policy and against the EU interfering in the domestic affairs of third countries. The UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples is not legally binding and the EU should not be attempting to make it so in its policies. The level of compliance with international agreements is a matter for the third countries concerned, not the European Union.

2016/11/22

. ‒ UKIP voted against this non-legislative and non-binding report. UKIP MEPs do not believe that the European Union should attempt to have any role in facilitating or shaping international rules. Member States, not the unelected EU Commission in Brussels, should have the power of making their own policy decisions with regard to domestic climate policy.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this non-legislative, non-binding report regarding accessibility to cultural services. Although there are some pertinent points, it is not for the EU to interfere with national tax policies, dictate how much national governments should contribute or invest in cultural services, nor how they should form policy in this area. Furthermore, we oppose calls for increased investment at the expense of the taxpayer; this is for the sole discretion of national governments.

2016/11/22

. – UKIP MEPs voted against this legislative first—reading report. We believe that it should be left to Member States to regulate professions, and that it is not the task of the Commission to set a proportionality test. UKIP tabled a rejection amendment to this report, which we voted in favour of, as we believe this legislation should not go ahead.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this report. It is looking at removing restrictions that Member States have the right to impose. These restrictions include such things as the use of hired goods vehicles with a gross vehicle weight above six tonnes and restricting the use of a vehicle which has been hired in a Member State different from the one where the vehicle is.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against. This first reading vote was requesting that the report go straight into interinstitutional negotiations, this means that there will be closed-door negotiations, therefore doing away with transparency.

2016/11/22

We supported this objection to the delegated regulation because we oppose the Common Fisheries Policy and the incorporation of the UK in its North Sea plan, especially as we are scheduled to leave the EU.

2016/11/22

UKIP abstained on this non-legislative resolution. We do not support the development of an EU foreign policy. Unresolved and frozen conflicts in Eastern Europe and the Caucasus are a concern, but we do not think that EU policy or action should or does play any constructive role in resolving these issues. Mediation is a concern for the parties involved supported by more appropriate international regimes.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs have voted against this non-legislative motion for resolution. UKIP firmly opposes the current EU-ACP Partnership Agreement, as it is based on the principle of conditionality, which is, in essence, the EU politicising its trade policy with third countries. UKIP believe that the best way to aid developing nations is via improved trade relations, whereas the EU’s insistence on pursuing a trade policy based on conditionality hinders not only the development of these nations, but also consumers in Europe.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against. This report is calling for such things as giving the Parliament basic control over major decisions affecting the EU, Member States and its people, with such decisions to include national budgets and reforms, these issues should remain the sole responsibility of the Member State. The report also goes on to mention its concern over the fact that fiscal measures, such as reductions in national expenditure, have not had the desired effect. This we totally disagree with.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted in favour of this proposal to scrap all UK MEPs. UKIP MEPs have been here since 1999 always on the basis that we want to put ourselves out of a job and for Britain to leave the European Union.The proposal is in two parts. The first part lists all Member States and indicates how many MEPs are allocated to each country. The 73 UK MEPs shall be removed from this list with a portion being re-allocated to other Member States.The second part of the proposal includes a clause stating that if the UK remains a Member of the EU by the next EU election (the EU treaties still apply), then the UK shall retain the current number of MEPs allocated. UKIP want to leave the EU on 29 March so we want all the MEPs to be gone.Regarding the second part of the proposal, the Government should have repealed the 2003 European Elections Act which they haven’t. If we have not left and there has to be a European election, which UKIP doesn’t want, we will fight it with the argument of complete unequivocal withdrawal as soon as possible.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted to abstain on the amendment to the annex as this does not affect the UK.

2016/11/22

UKIP have voted against this non-legislative, own initiative report. The report involves using EU funds in order to promote the circular economy. While to objectives of sustainability and reducing waste are important for everyone to work towards, this is not something that should be achieved through EU funding and legislation.

2016/11/22

. ‒ UKIP voted against this non-legislative and non-binding resolution. We are opposed to the development of EU foreign policy and do not believe that the EU should sign any international agreements or agreements with third countries.

2016/11/22

. ‒ UKIP voted against this non-legislative and non-binding report. We are firmly committed in our support of NATO as the primary guarantor of security cooperation and mutual defence in Europe. We are opposed to the militarisation of the European Union and the development of any institutional capacity or EU—led cooperation amongst Member States. Furthermore, we are against any level of EU cooperation with NATO as this risks duplicating and in some cases undermining NATO, negatively impacting security in Europe.

2016/11/22

. ‒ UKIP voted against this non-legislative and non-binding report. Whilst we recognise the rising significance of cyber—defence for national security, we are firm in our belief that national security is solely a matter for Member States. We do not support the militarisation of the European Union or the development of any EU institutional capacity or EU—led cooperation amongst Member States on issues related to national defence, including cyber—defence. Member States are free, however, to cooperate on a bilateral and multilateral level as well as through NATO if they choose to do so.

2016/11/22

We oppose this own-initiative report because it opens the way to catch ordinary anglers in the bureaucratic nightmare and legal minefield that is the common fisheries policy.

2016/11/22

Whilst UKIP does not support EU legislation, the proposed amendments to EMIR will reduce unnecessary compliance costs for business, and accordingly UKIP abstained.

2016/11/22

. ‒ UKIP voted against. This proposal will create a regulatory framework for the integration of new business models and emerging technologies, along with the harmonisation of accreditation worthiness by ensuring that similarly qualified entities who carry out tasks on behalf of national aviation authorities should be accredited by the agency. However the regulation does not describe what the model will be in order for these agencies to be accredited by the agency. In such an important issue as safety the bar has to be set high and unfortunately with the ‘one size fits all’ policies that the EU adopts, we know that the bar that the EU will set will be very low and this will affect standard safety issues. Further the report believes that the agency should play a more active and decisive role when a Member State decides to react immediately to a serious civil aviation safety issue and deviates from applicable EU rules. Should a Member State need to ‘deviate’ from EU rules then clearly the EU cannot envisage all possible events and it should therefore be for Member State to make whatever decisions it feels necessary in order to deal with the serious issue, without having to worry about an inexperienced agency breathing down their necks.

2016/11/22

. ‒ UKIP MEPs voted against this legislative report. EU energy and climate policies are profoundly damaging European economy. EU unilateral climate policy is making Europe non-competitive and it is causing a huge loss of jobs and industries. Companies are forced to take radical decisions, moving offshore to defend themselves from bankruptcy.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this non-legislative, non-binding report. Whilst pertinent points were made with regard to education, it is not for the EU to interfere in national curricula, nor dictate how Member States should invest in their education systems. This report called for the promotion of current EU programmes such as Erasmus+, the use of EU funds and for further investment at the expense of the taxpayer, which we oppose. Furthermore, UKIP does not believe in the creation of a European Education Area, particularly when the European Higher Education Area, a voluntary group set up by the Council of Europe, already exists. Finally, as stipulated under Article 165 of the TFEU, education is a Member State competency, therefore we feel strongly that this does not need to be conducted at EU level.

2016/11/22

We oppose this non-legislative report as it fails to acknowledge that successive reforms have been botched, denies the systemic nature of that failure, provides no real solutions, will be expensive to taxpayers and will not achieve its stated goals.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against. This report was hi-lighting the issues raised through odometer manipulation both in the EU and on vehicles that enter the EU from third countries. The amount of money lost through this fraud is in the billions and needs to be stopped. However, the legislation that is needed to combat this level of fraud is up to the individual Member States to deal with and put in place and it is not for the EU to determine what the correct legislation should be.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs abstained on this legislative report. UKIP deeply regret all natural disasters that occurred in Europe in the recent years and it is in favour of cooperation among Member States when it comes to exceptional circumstances related to natural disasters. On the other hand, UKIP MEPs are against all budgetary interventions in favour of mass migration and climate change. UKIP is against the proposal of establishing an Erasmus civil protection programme, to strengthen the cooperation that already exists between Member States and are against the creation of a mandatory EU Mechanism that would be imposed at Member States level.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against. This motion for resolution expressed its wish that the money spent by the Commission is spent wisely, this of course we have no objection to, however in our experience the Commission never spends the taxpayer’s money wisely. The Commission should not be spending the taxpayer’s money at all. Furthermore, an aspect of the report that is of concern is that the Commission is being called on to support the development of dual-use civilian-defence infrastructure along the TEN-T network.

2016/11/22

We voted against this non-legislative non-binding report. Whilst we agree with the premise of the report in terms of better access to vital amenities, protection of women from violence, we believe that this should not be conducted at EU level.

2016/11/22

We voted against this non-legislative non-binding report. Whilst we agree with the principle of boosting employment and opportunities for the youth, this report is calling for the continuation and further promotion of EU youth programmes. As well as calling for further investment and an increase in MFF funding, which we oppose.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this non-legislative report. UKIP MEPs believe that this EU regulation will impose a massive financial burden on every organisation that uses performance and professional lighting, including schools, village halls, arts centres, theatres, studios and event spaces.

2016/11/22

We abstained on this. We hold that there are issues with zero hours contracts and other forms employment. This is especially true in jurisdictions where benefits can be impacted depending on work duration and contracts. However it is for Member States, not the EU to address this.

2016/11/22

. ‒ UKIP voted against this budgetary proposal. The Solidarity Fund is an EU level fund that provides money for reconstruction and relief of disaster hit areas in Europe. This proposal will give EUR 1.3 million to Greece (earthquake), EUR 3.2 million to Spain (wildfires), EUR 48.9 million to France (hurricanes) and EUR 50.6 million to Portugal (fires). While UKIP of course sympathises with the disaster stricken areas and has no problem with individual countries sending aid and help to other countries for things such as this, we oppose British taxpayers’ money being spent by undemocratic EU institutions as a principle.

2016/11/22

. ‒ UKIP voted against this budgetary proposal. This vote is to raise the money for the proposal to give money to disaster stricken areas in Greece, Spain, France and Portugal (totalling EUR 104 million). This draft amending budget will mean every Member State will have to give more money to the EU. While UKIP of course sympathises with the disaster stricken areas and has no problem with individual countries sending aid and help to other countries for things such as this, we oppose British taxpayers’ money being spent by undemocratic EU institutions as a principle.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This report was approved without a vote due to a committee technical procedure. However the report is unobjectionable, as it seeks to stop dumping, a practice that the WTO condemns.

2016/11/22

. ‒ UKIP voted against this budgetary proposal. This is to give the Commission an extra EUR 345 000 to spend on administrative operations such as data gathering, information activities and websites to ensure the smooth running for the Globalisation Adjustment Fund (EGF). The EGF is a pot of money at EU level for workers in other countries that have lost their job. UKIP voted against as we oppose British taxpayers’ money being used as dole in other countries.

2016/11/22

UKIP abstained on this resolution. UKIP is concerned about sensitive issues such as consumersʼ health, food safety and environmental protection. However, UKIP MEPs believe that the authorisation for the placing on the market of food and feed produced from GA21 genetically modified maize should be taken autonomously by national parliaments.

2016/11/22

UKIP abstained on this resolution. UKIP is concerned about sensitive issues such as consumersʼ health, food safety and environmental protection. However, UKIP MEPs believe that the authorisation for the placing on the market of food and feed produced from genetically modified maize 1507 × 59122 × MON 810 × NK603, and genetically modified maize combining two or three of the single events 1507, 59122, MON 810 and NK603, should be taken autonomously by national parliaments.

2016/11/22

. ‒ We oppose this non-legislative report as it fails to acknowledge that successive reforms have been botched, denies the systemic nature of that failure, provides no real solutions, will be expensive to taxpayers and is likely to fail and even to be counterproductive.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against. This report highlighted the main changes negotiated between the different EU institutions along with the changes to the Parliament’s Rules of Procedure. The report welcomes the Commission Task Force on Subsidiarity, however this task force is not working towards subsidiarity but against it by highlighting that more matters should be controlled by Brussels such as migration and defence.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this non-legislative resolution. The MFF proposal is the long term budget setting for the EU. The current proposal foresees spending of over EUR 1.1 trillion, huge budget increases to many EU policies and new income streams for the EU budget (own resources). Hopefully the UK will be leaving the EU so should not be contributing in a meaningful way to this MFF, however it does look like we will be handing EUR 40 billion to the EU due to Brexit which won’t be paid off for decades. UKIP voted against this resolution as we oppose any EU budget increases and extra tax raising powers for the undemocratic EU institutions.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this non-legislative and non-binding report. We are opposed to the development of any EU capacity in relation to foreign affairs. We view EU action as unnecessary and in many cases damaging. Resolution to the situation in Libya must be found through bilateral support and through appropriate international institutions.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs have voted against this non-legislative report. UKIP firmly opposes the theme of this report, which suggests that the Schengen Area is one of the greatest achievements of the European Union. Furthermore, UKIP MEPs strongly oppose the accession of more countries to the area.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs have voted against this non-legislative report. UKIP fully support the rights for victims of crime to receive support and protection in all countries. However, UKIP MEPs oppose the need for this to be harmonised across the EU and therefore reject the attempt by the EU to further interfere in the judicial procedures of Member States.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs supported the concept of free trade and improving the access of SMEs to the opportunities unlocked by FTAs. However, we resent the EU’s attempts to use trade to bully countries, so we abstained.

2016/11/22

UKIP opposes this legislation because it extends and prolongs the infamous Common Fisheries Policy.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against. This report was making a very slight amendment to the wording of the Commission proposal. Whilst the rapporteur and the committee responsible for proposing the request felt that the wording was not a major deviation from the meaning of the sentence, it appeared that through the removal of the word ‘a’ it would enable the Commission to perform countless cost effective analysis which would be a waste of taxpayers’ money. One careful and considerate cost-effective analysis is required, not numerous ones that could allow the Commission to provide as many as they wish until they achieve the result they want.

2016/11/22

We voted in favour of this because we feel that it is pro-free trade, and also streamlines trade procedures. This will make procedures for trade easier, and cheaper for businesses.

2016/11/22

We voted in favour of this because we feel that it is pro-free trade, and also streamlines trade procedures. This will make procedures for trade easier, and cheaper for businesses.

2016/11/22

Whilst UKIP is in favour of combating tax fraud, it is not the role of the EU to interfere in tax sovereignty of nation states and accordingly UKIP abstained.

2016/11/22

UKIP opposes this own-initiative report because it wants to misuse taxpayers’ money to extend the perverse Common Fisheries Policy.

2016/11/22

UKIP opposes this non-legislative report as it denies the systemic nature of the sector’s problems, will be expensive to taxpayers and, likely, fail and even be counter-productive.

2016/11/22

UKIP supports the rejection amendment and oppose this legislation because it extends and prolongs the infamous Common Fisheries Policy in waters, many of which are British and should soon be outside the CFP.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this legislation. We are opposed to the EU’s interference in the domestic employment and economic standards of Member States. The changes proposed to this legislation do not protect the sovereignty of Member States and any powers to the member state in their implementation of the legislation is met by obligations to compliance with EU institutions.

2016/11/22

We oppose this legislation because the EU has no right or standing to pass laws for waters half a world away.

2016/11/22

Another attempt to encourage the EU Commission to bring forward legislation that would interfere in the proper functioning of the capital markets and increase the danger of asset bubbles, this time with the intention to ‘channel capital flows towards assets that contribute to sustainable development’, accordingly UKIP voted against.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against. This report published the effectiveness, independence and quality of a nation’s justice system. This is the first step in the EU moving towards a harmonised justice system by not taking into consideration the relevant rights of the individuals and Member States that hold separate rules of law when determining what is a criminal or a civil matter.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this consent procedure. We do not support the EU developing policy through these agreements or further accession to membership of the European Union.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this consent procedure. We do not support the EU developing policy through these agreements or further accession to membership of the European Union.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs have voted to abstain on this technically non-legislative report. In the UK, this drug already falls into the criteria listed in the Psychoactive Substances Act 2016. Subjecting it to control measures in the EU will assist in reducing its availability on the UK market. For this reason, UKIP MEPs abstained on this vote.

2016/11/22

. ‒ UKIP MEPs abstained on this technically non-legislative report. In the UK, this drug already meets the criteria listed in the Psychoactive Substances Act 2016. Subjecting it to control measures in the EU will assist in reducing its availability on the UK market. For that reason, UKIP MEPs abstained on this vote.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs voted against this report. While helping those who have been made redundant by the effects of global structural changes is an admirable aim, UKIP MEPs believe that this is something that can be achieved by Member States themselves, and not by using EU funding mechanisms.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this non-legislative, non-binding report, although there are various calls within this report for more transparency, better reporting and communication. We cannot vote to support the continuation of the EIB. Particularly as the withdrawal agreement plans to only return the UK’s EUR 3.2 billion paid in share-capital, without any profits. This is despite the fact that the UK’s share of EIB assets is worth EUR 92.3 billion.

2016/11/22

UKIP abstained on this resolution. UKIP is concerned about sensitive issues such as consumer’s health, food safety and environmental protection. However, UKIP MEPs believe that the authorisation for the placing on the market of food and feed produced from genetically modified sugar beet H7-1 should be autonomously taken by national parliaments.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this a non-legislative report. We fully support tackling fraud and corruption, though whilst the figures regarding fraudulent activity and irregularities are useful, particularly towards better oversight of the EU’s budget; we oppose the further calls for more EU legislation, measures and harmonisation, and fundamentally disagree with the spending of taxpayers’ money.

2016/11/22

. ‒ UKIP abstained on this non—legislative and non—binding resolution. Whilst we are concerned by developments in Venezuela caused by the Socialist Government we do not support EU interference in the matter or the development of EU foreign policy.

2016/11/22

. ‒ UKIP MEPs voted against this non-legislative own-initiative report. Improving transport infrastructures in order to benefit the environment, safety and economic concerns is certainly a positive goal. However, UKIP MEPs do not believe that the best way to do this is through cohesion policy and EU funding as it is an issue that is better handled by individual Member States.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEP’s have to against this non-legislative motion for resolution. Whilst UKIP firmly support protecting children, particularly unaccompanied children, this resolution politicises the topic to provide an opinion on the migration crisis as whole. More specifically, UKIP MEP’s firmly oppose the suggestion that the best way to assist children and asylum seekers is to offer them ‘safe and legal routes’ into the EU. UKIP believe the best way to combat people traffickers and to end the migration crisis is to stop the boats arriving into Europe.

2016/11/22

UKIP abstained on the motion for resolution on a global ban on testing cosmetics on animals. UKIP is in favour of animal welfare and ending of brutal practices on animals for cosmetics testing. UKIP share these concerns and are firmly against testing chemicals used in cosmetics on animals. However, UKIP MEPs do not trust the unelected EU Commission to decide on the protection of the environment and animal welfare - the EU has already caused irreparable damage with its environmental policy.

2016/11/22

. ‒ UKIP MEPs have voted against this non—legislative, own initiative report. This is because they are not in favour of using EU funds, particularly in relation to the common agricultural policy. In addition, they do not agree with the additional layer of bureaucracy that some of the additional monitoring proposed in this report would require.

2016/11/22

. ‒ UKIP MEPs voted against this non-legislative motion for a resolution. Whilst UKIP firmly supports the need for free and open media, which form the basis of a democratic nation, UKIP MEPs cannot support recommendations for EU legislation on how this should be achieved.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This report extends the temporary 15% minimum VAT rate set by the EU. UKIP does not support the EU collecting taxes from British taxpayers and accordingly voted against.

2016/11/22

. ‒ The EU should stop repeatedly changing the rules on anti-money laundering, which adds cost to business compliance, but UKIP are not against the prevention of money laundering and so (on balance) abstained.

2016/11/22

. ‒ UKIP MEPs voted against this legislative report concerning motor vehicles and their trailers. UKIP opposes harmonisation of rules, as we believe that Member States should be allowed to act on their own initiative.

2016/11/22

. ‒ We oppose this legislation because it fails to recognise that how you farm, including whether organic or not, and what you eat are matters for individual choice: instead, again, the EU proposes massive, often counter-productive bureaucratic intervention at taxpayers’ expense.

2016/11/22

. ‒ UKIP voted against this legislation. We firmly defend Member States’ right to define their own domestic legislation. Any interference by the Commission is an erosion of Member State sovereignty, which we are firmly against. We do not necessarily take a position on any of the suggested policies within the report, it is ultimately up to each Member State.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs voted against this report, as it concerns the spending of EU funds, which we are against. We voted in favour of amendments that wished to reduce the budget and which aim to make Parliament more transparent. We voted against amendments that wished to increase the budget, for instance in allowing APAs to accompany Members on missions, which is a waste of public funds.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEP’s have voted against this non-legislative motion for resolution. UKIP firmly support the work of investigative journalists and are appalled at the details of this murder which was clearly motivated by the need to silence a whistle-blower. This resolution, however, clearly oversteps the EU’s mandate in this field. UKIP reject any attempt by the EU to establish a directive on whistle-blower protection and strongly oppose calls for the EPPO to be established.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs have voted against this non-legislative motion for resolution. UKIP firmly opposes taxpayers’ money being given to organisations in the EU to promote the values of democracy, the rule of law and fundamental values. This is a clear attempt by the EU to increase funding for organisations which hold a favourable opinion of the European Union who will inevitably disseminate propaganda to the citizens of Europe.

2016/11/22

UKIP abstained on this non-legislative and non-binding resolution. UKIP have long been concerned by developments in Turkey and have opposed their integration within the EU. We are especially concerned at military developments and Turkey’s increasing opposition to the West and international norms. However this resolution implies a role for the EU institutions, to which we are opposed.

2016/11/22

This non-legislative own initiative report is generally supportive of national parliaments and doesn’t call on the Commission to act (other than to grant national parliaments more time in which to prepare ‘reasoned opinions’ objecting to EU legislation), but UKIP does not support the right of EU institutions to determine the rights of national parliaments and accordingly UKIP abstained.

2016/11/22

This non-legislative own-initiative report calls on the Commission to act in various areas, including energy, retail financial services and transport; accordingly UKIP voted against.

2016/11/22

UKIP believes in the importance of vaccination and cooperation against vaccine-preventable diseases. However, we would like national parliaments and not the unelected EU Commission to impose programmes on this issue.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs have voted against this non-legislative report. UKIP fully support the right of citizens to be protected in their own country and when travelling abroad and welcome the fact that all countries in the EU have their own system of protection orders. With such a limited amount of EPOs having been issued since the directive was enforced, it is clear to see that this is a poor and ineffective piece of legislation. For this reason, UKIP voted against this report.

2016/11/22

. ‒ UKIP voted against this non-binding motion for a resolution. We support the principle of the Bologna Process as a non-EU, voluntary group discussing education amongst its members. However, we disagree with the call for the Commission to become more heavily involved, using it as a platform to promote itself and its own education initiatives.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted to abstain. This was a procedural request for the period of this legislature to end within the five year term. UKIP voted to abstain on this matter as it does not affect the UK.

2016/11/22

. ‒ UKIP voted against giving consent to this procedure. We do not support the development of an EU foreign policy or believe that the EU is qualified to negotiate agreements with third countries as if it were a state. UKIP is extremely supportive of closer relations between the UK and Commonwealth countries, including especially Australia. We look forward to improved relations between our two countries when we finally, fully leave the European Union.

2016/11/22

. ‒ UKIP voted against this non-legislative and non-binding report. We do not support the development of an EU foreign policy or believe that the EU is qualified to negotiate agreements with third countries as if it were a state. UKIP is extremely supportive of closer relations between the UK and Commonwealth countries, including especially Australia. We look forward to improved relations between our two countries when we finally, fully leave the European Union.

2016/11/22

. ‒ UKIP MEPs voted against this technically legislative resolution. Whilst UKIP fully supports the need to tackle and prevent terrorism, UKIP MEPs do not support harmonised definitions and minimum sentences to be established by the EU.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs object to the creation of new EU legislation. UKIP is in favour of protecting the environment: reusing, recycling and recovery materials. However, UKIP believes that legislation in this field should be independently established by Member States.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs voted against this legislative report. UKIP objects to the creation of new EU legislation. UKIP believes that Member States should repeal the Waste Framework Directive, the Packaging and Packaging Waste Directive and the Landfill Directive and regulate these fields autonomously.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs abstained on this legislative report. UKIP are in favor of the removal of EU legislation to avoid overburden to people, organisations and Member States and agree that any legislation that does not serve its objective should be removed. However, UKIP are against the overreaching amount of EU environmental legislation produced since the 1970s.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs have voted against this non-legislative motion for a resolution. UKIP MEPs believe that the ‘UN compact on safe, orderly and regular migration and on refugees’ has the ultimate aim to make illegal migration legal and to facilitate it in greater numbers. UKIP believe that the Dublin Agreement already sets out a fair system for refugees; the problem is that it is not being enforced effectively, which has led to the current migration crisis.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this non-legislative and non-binding report. We do not support the propagation by the European Union of its foreign policy through the use of these funds that either interfere in the domestic policies of third party states or that are used to support the further expansion of the European Union. In particular, we are concerned by the changes made to the Instrument Contributing to Stability and Peace that allow it to fund military actors in third countries. We believe this contravenes existing Union law and its disregard is further evidence of the militarisation of the EU.

2016/11/22

This non-legislative non-binding report emphasised that subsidiarity is a ‘fundamental principle of federations’ – for this reason, UKIP voted against.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this. The Commission is unelected, unaccountable and has the sole power to originate EU law. Its executive agencies, as well as consuming vast amounts of taxpayers’ cash, are unaccountable and have powers far in excess of what such bodies should have. We note with concern, as noted in the report, that EUR 900 million was spent on management costs and fees. We also note the concerns expressed about corruption in Pre-Accession Funding, especially in Turkey.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this. We share the concern expressed in the report that projects in the Natura theme were unsustainable, and that a serious ‘audit gap’ has opened up between Member States. Most seriously, we note that the Courts of Justice of the European Union denied access to auditors of certain financial documents, a move we find at best incompetent, and at worst, suspicious. We also note with concern a trend towards auditors not being drawn from accounting professions due to a professional competency, but being drawn due to allegiance to the EU.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEP’s have voted against this technically legislative resolution. Whilst UKIP fully support the need to tackle and prevent terrorism, UKIP MEP’s do not support harmonised definitions and minimum sentences to be established by the EU.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this. The EU Parliament is little more than a talking shop, and lacks the legitimacy and powers of the British Parliament. The EU Parliament has shown a political vindictiveness and lack of maturity around Brexit, epitomised by the appointment of arch-federalist Guy Verhofstadt as EU Parliament negotiator. Despite our alleged ‘influence’, British MEPs account for barely 10% of the total, placing us totally at the voting mercy of our ‘partners’ and thus making it impossible for British interests to be defended. We note with satisfaction our imminent departure.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this for several reasons. One key reason, as identified by the report, was the lack of transparency identified in the report, and we feel that this alone would be grounds for rejection. We also feel that the EU Council, with its unelected EU President is not a legitimate organ for EU law making, and we not the ‘President’ is appointed in secret under the terms of the Lisbon Treaty, which EU citizens were denied a promised referendum on.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against granting discharge and closing the accounts for EU agencies and institutions. UKIP is opposed to all EU institutions and agencies as they are not democratically controlled and waste billions of taxpayers’ money.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this discharge procedure. UKIP voted against granting discharge and closing the accounts for EU agencies and institutions. UKIP is opposed to all EU institutions and agencies as they are not democratically controlled and waste billions of taxpayers’ money. In particular we are concerned by the EEAS spending to attempt to influence media within the European Union and its censorship activities. As such we supported Amendment 3.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs voted against this report. It approves the closure of the accounts of the Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators for the financial year 2016. UKIP are against the financial expenditures related to this project.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEP’s have voted in favour of postponing the discharge of the EASO. UKIP are highly concerned with both the significant budget increases for the agency and the fact that so many payments are listed as irregular. UKIP MEP’s also supported the accompanying resolution as it highlighted the issues as to why, until the OLAF investigation has concluded, it cannot discharge this agency.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs voted against this report. It approves the closure of the accounts of the European Chemicals Agency for the financial year 2016. However, UKIP are against the financial expenditures related to this project.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs voted against this report. It approves the closure of the accounts of the European Food Safety Authority for the financial year 2016. However, UKIP are against the financial expenditures related to this project.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs voted against this report. It approves the closure of the accounts of the Euratom Supply Agency for the financial year 2016. UKIP are against the financial expenditures related to this project.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs voted against this report. The report grants the Bio-based Industries Joint Undertaking discharge in respect of the implementation of the Joint Undertaking’s budget for the financial year 2016. UKIP are against the financial expenditures related to this project.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs voted against this report. It grants the Fuel Cells and Hydrogen 2 Joint Undertaking discharge in respect of the implementation of its budget for the year 2016. UKIP are against the financial expenditures related to this project.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs voted against this report. It approves the closure of the accounts of the Innovative Medicines Initiative 2 Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2016. UKIP are against the financial expenditures related to this project.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs voted against this report. It approves the closure of the accounts of the Joint Undertaking for ITER and the Development of Fusion Energy for the financial year 2016. UKIP are against the financial expenditures related to this project.

2016/11/22

. ‒ UKIP MEPs voted against this report. UKIP do not oppose scientific cooperation in the Mediterranean area. However, UKIP MEPs oppose the huge financial implications of these projects (Horizon 2020 funding).

2016/11/22

. ‒ UKIP oppose this consent for the EU to share in despoiling other people’s seas, in this case Mauritian tuna.

2016/11/22

. ‒ UKIP voted in favour of this report as it was/is in favour of increased free trade in agricultural services between the EU and Norway. We support free trade between nations, and look forward to being a key player in free trade once Brexit is finalised, and we can sign our own free trade deals.

2016/11/22

. ‒ UKIP oppose this non-legislative report as it proposes unnecessary, long-term market intervention which is bureaucratically burdensome, potentially expensive to taxpayers and, likely, counter-productive.

2016/11/22

. ‒ UKIP MEPs voted against this legislative report. UKIP are sceptical about the existence of man-made climate change and believe that EU energy and climate policy have damaged our economy whilst bringing jobs and industry offshore.

2016/11/22

UKIP is against public funding of political parties because it provides establishment parties with a stranglehold on purse strings that enables them to vastly outspend emerging political parties and suffocate opposition.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs voted against this non-legislative report. UKIP objects to the implementation of existing EU law on this issue. UKIP MEPs are in favour of protecting the environment. However, UKIP believes that the legislation in this field should be independently established by Member States.

2016/11/22

. ‒ UKIP voted against this non-legislative non-binding report. Although there were aspects such as incitement to hatred, violence against women and cyber-bullying which we fully deplore, we did not support this report as we oppose gender quotas and gender mainstreaming in policy, which this report calls for. We believe equality can be achieved through other means. Furthermore, we oppose the call to unblock the Women On Boards Directive, which also called for obligatory gender quotas in listed companies, calling for sanctions on those who breached the directive.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this non-legislative, non-binding report. We are for equal opportunities for all, both men and women. Whilst we are in favour of pushing for more women and men to be involved in the digital sector, to improve opportunities in the labour market and to reduce the gender pay gap, we do not believe that this needs to be achieved through gender mainstreaming within policy. The EU should not interfere with the national curricula of Member States with regard to digital literacy, since this is the prerogative of national governments, as is the empowerment of all, which can likewise be achieved through national governments and not at EU level.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs have voted against this non-legislative motion for resolution. UKIP do not support these EU instruments, which send millions of taxpayers’ money overseas with minimal scrutiny. UKIP believe that any decision to provide foreign aid money should be made solely by the Member States.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs have voted against this non-legislative motion for a resolution. Whilst UKIP support some of the principles of this report – that money should not be loaned to corrupt governments, for example – we reject any suggestion that it is the EU has a right to legislate in this field.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs have voted against this non-legislative, own-initiative report because it concerns cohesion policy and the spending of EU money, which we are against. We have also voted in favour of Amendment 1, because it is critical of EU spending and the economy, reiterating rights for sovereign control of these areas.

2016/11/22

We abstained because we do not support the Commission and the Council in denouncing the agreement – thus opening the way to a new agreement – but neither can we endorse the current agreement by voting against denunciation.

2016/11/22

. ‒ We abstained because we do not support the Commission and the Council in denouncing the agreement – thus opening the way to a new agreement – but neither can we endorse the current agreement by voting against.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this legislative report. We view the European Union Youth Orchestra as an EU propaganda tool to promote EU ideals and therefore did not wish its funding to be secured via amendment of the creative Europe legislation.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this legislative report. Whilst we support the principle of boosting employment, this scheme, according to the Commission, is not reaching many users, despite running for almost 13 years. Therefore, given that it is failing, we do not think that the scheme should be continued and promoted at the taxpayers’ expense.Furthermore, we oppose harmonisation, which we believe that the EU is aiming to achieve through Europass.

2016/11/22

Without doubt there are injustices caused by use of Single Market rules (that allow multinationals to establish themselves in any Member State whilst selling into another) which lower the tax paid in the location of much of the economic activity; the solution lies with wider global international arrangements (for example via the OECD) rather than via the EU which is motivated by a desire to eliminate tax competition and to harmonise taxes at ever higher rates.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this non-legislative report. This report is intended to set the initial position of the Parliament ahead of the negotiations with the Council and Commission for the EU budget for 2019. The report of course called for more EU spending and more EU action. Of interest is that it included very little about Brexit. This is explained because they believe the UK will continue to pay yearly budget contributions until 2020, due to what was agreed in the first phase of negotiations.

2016/11/22

UKIP abstained on this non-legislative and non-binding resolution. UKIP’s Members are concerned by the endemic failures in British and Western foreign policy, which repeatedly makes the same mistakes and does not make British citizens safer or more prosperous and continues to contribute to the insecurity the Syrian people face. We support a major rethink of the conduct of British and Western foreign policy; however, we are firmly against any EU foreign policy or defence capacity. We voted against amendment 1 on arms trade with Saudi Arabia because this policy should remain firmly within the remit of the British and Member State governments, rather than being exercised at EU level.

2016/11/22

UKIP opposes this non-legislative resolution as arrant hypocrisy by which the EU attacks the protectionism of others whilst adopting the very same protectionist approach for itself when it suits it.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEP’s have voted against this non-legislative report which outlines Parliament’s opinion on how future EU-UK relations should be conducted once the UK leaves the Union. UKIP tabled its own resolution and amendments on this issue which aimed to protect the sovereignty of Northern Ireland and the UK fishing waters, to ensure that the role of the ECJ would end at the date of withdrawal and to assert that there is no legally enforceable obligation for the UK to continue contributing financially to the EU after the UK withdraws. UKIP MEP’s also highlighted that negotiations for continued tariff free trade arrangement must begin in parallel with the withdrawal to ensure minimal disruption for businesses and services. Lastly, UKIP were also keen to remind Parliament that, even though the UK is withdrawing from the Union, the UK will continue to play a major role in the prosperity of peace and security on the European continent via NATO and bilateral partnerships.

2016/11/22

We abstained on this legislation because it does no more than remove an obsolete article.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs abstained on this Report. Whilst UKIP is against all transpositions of the EU Directives, it recognises the damages and risks connected to the Newcastle disease and the importance of developments in research and in diagnostic procedures.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs voted against this Resolution. UKIP MEPs are in favour of accelerated planning and favouring lower administrative costs in Europe. UKIP is in favour of increasing direct democracy through greater public participation via different kinds of consultations. However, UKIP MEPs are against any projects that favours EU energy policy and climate objectives. UKIP doesn’t believe that the EU should initiate a greenhouse gas emissions reduction as established by the European Commission. The European Institutions are planning to spend unimaginable sums of money on mitigation measures, which will only damage further our economy.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against the mobilisation of this EU money. This proposal is to give EUR 2 165 231 (60% match funding) to 646 workers who have lost their jobs in Germany from the company Goodyear Dunlop. The money will be spent on job search, training allowance, career guidance, workshops for exchanging views, and business start-up advice. UKIP voted against as we oppose taxpayers’ money being used as EU dole for poor economic decisions made in other countries.

2016/11/22

. ‒ UKIP voted against this non-legislative report. The MFF is the long—term budget of the EU, with the current MFF running out in 2020. Technically the Commission should have put forward a proposal for the next MFF by 1 January 2018, but it looks unlikely they will present anything until May 2018. In general the report overall calls for yet more EU spending and action. On Brexit it notes that during the first phase of negotiations the UK Government agreed to carrying on paying contributions to the EU budget until 2020. The report also wants to take away the veto for Member States on budget setting and move towards ‘qualified majority voting’.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this non-legislative report. This report proposed new ways the EU budget should be financed. Such ideas included: reform of EU level VAT rates, set and collect corporate tax, the idea that ECB profits should go to the EU budget rather than back to national governments, an EU level financial transaction tax, and other green taxes. As this would mean more powers for the EU in an effort to have a higher budget, UKIP voted against.

2016/11/22

The EU Semester identifies real economic problems in the EU but ignores the obvious solution to the economic difficulties of various Member States within the eurozone, namely that they need to abandon the euro in order to adopt their own bespoke economic policies. Accordingly, UKIP voted against.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this non-legislative and non-binding report. We do not support the premise that the Commission should interfere in the employment or social policy of Member States; this should be a sovereign and democratic decision made by the Member States themselves. In particular, we object to the report’s proposals for an EU-level social security number and EU-level unemployment reinsurance scheme.

2016/11/22

. ‒ UKIP voted against this budget vote. This proposal was to recycle an extra EUR 40 million to a fund called ‘Research for Coal and Steel Fund’ (RFCS) which lies outside the EU budget but is managed by the Commission. The money is used to fund research projects for coal, steel and climate change, in line with EU political priorities. The money will come from ‘de-commitments’ (money which hasn’t been used or has been recovered) from the fund from every year since 2003. UKIP voted against as we oppose giving the unelected Commission more resources to further their political aims which are not accountable to voters.

2016/11/22

. ‒ We abstained as we feel that there was no point in being needlessly obstructive by voting against what was simply a technical exercise. We do not wish to stand in the way of anything that may improve international trade cooperation.

2016/11/22

We opposed this non-legislative report on the grounds that, although the objective is sound, the approach proposed is unnecessarily bureaucratic and potentially expensive to taxpayers.

2016/11/22

We oppose this because, as so often, the legislation does more to grow regulatory bureaucracy than to deliver an improved service to consumers.

2016/11/22

. ‒ We oppose this legislation because the new regulations will simply deepen and extend EU bureaucratic capture - without delivering identifiable benefits to UK drivers.

2016/11/22

. ‒ UKIP MEPs voted against the Report on the proposal for an EU regulation establishing the European Defence Industrial Development Programme. UKIP is against further EU harmonisation dictated by the unelected EU Commission in Brussels. UKIP is also against the huge financial implication of this project.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this a non-legislative report regarding gender equality in EU trade agreements. We fully support combating exploitation, improving working conditions for workers and protection of labour rights and human rights. However, we believe this report highly politicises trade, which we oppose. Furthermore, we do not agree with gender mainstreaming, which the EU wants to incorporate into policy and trade negotiations. Gender equality is a cultural change that needs to be achieved through male and female voices.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs have voted against this own-initiative report. Whilst the aims of this report are admirable, such as reducing unemployment and helping lagging regions, this is something that should be entrusted to Member States and is not for the Commission.

2016/11/22

UKIP have voted against this own-initiative report, as MEPs believe that it is not for the European Union to take action on climate change or to tell Member States how they should implement the outcomes of the COP21 Paris Agreement. Furthermore UKIP MEPs disagree with spending any EU funds on this issue. We have also voted against amendment one as we do not believe that it is the EU’s place to introduce mandatory targets.

2016/11/22

. ‒ Establishes retrospective legislation, accordingly UKIP voted against.

2016/11/22

The EU should be prioritising similar agreement with the UK as part of the Brexit process, the fact that the EU is not doing so demonstrates its bad faith. If the EU can agree mutual recognition of regulation on insurance and re-insurance with the USA it should do the same with the world’s premier insurance and re-insurance market in London. Accordingly UKIP voted against.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs voted against this legislative report. UKIP is in favour of product labelling and consumer information. UKIP is in favour of a major involvement of the elected EU parliament in the decision process. However, UKIP firmly believes that this issue should be regulated by Member States.

2016/11/22

The mandatory exchange of tax information is an attempt at corporate tax harmonisation and undermines national tax sovereignty. Accordingly UKIP voted against.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs abstained on this resolution. UKIP believes in the importance of a scientific health risk safety assessment. However, UKIP believes that national parliaments should be in charge of this decision.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs have voted against this legislative report which seeks to give EUR 1.2 million of taxpayers’ money to cover redundancies for workers in Spain. UKIP believe that British taxpayers’ money should not be used to cover redundancies in other nations.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs voted against this legislative report which seeks to give EUR 2.1 million of taxpayers’ money to cover redundancies for workers in Sweden. UKIP believes that British taxpayers’ money should not be used to cover redundancies in other nations.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs voted against this non-legislative resolution. UKIP firmly opposes the Commission’s decision to activate Article 7 which is politically motivated against Poland and clearly infringes upon its sovereignty.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs have voted against this non-legislative report. UKIP fully supports the broad concept of fundamental rights but does not agree that an EU approach to fundamental rights is the best approach given the different cultures and diversity of Europe. UKIP MEPs did, however, vote in favour of a number of amendments that support national sovereignty and the right for Member States to control their own immigration policies.

2016/11/22

We abstained on this non-legislative vote because we believe that bees are vital and action must be taken to ensure they thrive and are available to pollinate but we could nonetheless not endorse the proposed EU programme.

2016/11/22

The Banking Union Annual Report for 2017 identifies many of the problems of the Banking Union without recommending the necessary reforms, namely abolition of the euro. Accordingly UKIP voted against.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this non-legislative and non-binding report. We take the combatting of terrorism extremely seriously and we have campaigned against one of the primary sources of financing of terrorism within UK and European mosques originating from the Middle East, primarily Saudi Arabia. We are supportive of effective UK Government-led initiatives to further combat terrorist financing in conjunction with appropriate international cooperation. However this report calls on the Commission to further intrude in the internal affairs of Member States, to grant the Commission a greater role in the coordination of intelligence and other policy areas and for more EU Commission spending. We cannot support these initiatives.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this non-legislative non-binding report. We fully support gender equality, the empowerment of women, access to healthcare and education; tackling discrimination and violence against women; reducing the pensions gap and the gender pay gap. However, we fully oppose gender mainstreaming in policy. We believe national governments are able to resolve such issues and invest how they wish, and this should not be dictated nor conducted at EU level. Furthermore, we viewed this report as a form of EU self-promotion at the UN and on the international stage.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs voted against this legislative report as UKIP questions the entire EU energy and climate policy, which is entirely based on the man—made climate change theory. We reject new legislation coming from Brussels and believe that national parliaments should be free to have legislative autonomy on this subject..

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against. This report is looking at how best to use the 73 seats vacated by the UK after Brexit. The EU is extremely keen on establishing a super—constituency which would cover the entire EU, but in real terms the MEP who is supposed to represent them would have little or no accountability to his constituents. We would have been happy to see a reduction in the size of the European Parliament to 678 after the UK leaves the EU and at least save the taxpayer some money.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against. This report because is calling for a ‘Spitzenkandidat’ or lead candidate to be used in the process for the election of such positions as the President of the Commission. However, one of the main issues with that is that it is not fair or transparent and the electorate would not be familiar with who the lead candidate is. In addition, this report considered it to be fair and just for a Commissioner who is standing for election to the European Parliament to still retain their position as a Commissioner, we feel that they should resign as a Commissioner in order to prevent there being a conflict of interest.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEP’s have voted to abstain on this technically non-legislative report. UKIP support data exchanges, particularly when this the aim is to fight terrorism and serious crime, but believe that this should be concluded bilaterally between sovereign nations rather than via the EU.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEP’s have voted against this non-legislative resolution. UKIP fully support the rights of minorities in Member States but do not support EU wide measures aimed at protecting their rights. UKIP believe that the protection and non-discrimination of minorities should be a competency for the Member State for which they are in.

2016/11/22

. ‒ UKIP voted in favour of this non-legislative resolution on zero tolerance for female genital mutilation (FGM). We shared many of the concerns raised in this report and we, too, fully condemn this criminal practice. Whilst we do not believe in calling on the EU for more action, we are supportive in all endeavours to eradicate FGM.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs voted against this EU recommendation. We believe in cooperation and exchange of information in the technology and energy sector. However, we are against the huge financial implication of Horizon 2020.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs abstain on this vote. With regard to the creation of a special committee on glyphosate, UKIP believes it is of upmost importance to have free and independent scientific research whilst guaranteeing transparency. Glyphosate is the world’s most widely used herbicide and glyphosate-based herbicides are used in agriculture as well as in public and private gardens. For the importance of this issue, UKIP believes that a final evaluation should be made at national level.

2016/11/22

UKIP have voted against this legislative, first reading report, as MEPs believe that it is not the EU’s place to be addressing geo-blocking. Additionally, UKIP disagree with legislation that involves the furthering of the Single Market. UKIP tabled an amendment in order to reject this report.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs have voted against this legislative report. UKIP MEPs are against the emission trading system as they believe in a free functioning, self regulated market. A new ETS would try to reduce CO2 emissions at the expense of European jobs and industry. The sectors concerned, such as the steel industry, already face cutthroat international competition from countries such as China. Furthermore, the increasingly insidious strengthening of the Commission’s powers to the detriment of sovereign Member States is clearly stated in this report. Neither can UKIP accept the intention to include the maritime and aviation sector in the ETS mechanism - these decisions should only be taken by national parliaments.

2016/11/22

Whilst the report was critical of the ECB and Mario Draghi in particular, there was still no recognition that the solution to the Euro crisis is to have a mechanism by which a country can leave the single currency in an orderly fashion. Accordingly UKIP voted against.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs have voted against this own initiative report. UKIP appreciate the effort of Buzek MEP to write a sensitive report based on sound energy considerations. However, the text takes into consideration the energy transition process (to a decarbonised economy) and quotes the achievement of objectives stated in the Paris agreement.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this budgetary decision. The Contingency Margin is a last-resort financial mechanism for the EU to react to unforeseen circumstances and amounts to 0.003% of the EU’s GNI. This proposal was related to the spending of an extra EUR 1.9 billion on EU security migration policy. That money has already been spent, but the decision here is whether it should be paid back in 2 years or 3 years by lowering future budget lines (this proposal wanted to extend it to 3 years). UKIP voted against as it would mean a higher budget for the EU to spend on administration in 2018, and also this proposal was part of the final agreement on the setting of the overall EU budget for 2018 worth EUR 160.1 billion.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted in favour of this budgetary decision. The proposal here is regarding a recalculation of estimated needs in the EU budget, an update of revenue from fines and the UK correction. While UKIP opposed Parliament’s comments that went with it, we voted in favour overall as the proposal would see EUR 9.8 billion return to Member States. (Meaning a reduction in the amount each Member State has to contribute to the EU).

2016/11/22

UKIP abstained on this budgetary decision. The EU Solidarity Fund has a budget of EUR 500 million a year and is used for disaster relief in Europe. This proposal is to take EUR 50 million of that money and ‘frontload’ it. This means that this amount of money can be more quickly mobilised in the event of a natural disaster. The EUR 500 million is something that is already budgeted for and this proposal won’t mean more money has to be taken from taxpayers. UKIP has criticised the speed at which the EU reacts to disasters in the past, and as this money is for disaster relief we decided it would be wrong to oppose.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this budgetary decision. The Flexibility Instrument is an EU financial tool which currently has EUR 1.4 billion available to it and allows the EU spend money on individual areas which would often break normal budgetary ceilings. This proposal is to mobilise EUR 837 million over the next 4 years for the EU to spend more money on migration and security. UKIP voted against as we oppose the unaccountable EU institutions spending taxpayers’ money, especially in a failing policy area.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this budgetary decision. The proposal is to give EUR 2.9 million (60% match funding) for 725 redundancies in Greece. The money will be spent on projects like professional counselling, start-ups, job search, training allowance, and a job creation subsidy. UKIP voted against as we oppose unaccountable EU institutions spending taxpayers’ money on unemployment measures in other countries.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this budgetary decision. This proposal is to give EUR 2.4 million (60% match funding) for 1 500 redundancies in Finland. The money will be spent on projects like coaching measures, training courses, start-up grants, pay subsidy, and allowances for travel and accommodation. UKIP voted against as we oppose unaccountable EU institutions spending taxpayers’ money on unemployment measures in other countries.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this budgetary decision. This was a final agreement behind closed between the Council, EU Parliament and Commission on setting the EU budget. The final agreement for 2018 will set the EU budget at EUR 160.1 billion. UKIP voted against, as we oppose unaccountable EU institutions spending huge amounts of taxpayers’ money.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs have voted against this first reading of this legislative report. The document wished to make a number of technical changes due to the release of recent statistical data. The Commission want to increase the amount of money spent on schemes such as the Youth Employment Initiative (YEI) which has been extended from 2017 to 2020. In accordance with this they want an increase of EUR 1.2 billion for the YEI. This is just the EU wanting to waste more UK taxpayer money on schemes that produce poor results and for this reason this is why UKIP MEPs have voted against.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this EU recommendation. UKIP strongly supports the role of research and innovation in our society. However, the EU desperately needs budget cuts as a result of heavy deficiencies in several of its policy areas.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this EU Recommendation. UKIP strongly supports the role of research and innovation in our society. However, the EU desperately needs budget cuts as a result of heavy deficiencies in several of its policy areas.

2016/11/22

It is principally a matter for the third country and the EU Member State concerned if they wish to adopt or recognise accession to the Hague Convention, given the subject matter it is not something we would seek to deny them, accordingly UKIP abstained on this non-legislative enactment.

2016/11/22

It is principally a matter for the third country and the EU Member State concerned if they wish to adopt or recognise accession to the Hague Convention. Given the subject matter, this is not something that we would seek to deny them. Accordingly UKIP abstained on this non-legislative enactment.

2016/11/22

. ‒ The proposal constitutes further interference by the EU in the regulation of financial services. UKIP voted against this legislative report.

2016/11/22

. ‒ UKIP voted against this proposal. We are concerned by the proposed further militarisation of the European Union and the lack of clarity in the legislation over what constitute eligible military actors.

2016/11/22

. ‒ This proposal is for further unnecessary EU harmonisation of rules on corporate insolvency in Member States. UKIP voted against the legislative report.

2016/11/22

Further measures to increase the collection of VAT - particularly on imported goods of low value - by making online platforms (rather than the seller or importer) responsible for the collection of VAT. UKIP voted against this legislative report.

2016/11/22

Further interference in the taxation of goods and services within Member States, in particular an enhanced role for the Commission in co-ordinating VAT matters, accordingly UKIP voted against.

2016/11/22

UKIP abstained on this non-legislative and non-binding resolution. We are concerned at the ongoing humanitarian crisis occurring because of internal instability and the power politics games played between Saudi Arabia and Iran. Arms exports are an intricate part of government policy, linked with both economic well—being and foreign policy interests. Whilst we are concerned at aspects of UK Government policy, in particular regarding Saudi Arabia, there is no justification for the transfer of these powers to the EU which, following Brexit, will be a foreign power. We are extremely concerned at the British Government’s apparent willingness to do so, expressed in their position paper on foreign affairs following Brexit.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this non-legislative and non-binding report. We as a party are supportive of a balanced approach that supports disabled people’s rights and protections without creating an undue burden on business. Domestically we have expressed strong opposition to several policy areas that have failed to do this. This report however consistently calls for either fresh legislative initiative from the Commission or extensive involvement of the Commission in the domestic affairs of Member States. On principal this is something we cannot support.

2016/11/22

. ‒ UKIP MEPs voted against allowing this legislative report to be negotiated among the EU institutions behind closed doors. UKIP believes that legislation should receive full scrutiny from Parliament and that Members should be able to table amendments to the report.

2016/11/22

In this non-legislative own—initiative report on the EU-Africa Strategy: a boost for development, UKIP MEPs voted against. ACP means ‘African, Caribbean and Pacific’ states. ‘The document ‘calls for the parliamentary dimension of ACP-EU to be stepped up.’ They see the ACP as an important entity to help strengthen democracy, the rule of law and respect of human rights. However, the ACP is just another EU Trojan horse. The EU finances approximately 50% of the costs of the ACP secretariat. The report ‘recalls that Africa is particularly vulnerable to the impact of climate change; considers it essential for the EU to develop a strategic approach to building climate resilience and to support African countries, in particular the least developed countries in their efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and to adapt.’ It is argued that African countries have more important concerns when it comes to spending money than focussing on climate change scaremongering. In addition, the document states that it wants to ‘respect the commitment given in Paris in 2015 to allocate USD 100 billion to developing countries by 2020.’ This is the EU throwing money at a problem and hoping that it will go away, so UKIP voted against.

2016/11/22

UKIP abstained on this non-legislative report. We support the right of anyone who feels they have been mistreated by the EU institutions to seek redress via the ombudsman. However, we voted to abstain on this, as we do not believe all of the provisions within this report are in the British interest.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs have voted against this non-legislative resolution. UKIP believe that a new EU legislative tool to inspect the rightful application of unilaterally imposed legislation is not the answer to the improvement of environmental policies in Europe. Independence and freedom from absurd targets unilaterally set by the unelected EU Commission will allow Britain to re-join the world and enhance liberty whilst protecting the environment.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this non-legislative and non-binding report. Whilst we support effective measures to increase economic opportunities for all citizens, we cannot support this report. Primarily, it supports the implementation of new EU legislation and increased interference by the Commission in the internal affairs of Member States. Additionally, many of the proposals contained within this report would have the opposite effect of their stated aims.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this legislative initiative. This would extend the Commission’s power to bypass parliamentary scrutiny of changes to a Directive on intelligent road systems, and make unilateral changes to the legislation. Whilst we object to all EU institutions legislating on behalf of the UK, the European Parliament allows some level of democratic scrutiny on otherwise unaccountable decisions made in the Commission.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this legislative 1st reading report as we felt that the recommendations would not be sufficiently strong to protect us from unfair or abusive trade practices with partners. In addition, we note that whilst independent countries like America can and do take decisive action against trade abuse, EU policy is not as effective in this area.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this non-legislative and non-binding resolution. We express our sincere condolences to the family of Daphne Caruana Galizia and support the on-going independent investigation into the circumstances to her death. We hope her killers are brought to justice. However we are completely opposed to any attempt at politicising her death or using it as a catalyst for the European Commission or any other EU institution to interfere in the internal affairs of Malta. Any allegations of illegal wrongdoing should be investigated by the appropriate authorities within Malta. We remain resolutely opposed to any use of the Rule of Law Mechanism.

2016/11/22

UKIP abstained on this non-legislative resolution. We note with satisfaction that this is the last time that the EU will represent us in the WTO Ministerial Conference before Brexit. We look forward to an independent Britain being a helpful and active participant in the WTO once free of the EU. In the meantime, we chose to abstain.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this non-legislative and non-binding report. We are firmly opposed to the development of any kind of EU foreign policy, including further expansion of the European Union. The Eastern Partnership provides a mechanism to support these ambitions.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs have abstained on this non-legislative resolution. UKIP firmly believe in the great importance of preserving biodiversity in Europe. However, UKIP think that this subject should be competence of Member States’ national governments.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this non-legislative and non-binding resolution. We are opposed to any use of the Rule of Law Mechanism in which the Commission interferes in the internal affairs of a sovereign state. The Law and Justice Party sought and received a democratic mandate in free and fair elections to form a government and pursue its agenda. Any allegations of unconstitutional or illegal activity should be dealt with by the courts within Poland and have no need for the involvement of the Commission.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this non-legislative and non-binding report. Whist we take the issue of car safety seriously the UK has perfectly sufficient legislation in place. This report calls for unnecessary harmonisation of standards and contains calls for several legislative initiatives which we cannot accept. Any changes to laws affecting the UK should originate in our own sovereign Parliamentary democracy.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this legislative initiative. Fundamentally we disagree with the EU institutions deciding any law affecting the UK. Specifically in this case the UK has its own licensing system. EU involvement and harmonisation is unnecessary and potentially damaging. A similar scheme applied to the UK’s road infrastructure created a national shortage of drivers and therefore disrupted the economy. Voting against protects against any potential negative impacts on the UK’s inland waterways.

2016/11/22

UKIP have voted against this legislative first reading report. UKIP disagree that harmonisation of consumer protection across Europe is needed, as well as opposing the idea that the scope of the existing CPC regulation needs extending, or its efficiency strengthening. In addition to this, UKIP believe that Member States can act on their own accord without involvement from the Commission.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this legislation. Whilst we agree that the region is important and look forward to improved relations between an independent United Kingdom and the countries concerned, we cannot support the creation of an international organisation by the European Union. We completely reject the development of an EU foreign policy and any budgetary implications in the future.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs abstained in the vote on this technically non-legislative report. The report solely concerns the Schengen area, of which the UK is not part. For this reason, it would not be appropriate for UK MEPs to interfere in this matter.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs have abstained on this technically non-legislative report. UKIP supports data exchanges, particularly when the aim is to fight terrorism and serious crime, but believes that this should be concluded bilaterally between sovereign nations.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs have voted to abstain on this technically non-legislative report. UKIP support data exchanges in principle, particularly when the aim is to fight terrorism and serious crime, but believe that this should be concluded bilaterally between sovereign nations.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs have voted to abstain on this technically non-legislative report. UKIP support data exchanges in principle, particularly when the aim is to fight terrorism and serious crime, but think that this should be concluded bilaterally between sovereign nations.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs have voted to abstain on this first reading. It is important to understand that safety rules on passenger ships are important. In no way would UKIP MEPs agree to the EU managing the safety standards of Member States, but at the same time UKIP MEPs would never consider it acceptable to allow the safety of passengers and their rights to be put in danger.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs have voted to abstain on this first reading. It is always important wherever necessary to tidy up the burdensome red tape that is produced by the EU. The amendment to this Directive updates, simplifies and clarifies the existing requirements for the counting and registration of passengers and crew on board passenger ships, whilst enhancing safety levels. However it does not go far enough and one proposal put forward by one of our MEPs is to have CCTV on decking to ensure safety of passengers in the event of any accidents.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs voted to abstain on this first reading. This is a review of the existing legislation which aims to simplify and rationalise it. There is a proposal to eliminate the legal uncertainty and redundancy caused by the co—existence of two directives on the inspection of vessels. It is important to ensure that any legislation that is to do with the safety of ro—ro ferries is clear to all parties involved and UKIP MEPs will ensure that no unnecessary red tape will confuse matters and cause any problems.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs abstained on this motion for a resolution. UKIP supports the highest possible level of protection of environment and human health. However, this control should be made by Member States and not by the unelected Commission.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs have abstained on this motion for a resolution. UKIP support the highest possible level of protection of human health. However, this control should be made by Member States and not by the unelected EU Commission.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted to abstain on this non-binding motion for a resolution. We utterly deplore such an abominable crime, and support tackling violence against women. However, we believe that this ought to be conducted at Member State level, and believe it is not for the EU to state where Member States spend their development aid, or to interfere with the financial decisions of international nations. The UK is already committed to the cause of ending forced marriage, duly considering it a criminal act under UK law.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs have voted against this Resolution on 2017 UN Climate Change Conference in Bonn. UKIP deny the Climate Change alarmism supported by green lobbies, often financed by the EU Commission. They are the cause of current damaging and counter-productive energy policy. The European Commission continues imposing never-ending objectives for emissions reductions. EU policies are forcing the investment of vast amounts of money into activity that will have little or no effect on climate.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this non-legislative, non-binding resolution. The resolution itself was a co-signed by a number of the political groups in the European Parliament. It included calls for a transition period to be under ECJ jurisdiction, that free movement continue, that Northern Ireland and the UK remain in the customs union, and that talks on a UK-EU trade deal be postponed. UKIP tabled 13 amendments calling for a range of things such as allowing the UK to start trade negotiations with third countries, that the ECJ must have no jurisdiction in the UK, that the Commission does not obstruct the UK bringing in border controls, that there should be no transition deal, and that Gibraltar should not be used as a bargaining chip. Unfortunately all these amendments were rejected. UKIP also tabled its own resolution, however this was not voted on as the joint resolution was passed first.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs voted against this legislative report on the restriction of the use of certain hazardous substances in electrical and electronic equipment. UKIP opposes the creation of new EU legislation in this field. UKIP believes it is necessary to increase legal certainty while preserving the environment and public health. However, UKIP insist that all decisions on the restriction of the use of certain hazardous substances should be taken at national level.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs reject this legislative proposal because, however powerful the case to conserve tuna by international agreement, the European Union is neither a state nor a nation and should not therefore be trying to behave as one by signing agreements which are by definition for signature by nations: the word ‘international’ means between nations and this is a further example of EU action which may be judged as ‘ultra vires’.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this non-binding, non-legislative report. Although we fully support tackling discrimination and violence against women; as well as the empowerment of women; UKIP vehemently opposes all forms of gender quotas, gender mainstreaming and in particular the women on boards directive. We believe that such strategies are highly counterproductive and also discriminatory. All positions, including high-level positions ought to be determined by aptitude, and not gender.This report was extremely contradictory; on the one hand it pushed for gender quotas and women on boards, whilst at the same time called for anonymised euro-pass C.V’s, where C.V’s are unable to be determined by a person’s gender.Furthermore, not only was this report seeking to intervene in the employment policy of Member States; we also believe this report was intrusive in the private and domestic lives of families, with regard to the division of care.Overall, this was more interference on the part of the EU and undermines the sovereignty of Member States, via the need to enforce their gender mainstreaming agenda.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs have voted against this non-legislative and non-binding report, which wants to address the shrinking civil society space in developing countries. The document states that it ‘believes that a genuinely independent, pluralistic and vibrant civil society is pivotal to a country’s development and stability, to ensuring democracy and respect for human rights, and to building inclusive societies’. This sounds contradictory for an EU institution to say this, as they are more likely to try to control every aspect of a nation state. In addition to this, the report calls on the EU to ‘provide guidance to governments’. The governments of these nation states were elected by their own citizens to run the country how they see fit not by some foreign illegitimate political entity. Furthermore, the report wants to see the integration of all internal and external policies, including justice, home affairs, trade and security policies, in accordance with the principle of policy coherence for development. UKIP do not want to see the harmonisation of policies as it is up to the nation state to amend and implement policy and for these reasons UKIP MEPs voted against this own initiative report.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs have voted against this non-legislative report. UKIP MEPs believe that co-operation is needed in the fight to combat cybercrime, but that that this should be concluded bilaterally between sovereign nations. UKIP also strongly oppose any attempt by the EU to establish further legal frameworks, particularly when this seeks to establish common definitions on terms associated with cybercrime.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this non-legislative and non-binding report. We do not support the development of any type of EU foreign policy.

2016/11/22

. ‒ UKIP voted against this legislative report at first reading. Whilst making products and services more accessible to people with disabilities is a positive aim, UKIP believes that it is not for the EU to tell Member States how to legislate in this area. Additionally, UKIP disagrees with harmonisation attempts and efforts to create a single market. UKIP MEPs voted against a number of amendments tabled to this report. They voted for amendments which would remove microenterprises from the scope of the legislation. They voted against any amendments seeking to increase the scope of the legislation: for example, amendments to include ‘persons with functional limitations’ in the legislation, as this goes beyond what the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities sets out, and it is not for the European Union to go beyond this.

2016/11/22

UKIP supported this legislative report whereby this agreement grants Chile the right to cancel the deal if it feels the EU is not upholding its end of the bargain. Given this is one of the rare occasions the EU has treated a trade partner as an equal, we supported this.

2016/11/22

. ‒ UKIP supported this legislative report. UKIP notes that this was a simple technical update to reflect that fact that Croatia is now an EU Member State. There was no need to oppose such a factual update, so we supported it.

2016/11/22

. ‒ UKIP abstained on this non-legislative non-binding report, which notes that trade between Chile and the EU does not require freedom of movement of people, and it hopes that the Brexit negotiators on the EU side will be reminded of this. We abstained on this vote as we feel there is no need to interfere in trade.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this legislative report. This would tie the UK into the common fisheries policy for the long term, deprive us of our own waters and is entirely against UK interests.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this decision. We are concerned by the proposed further militarisation of the European Union and the lack of clarity in the legislation over what constitutes eligible military actors.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted to abstain on this non-legislative own initiative report. It is extremely important that the EU institutions maintain a high level of transparency in order to ensure that it remains accountable. However, this is very much a report that has come about through closing the barn door after the horse has bolted. This report does not go far enough, there should be an independent body established in order to provide a relevant code of conduct that will ensure that all measures that are required to maintain integrity and transparency are met.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this non—legislative motion for resolution. We are against further calls for self-promotion and budget increases, which this resolution calls for in line with the next MFF negotiations. This is despite the programme already having had a 40% increase since the last programme, as well as admitting that the success rate remains low, with only 5% of young citizens having benefited from the programme. Currently Erasmus+ costs the taxpayer EUR 14.7 billion. UKIP believes that this exchange scheme is not cost effective; exchange schemes can be conducted outside of Erasmus+ in the UK.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this non-legislative and non-binding report. Whilst we share similar concerns with the balance of work skills and jobs in the market, EU-level action is unnecessary and unhelpful. These issues are best addressed by the UK Government and private enterprise.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEP’s voted to abstain on this recommendation. Amongst other things this recommendation was amending the Multilateral Agreement to take into account the accession of several countries who are now members of the EU.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs have voted to abstain on this technically non-legislative report. The UK already considers this substance to be worthy of being listed as a Class A drug. Furthermore, the UK is not bound by this decision taken at EU level. UKIP believe that controlling the drug in the EU could be beneficial in combatting the drug being available in the UK.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this non-legislative and non-binding report. We do not support the development of any type of EU foreign policy. We look forward to reinvigorating the UK’s ties with our important Commonwealth partners following the UK’s exit from the European Union, on a bilateral basis, when we will able to, once again, negotiate our own trade agreements.

2016/11/22

UKIP abstained on this legislative decision. This proposal is to give over EUR 1 billion to Italy to help in reconstruction efforts for earthquakes that occurred in 2016 and 2017. While of course UKIP opposes the EU spending any UK taxpayers’ money, the amount given would be budget-neutral. It does not mean the UK has to give more money to the EU, nor would it mean the UK would get money back if this money wasn’t given to Italy. The money will come from funds that had already been budgeted for. To be clear, this would not mean any additional funding is necessary from taxpayers. Additionally as this was for legitimate humanitarian reasons, UKIP felt it would be more responsible to abstain.

2016/11/22

UKIP abstained on this legislative amending budget. This proposal is directly linked to the ‘mobilisation’ vote to give over EUR 1 billion to Italy for reconstruction efforts due to recent earthquakes. Whilst the other vote is concerned with the principle of giving the EUR 1 billion to Italy, this vote is to make sure that there is technically enough money in the correct budget-line to pay it. As it happens the EU Solidarity Fund (EUSF) does not have enough money in its budget-line to pay outright. The proposal here is to transfer some money from under used budget-lines, in to the EUSF. This would be budget-neutral and will not require additional funding from taxpayers.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this legislative decision. The proposal is to give over EUR 3.5 million to Finnish workers who have lost their jobs due to Microsoft downscaling its operation in the country. The money will go to areas such as retraining, job seeking, allowances for travel, start-up grants etc. UKIP voted against as we don’t believe UK taxpayers’ money should be used for poor economic decisions in other countries. This is nothing more than EU dole money.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs have voted against this legislative report on aviation. UKIP believe that the EU Emission Trading System is a huge failure for the EU. It forces industries to comply with absurd standards dictated by the EU Commission’s obsession to limit global temperature below 2 degrees Celsius. The ETS has destroyed our Industry causing a considerable carbon leakage phenomenon. UKIP believe the only solution to this legislative chaos is to reject the EU energy policy together with the entire ETS system. Once out of the EU, the UK should be free from any EU legislation, including the emission trading scheme in the aviation sector.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs voted against this legislative report on land use, land use change and forestry. UKIP rejects the Commission proposal. UKIP denies man—made climate change and believes that CO2 is not a pollutant. New legislation in this field would only bring further bureaucracy and economic damages to this sector. UKIP notes that forestry is not an EU competence.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs have voted to abstain on this legislative report. UKIP fully support measures that seek to tackle illegal migrants being able to easily forge residence permits. We cannot, however, support EU legislation and EU harmonisation practices. For these reasons, UKIP voted to abstain on this report.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs have voted in favour of this motion for resolution, which opposes the Commission position. UKIP believe that the EU Commission’s draft delegated act, if adopted, would result in a lower standard of products being available to consumers.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this legislative amending budget. The proposal has two elements to it. The first (and far more important) is that the budget ceiling for the EU ‘Youth Employment Initiative’ will be increased by an extra EUR 500 million. The second part is minor adjustments to staff posts in the EU decentralised agencies ‘ACER’ and ‘SESAR2’, however no extra staff will be awarded to them. UKIP voted against because we oppose unaccountable EU institutions spending taxpayers’ money. Only our elected and accountable national governments should decide employment policies.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this non-legislative and non-binding report. Arms exports are an intricate part of government policy, linked with both economic well—being and foreign policy interests. Whilst we are concerned at aspects of UK Government policy, in particular regarding Saudi Arabia, there is no justification for the transfer of these powers to the EU which, following Brexit, will be a foreign power.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this non-legislative and non-binding report. We do not support the development of any type of EU foreign policy.

2016/11/22

UKIP abstained on this non-legislative and non-binding report. This report raises many important breaches of human rights and corruption of which we are concerned. However, we do not support the development of EU foreign policy or see any added value in EU action that cannot already be achieved by state or international level assistance.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted to abstain on this non-legislative report. Although the report is broadly critical of the European Fund for Strategic Investments, and expresses concerns which we share, we cannot endorse the strategy of using public money to shelter private investors from risk – it leads to a misallocation of capital that will in turn lead to asset bubbles. Accordingly UKIP voted against the report as a whole.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs have voted against this non-legislative, own-initiative report. UKIP are against a ‘European Agenda’ on the collaborative economy. UKIP believe that Member States should be free to create their own laws on the collaborative economy, and that a harmonised approach is not suitable.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs voted against this non-legislative, own-initiative report. UKIP reject calls for more EU legislation to be produced and are against a harmonised approach to online platforms, as this is an issue for individual Member States. UKIP also oppose the creation of the digital single market.

2016/11/22

. ‒ UKIP abstained overall on this non-legislative and non-binding report. We cannot support EU action or the development of an EU foreign policy but we remain concerned at the ongoing conflict in Yemen and wish to see a long-lasting and stable solution. In particular, we are concerned at attempts by the EU to interfere with Member State trade policy. Whilst, as a party, we are critical of arms sales to Saudi Arabia, this should always remain a matter for the British Government and not the Commission.

2016/11/22

. ‒ UKIP voted against this motion for a resolution because it calls for an end to funding for European parties that do not support the Union. This is inherently undemocratic, especially as it means members of the public who do not support the Union will have no voice.

2016/11/22

. ‒ UKIP voted against this legislative report. The EU seeks to reduce emissions within its borders while forcing energy-intensive industries offshore to jurisdictions with lower emission standards. We in UKIP oppose EU climate and energy policy. We reject climate hysteria and we believe the EU should accept that the Paris Agreement is close to its end.

2016/11/22

We supported this objection because it rejects secondary legislation which adds to ‘red tape’ - and completely fails to understand the vital need to remove, simplify and ease the ever-expanding EU bureaucratic burden.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this non-legislative, non-binding report. Principally we oppose any form of EU action, and this report was looking to create an EU strategy. UKIP wholly believe issues such as the ones contained within the report, gender discrimination, gender pay and gender pension gap are issues that need to be tackled. However, UKIP believe that this is the sole competency of the individual Member States. This report calls for more legislation and regulation and seeks to interfere within the domestic life of men and women, which we cannot support.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this non-legislative and non-binding report. We are opposed to any expansion of the European Union and all pre-accession related activities. In particular we are opposed to this reports attempts to infringe on Serbia’s sovereign right to exercise independent foreign relations.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this non-legislative and non-binding report. We are opposed to any expansion of the European Union and all pre-accession related activities.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this non-legislative and non-binding report. We are opposed to any expansion of the European Union and all pre-accession related activities.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this non-legislative and non-binding report. We support efforts to improve standards in labour but are also equally committed to free and open trade and against its politicisation. Any punitive measures that impede this flow of goods will only serve to make both parties poorer.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs have voted against this non-legislative report. The report ‘points to the increase in Euroscepticism and in anti-European propaganda that distorts information on Union policies, and calls on the Commission and the Council to analyse and address their causes.’ By the sounds of it, the EU wants to spend more money on dead-end projects that do not convey an accurate message to people living in the EU. The document talked about how the EU wants to increase its dialogue with people in Member States, and it has called on the Commission to focus on an action plan for greater communication. UKIP does not support more money being wasted, nor does it believe that the Commission should be doing anything as it is an illegitimate political entity, and for these reasons voted against.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this non-legislative, non-binding report regarding the 7th Research Programme. The 7th Research Programme was an EU project which ran from 2007 to 2013 and had a budget of EUR 55 billion. The money would be spent on grants for research in Europe, but these would also have to have a ‘European added value’. The report says that there was no cost-benefit analysis of the 7th Research Programme, that there was an error rate of about 5% and that there were shortcomings in the oversight of the programme. The report goes on to call for more synergies between EU funds, and states that the Commission operated the programme effectively. UKIP believes that taxpayers’ money should not be used by unaccountable EU institutions. If we didn’t have to waste so much money on EU membership and bureaucracy, we would have more money available to support research in the UK.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this non-legislative and non-binding resolution. Whilst we recognise and sympathise with the issues related to statelessness in the region, in particular the suffering of the Rohingya in Myanmar, we cannot support EU action on the matter. We remain resolutely opposed to the development of any EU foreign policy, and this report makes several calls for such EU action.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this non-legislative report, because the proposal for harmonisation of the legal framework could add additional costs; in addition, any matters relating to tax fraud should be dealt with by the Member State and not the EU.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against the legislative report on PRIMA. We in UKIP strongly support the role of research in our society. However, we believe that the EU desperately needs budget cuts as a result of heavy deficiencies in several of its policy areas.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs have voted to abstain on this legislative document. The Commission proposal sought to change some bits of legislation to allow the EU to pay for 100% co-financing of the European Regional Development Fund for reconstruction efforts and also to make it easier to pre-authorise EU money for use in affected countries. The Commission stated that these changes will not need new money or raising of budget ceilings. This proposal has come about primarily because of recent horrendous earthquakes in Italy. This doesn’t mean the EU will be making the UK pay more money - it will just mean the EU will be able to use the money it already has more quickly to help give relief to areas hit by natural disasters.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against the legislative report on energy labelling. Despite the changes proposed by the EU parliament, we in UKIP believe that the new EU Commission proposal on energy labelling will bring great uncertainty for the industry and great confusion to consumers. We believe that this regulation is unnecessary and that it will be a new EU burden to deal with.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this legislative report, which amended the 2014 decision on the establishment of the European Capitals of Culture for the years 2020—2033.This we believe is another propaganda scheme, to promote the EU and its values. This report extends the scheme beyond the EU Member States to allow participation from EFTA and EEA countries, which only confirms the self-promotion of the EU on a wider international scale.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against the non-legislative report on Horizon 2020. We in UKIP strongly support the role of research in our society. However, we believe that the EU desperately needs budget cuts as a result of heavy deficiencies in several of its policy areas.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs voted against this non-legislative report on building blocks for a post-2020 cohesion policy. The document called on the Commission to ensure that there is better cooperation between the ESI Funds and other Union funds. It also endorsed the Paris climate change agreement and the report underlines that the increased visibility of the cohesion policy is vital to fight against Euroscepticism and can contribute to regaining citizens’ confidence and trust. UKIP does not support the Paris climate change agreement nor does it believe in wasting UK tax payers’ money on vanity projects in order for the EU to promote itself.

2016/11/22

We voted against this non-legislative resolution because it details an unworkable plan for a failed policy, the CFP (Common Fisheries Policy)

2016/11/22

The proposal will return some decisions on VAT to Member States (i.e. the UK rate of VAT on e-books could be reduced) and accordingly UKIP voted in favour.

2016/11/22

Today UKIP voted against this own-initiative report. We are against new EU legislation and we oppose further harmonisation in this field.

2016/11/22

UKIP have abstained on this non-legislative report, because the needs of vulnerable adults must be ensured within the Member States. It is important that every Member State ratifies the Hague Convention; it really should not be up to the EU to put pressure on the Member States to force the ratification. Ratification of the Hague Convention should be done in a timely manner and when the Member States are in a position to do so.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs voted against this proposal, as we note with outrage that, by ratifying this agreement, the Dutch Parliament completely ignored the wishes of their electorate, by reversing the Dutch people’s democratic decision to oppose the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement, in the Netherlands referendum held in April 2016. Continued EU intervention in the Ukraine crisis only serves to further exacerbate this terrible situation.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs have voted to abstain on this legislative report. UKIP MEPs firmly support measures which are designed to combat illegal migration. We do, however, not support further EU harmonisation practices and EU legitimacy in issuing visas.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs have voted against this technically legislative report. UKIP fully support safeguarding fundamental rights but reject the need for an EU body, financed by the taxpayer, to conduct work that many national governments and NGOs already do.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs have voted against this non-legislative motion for resolution. UKIP principally oppose the EU’s Fundamental Rights Agency (FRA), which is financed by the taxpayer, to conduct work that many national governments and NGO’s already do. This resolution seeks to expand the scope of this framework, so UKIP MEPs voted against.

2016/11/22

Today UKIP voted against this own-initiative report. We are against new EU legislation and we oppose further harmonisation in this field.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs have voted against the new Consensus on Development in this motion for a resolution. UKIP does not support the European Union trying to further harmonise development policy. The EU wants to see one development policy to override all of the 28 other development policies from the national governments. With this one line of vision the EU will have the authority to instruct nation states where to spend their taxpayer money as well as wanting to push for the further expansion of the influence of the Union though their ‘common vision, values and principles’. UKIP does not want the EU to have more influence and see the further harmonisation of policies and so for these reasons UKIP has voted against.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs voted against this motion for a resolution on resilience as a strategic priority of the external action for the EU. This document would like to see the 2013-2020 Action Plan for resilience fully implemented and it would like to promote ‘greater coherence between policies’. This would mean that the EU would like to see further integration of its policies in Member States and harmonisation throughout the European Union. In addition, the document has asked for ‘sufficient resources to be devoted to the promotion of resilience’. This means that the EU wants to put more money into failing and unsuccessful projects to promote resilience. UKIP does not support the EU wasting more money and for the further harmonisation of policies, and for these reasons UKIP voted against.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs were permitted a free vote on this non-legislative resolution. UKIP firmly reject all forms of racism, including anti-Semitism. As some amendments concerned sensitive issues, such as the definition of ‘anti-Semitism’ and the right to criticise Israel, UKIP MEPs were permitted to vote based on their own conscience.

2016/11/22

We opposed this non-legislative resolution because, like the common fisheries policy (CFP) itself, it would block development without delivering the conservation necessary to avoid the ‘tragedy of the commons’.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this budgetary vote to give over EUR 2.6 million to 821 Finnish workers who have lost their job. This is nothing more than EU dole money. British taxpayers’ money shouldn’t be used to pay for poor economic decisions in other countries.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this non-legislative report because we cannot support a report that welcomes subsidiarity and proportionality whilst in the same sentence acknowledges that they should be considered integral parts of the EU’s policy making process, UKIP does not agree with any part of EU policy making. In one sentence it seems that it is calling for national parliaments to have a greater say in EU policy making but effectively it is nothing more than an empty gesture leading to the negation of parliamentary sovereignty.

2016/11/22

This non-legislative report calls on the Commission to take further control of financial markets and their regulation; accordingly UKIP voted against.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs have voted to abstain on this technically non—legislative report. UKIP support the cooperation between nations to combat terrorism and crime, but oppose this having to be done via the European Union. UKIP would prefer these agreements to be conducted on a bilateral basis.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs have voted to abstain on this legislative report. UKIP MEPs would normally support an objection to a Commission delegated act. On this occasion, however, the report specifically includes calls for the Commission to propose a new delegated act. UKIP MEPs feel that regardless of this rejection the Commission will ultimately still pass a delegated act..

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this non-legislative and non-binding resolution. We believe that the full sovereignty of states should be respected; the intrusiveness of the European Union’s criticism, and calls for action against Hungary, run contrary to that concept. In particular, we are concerned about the inclusion of paragraph 7 in the resolution and the launch of Article 7(1) TEU against Hungary.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this non-legislative and non-binding resolution. Education qualifications and certification should be a matter for individual states and we see no beneficial role unique to the European Union.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against giving consent to this protocol. We do not support the expansion of the European Union, the facilitation of this in EU legislation or EU agreements with third countries.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against giving consent to this protocol. We do not support the expansion of the European Union, the facilitation of this in EU legislation or EU agreements with third countries.

2016/11/22

. – UKIP MEPs have voted against this technically legislative report. UKIP does not support further financial payments to EU bodies who have been assigned control of the EU’s external borders.

2016/11/22

We voted against this legislative report. Firstly, we object to the EU becoming a member of international bodies in its own right, as it would enable to the EU to bully other countries. Secondly, we note that the concept of the EU joining bodies in its own name is conferred by powers under the Lisbon Treaty, which the EU forced on the people of Europe without their consent.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs voted against this non-legislative report. UKIP believe that, whilst there may be some benefits for advancing the digitalisation of public sector bodies, this should be an exclusive competence of national governments and does not require EU funding or harmonisation practices.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this non-legislative, non-binding report; even though the figures and criticisms are very useful, the solution it offers is that to combat the fraud there needs to be more EU legislation and power. The report highlights that the cost of known fraudulent and non-fraudulent irregularities in the budget amounts to over EUR 3 billion. It states that the ECB estimates that the cost of counterfeiting since the euro was set up in 2002 amounts to approximately EUR 500 million. The report criticises the Commission for the increases in irregularities and that the Commission no longer seems to want to publish an EU anti-corruption report anymore. However the solutions offered by the report call for more EU legislation and action on VAT, own resources and support for a European Public Prosecutor’s Office. The ultimate way to end fraud in the EU budget is to get rid of an EU budget altogether. UKIP voted against as we oppose calling for any more EU legislation and because we fundamentally disagree with the EU spending and wasting any taxpayers’ money.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this non-legislative report because not only do we deny climate change hysteria, but we also reject further EU legislation. Food waste is an issue that needs to be addressed by Europe and the world. However, we believe that national parliaments should monitor food safety issues without the creation of further EU legislation.

2016/11/22

We voted to abstain on this own-initiative report, as we do not wish to interfere in any measure that could combat fraud and illicit trade.

2016/11/22

We abstained on this non-legislative, own—initiative report, as although horses should be well-treated, the EU should not be encouraged to act on the topic.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted against this legislative report because the amendment called for the adoption of a Directive relating to Data Protection. We currently have an exceptional Data Protection Act in place and adding this to our current legal system would be pointless.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs have voted against this legislative report. UKIP do not believe the legislation is proportionate to its intended objective of combatting terrorism. Furthermore, UKIP strongly condemn the lack of an impact assessment from the Commission. We consider these legislative changes will only harm law abiding citizens who possess or acquire firearms.

2016/11/22

The EU Commission and the rapporteur believe that the EU circular economy is an efficient economic model that ensures that the environment receives adequate protection. The rapporteur believes it is the key to promote reindustrialisation and competitiveness in Europe. The main objective of this proposal is to transform the Union into a green, low-carbon economy. We are against the EU Commission proposal, we believe that this issue should be competence of National Parliaments.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted by way of a conscience vote on this non-legislative report, which contained some highly sensitive issues, with regard to sexual and reproductive rights as well as tackling violence against women. Whilst there were aspects of this report that we opposed, such as calling for the creation of new initiatives, as well as gender quotas, the vote was open to freedom of conscience.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted by way of a conscience vote on this non-legislative report. Whilst there were aspects of this report that we opposed, such as the EU monitoring Member States. This report contained some highly sensitive issues such as tackling violence against women. The vote was therefore left open to freedom of conscience.

2016/11/22

UKIP voted by way of a conscience vote on this non-legislative report. Whilst there were aspects of this report that we opposed, such as calling for an increase in the next MFF allocation and the inclusion of gender budgeting within various EU programmes, this report contained some highly sensitive issues such as tackling violence against women. The vote was therefore left open to freedom of conscience.

2016/11/22

UKIP MEPs have voted against this non-legislative motion for resolution. UKIP reject calls for further funding and staffing for EU authorities. Moreover, UKIP also oppose calls for the Commission to issue guidelines on big data for law enforcement purposes.

2016/11/22

We abstained on this non-legislative, own initiative report as although rabbits should be well treated, the EU should not be encouraged to act on the topic.

2016/11/22

Written questions (103)

P-000807/2019 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(39 KB) DOC(18 KB)

E-005755/2018 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(4 KB) DOC(17 KB)

E-005754/2018 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(4 KB) DOC(17 KB)

E-005753/2018 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(4 KB) DOC(18 KB)

E-004701/2018 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(101 KB) DOC(18 KB)

E-003719/2018 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(100 KB) DOC(17 KB)

E-003702/2018 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(4 KB) DOC(17 KB)

E-003701/2018 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(99 KB) DOC(17 KB)

E-003700/2018 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(98 KB) DOC(17 KB)

P-003661/2018 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(98 KB) DOC(17 KB)

P-002266/2018 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF DOC

P-001289/2018 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(4 KB) DOC(17 KB)

P-000646/2018 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(101 KB) DOC(17 KB)

E-007801/2017 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(98 KB) DOC(17 KB)

E-007800/2017 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(97 KB) DOC(17 KB)

E-007799/2017 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(4 KB) DOC(17 KB)

P-007183/2017 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(97 KB) DOC(17 KB)

E-007182/2017 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(4 KB) DOC(17 KB)

E-007181/2017 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(4 KB) DOC(17 KB)

E-004759/2017 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(4 KB) DOC(17 KB)

E-004301/2017 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(5 KB) DOC(15 KB)

E-004254/2017 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(4 KB) DOC(15 KB)

P-003835/2017 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(98 KB) DOC(15 KB)

E-003562/2017 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(102 KB) DOC(15 KB)

E-003112/2017 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(102 KB) DOC(15 KB)

E-002892/2017 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(4 KB) DOC(15 KB)

E-002494/2017 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(4 KB) DOC(15 KB)

E-002468/2017 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(5 KB) DOC(15 KB)

E-002467/2017 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(5 KB) DOC(15 KB)

E-002466/2017 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(102 KB) DOC(19 KB)

E-009590/2016 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(5 KB) DOC(16 KB)

E-009588/2016 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(5 KB) DOC(16 KB)

P-009493/2016 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(5 KB) DOC(18 KB)

E-009496/2016 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(5 KB) DOC(18 KB)

E-008017/2016 - Council

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(101 KB) DOC(16 KB)

E-008016/2016 - Council

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(102 KB) DOC(16 KB)

E-006968/2016 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(4 KB) DOC(15 KB)

P-006833/2016 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(5 KB) DOC(16 KB)

E-006676/2016 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(97 KB) DOC(15 KB)

E-006645/2016 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(102 KB) DOC(16 KB)

E-006644/2016 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(96 KB) DOC(15 KB)

E-005497/2016 - Council

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(102 KB) DOC(15 KB)

E-004016/2016 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(99 KB) DOC(16 KB)

E-003970/2016 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(101 KB) DOC(15 KB)

E-001494/2016 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(6 KB) DOC(24 KB)

E-001251/2016 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(4 KB) DOC(22 KB)

P-001003/2016 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(4 KB) DOC(22 KB)

E-015328/2015 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(4 KB) DOC(22 KB)

E-015296/2015 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(100 KB) DOC(22 KB)

E-015295/2015 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(100 KB) DOC(23 KB)

E-014779/2015 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(4 KB) DOC(22 KB)

P-014730/2015 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(101 KB) DOC(23 KB)

E-014581/2015 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(4 KB) DOC(23 KB)

E-014579/2015 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(5 KB) DOC(23 KB)

E-014271/2015 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(4 KB) DOC(22 KB)

E-014270/2015 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(4 KB) DOC(22 KB)

E-014269/2015 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(4 KB) DOC(22 KB)

E-013613/2015 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(99 KB) DOC(23 KB)

E-013612/2015 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(95 KB) DOC(22 KB)

P-013047/2015 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(4 KB) DOC(22 KB)

E-013081/2015 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(4 KB) DOC(22 KB)

E-012658/2015 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(103 KB) DOC(23 KB)

E-012354/2015 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(99 KB) DOC(22 KB)

P-011500/2015 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(98 KB) DOC(23 KB)

E-011501/2015 - Council

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(98 KB) DOC(23 KB)

E-011300/2015 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(101 KB) DOC(23 KB)

E-011299/2015 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(98 KB) DOC(22 KB)

E-007973/2015 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(98 KB) DOC(23 KB)

E-007250/2015 - Council

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(93 KB) DOC(22 KB)

E-005672/2015 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(96 KB) DOC(22 KB)

P-005557/2015 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(4 KB) DOC(22 KB)

E-004010/2015 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(95 KB) DOC(22 KB)

E-004009/2015 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(4 KB) DOC(22 KB)

E-004008/2015 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(97 KB) DOC(23 KB)

E-003808/2015 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(4 KB) DOC(22 KB)

E-003807/2015 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(4 KB) DOC(22 KB)

P-002184/2015 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(4 KB) DOC(23 KB)

E-002136/2015 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(98 KB) DOC(22 KB)

E-002135/2015 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(4 KB) DOC(22 KB)

E-002134/2015 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(4 KB) DOC(22 KB)

E-000945/2015 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(100 KB) DOC(23 KB)

P-000292/2015 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(4 KB) DOC(23 KB)

E-000301/2015 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(97 KB) DOC(23 KB)

P-010913/2014 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(4 KB) DOC(22 KB)

E-010921/2014 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(4 KB) DOC(23 KB)

E-010920/2014 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(103 KB) DOC(23 KB)

E-009543/2014 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(4 KB) DOC(23 KB)

E-009532/2014 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(97 KB) DOC(22 KB)

E-009531/2014 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(4 KB) DOC(22 KB)

E-008555/2014 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(102 KB) DOC(25 KB)

P-007472/2014 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(4 KB) DOC(22 KB)

E-007509/2014 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(4 KB) DOC(22 KB)

E-007508/2014 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(4 KB) DOC(22 KB)

E-007507/2014 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(4 KB) DOC(22 KB)

E-007506/2014 - Council

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(4 KB) DOC(22 KB)

E-007260/2014 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(4 KB) DOC(22 KB)

P-007142/2014 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(4 KB) DOC(22 KB)

E-006904/2014 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(98 KB) DOC(22 KB)

E-006903/2014 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(97 KB) DOC(22 KB)

E-006902/2014 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(98 KB) DOC(22 KB)

E-006122/2014 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(99 KB) DOC(23 KB)

E-006121/2014 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(96 KB) DOC(22 KB)

E-005759/2014 - Commission

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(4 KB) DOC(22 KB)

Amendments (94)

2018/2094(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7 a. Recognises further that the politicisation of EU Trade Agreements inhibits Trade and thereby diminishes the prosperity and growth of EU Member States;

2018/10/16
Committee: INTA

2018/0058(COD)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Proposal for a decision
Recital 2

(2) Since spring 2014, Ukraine has embarked on an ambitious reform programme aiming to stabilise its economy and improve the livelihoods of its citizens. Ukraine and the Union have jointly defined a reform agenda (the Association Agenda, which was last updated in March 2015). The fight against corruption as well as constitutional, electoral and judicial reforms are among the top priorities on the agenda. However, Transparency International’s 2017 Corruptions Perception Index Report showed that Ukraine had the second worst score for corruption rate of any country in the European continent.

2018/04/26
Committee: INTA

2018/0058(COD)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Proposal for a decision
Recital 16 a (new)

(16 a) The Union's macro-financial assistance should not be used for purposes of military or security operations, so as not to intensify the civil war or make the Union complicit in any military activities that may result from such activities being funded.

2018/04/26
Committee: INTA

2018/0058(COD)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Proposal for a decision
Recital 18

(18) In order to ensure that the Union’s financial interests linked to the Union’s macro-financial assistance are protected efficiently, Ukraine should take urgent appropriate measures relating to the prevention of, and fight against, fraud, corruption and any other irregularities linked to the assistance. Furthermore, Ukraine should desist from further harassment activities of anti- corruption and pro-transparency campaigners, for which Ukraine has a concerning record. In addition, provision should be made for the Commission to carry out checks and for the Court of Auditors to carry out audits, and the assistance should be reduced or withheld if serious improvements are not made.

2018/04/26
Committee: INTA

2018/0058(COD)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Proposal for a decision
Recital 18 a (new)

(18 a) An important step in the anti- corruption activities Ukraine is to carry out in order to receive the Union's macro- financial assistance is the setting up of the High Anti-Corruption Court, which was initially blocked by the Ukrainian Authorities. The staff and the judges of that court should be politically independent of the Ukrainian Government and they should submit annual personal financial interest declarations, monitored by international agencies with experience in such reporting activity.

2018/04/26
Committee: INTA

2018/0058(COD)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Proposal for a decision
Article 1 – paragraph 5 a (new)

5 a. The Union's macro-financial assistance shall not be used for purposes of military or security operations.

2018/04/26
Committee: INTA

2018/0058(COD)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Proposal for a decision
Article 6 a (new)

Article 6 a To protect the financial interests of the Union, all financial assistance shall be subject to independent auditing. Where necessary, data and findings on corruption and fraud shall be raised with other multilateral parties including, but not restricted to, the UN, OSCE and OECD.

2018/04/26
Committee: INTA

2017/2271(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Notes that the US was the largest market for EU exports and the second- largest source of EU imports in 2017; notes that there are differences in the trade deficits and surpluses between the EU and the US for trade in goods, trade in services, digital trade and foreign direct investment; notes further that the EU has a US dollar 147 billion surplus in goods with the US;

2018/05/23
Committee: INTA

2017/2271(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Recognises that in the view of many authorities, Germany's trade surplus in goods with the US is excessive and not in the interest of the German and wider Eurozone economies;

2018/05/23
Committee: INTA

2017/2065(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)

20a. Fully recognises that the Temporary Agency Work Directive in its operation and effect is counter-productive and hostile to the development of the digital market in the Member States;

2017/10/04
Committee: INTA

2016/2148(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Notes the efforts made to use the ESI Funds in support of key priorities set in the country-specific recommendations; notes the Commission’s proposal on the establishment of the Structural Reform Support Programme; sStresses that Article 23 of the Common Provision Regulation must only be used as a last resort and that Parliament must be fully involved from the early stages;

2016/09/08
Committee: BUDG

2016/2148(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Stresses that migration has become a structural phenomenon in Europe and calls for further use to be made of ESI Funds in order to promote the integration of asylum seekers and refugees into society;deleted

2016/09/08
Committee: BUDG

2016/2099(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6 a. Deplores that the European Investment bank is placed in Luxembourg - in terms of GDP per capita the richest country in the EU - and stipulates that the European Investment Bank commence a review to relocate the headquarters of the European Investment Bank together with its over 2,000 employees away from Luxembourg to a less well-off country.

2016/10/18
Committee: INTA

2016/2052(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Notes that, with around EUR 200 billion of annual military spending, European countries ~~are unable to aver~~have the sole right theo deter~~ioration of their security environment and to weigh on global affairs because of fragmented defence policies that create inefficiencies and hinder their force projec~~mine their own defence and security policies; Believes that any pooling or cooperation; be~~lieves that a more integrated framework for~~tween Member States on defence cshould result in significant savings, additional capabilities and more sustained investment; recalls that, according to ‘cost of non-Europe’ estimates, annual efficiency gains in this area could range between EUR 26 billion in the less optimistic scenarios and EUR 130 billionbe conducted on a bilateral basis, or with legitimate international organisations and must not in any way be conducted at EU level;

2016/09/12
Committee: BUDG

2016/2052(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Underlines that, at a time when public support for the EU is being called into question in some Member States, defence is an area where the individual and collective benefits of more Europe can be easily demonstrated, especially regarding the likely challenges to EU’s standing as a strategic actor following Brexit;deleted

2016/09/12
Committee: BUDG

2016/2052(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Believes that common funding has a key role to play in incentivising the use of mechanisms whose potential remains largely untapped, such as permanent structured cooperation and EU Battlegroups; calls, therefore, for the Athena mechanism to be expanded and for consideration to be given to alternative funding for military expenditure in order to do away with the ‘costs lie where they fall’ principle; stresses that, in this context, the EU budget should be able to fund the administrative costs of establishing strategic structures, such as joint operational headquarters; calls also for more ambitious civilian missions that are better integrated in the policy cycle and in the range of available instruments;deleted

2016/09/12
Committee: BUDG

2016/2052(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. ~~Urg~~Notes theat Member States tocan engage ~~more actively~~ in cooperative projects, e.g. research programmes or pooling and sharing of assets~~; supports,~~ as they are free to determine th~~is framework, the proposed~~eir own defence and security policies; Rejects any proposal for an EU preparatory action on defence research ~~which should pave the way for a~~or dedicated programme;

2016/09/12
Committee: BUDG

2016/2052(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Believes that the time is ripe for unfreezing the budget of the European Defence Agency, and is convinced that more should be done to close the investment gap in defence capabilities, including via EU innovative financing; endorses, finally, the proposal for a ‘European Semester’ on defence, whereby Member States would coordinate their defence spending plans in an open process involving the European Parliament and the national parliaments.deleted

2016/09/12
Committee: BUDG

2015/2233(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Motion for a resolution
Recital K a (new)

Ka. whereas data flows are integral to the global economy and directly benefit consumers; recognising that the European Court of Justice decision of 6 October 2015, which struck down the transfers of personal data to the USA under Safe Harbour, is a negative factor in this regards;

2015/11/04
Committee: INTA

2015/2132(BUD)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. ~~Welcomes the slight~~Deplores the increase in commitments for the Instrument for Macro-Financial Assistance and the European Neighbourhood Instrument; is ~~concerned, however, that these increases will not be sufficient to respond to the needs in the Ea~~furthermore of the opinion that in view of Turkey’s persisternt and ~~Southern neighbourhood, including possible further assistance programmes for Ukraine~~systematic human rights violations (which include imprisoning journalists), the Macro-Financial Assistance to Turkey should be suspended;

2015/07/20
Committee: INTA

2015/2127(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 (new)

Notwithstanding, the lending policies and practice of the European Investment Bank should conform in the first instance to sound commercial principles;

2015/11/06
Committee: INTA

2015/2127(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Welcomes the EIB public consultation on climate action and believes that the EIB can further strengthen its position as leader in the climate field; looks forward to the update of the EIB climate strategy outside of the EU, with the expectation of an action plan phasing out lending to non-renewable energy projects;deleted

2015/11/06
Committee: INTA

2015/2127(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Commends the high level of transparency achieved by the EIB; suggests further improvements in transparency ~~with regard to the assessment of the economic and social impact of the EIB’s intermediated loans~~;

2015/11/06
Committee: INTA

2015/2127(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Calls on the EIB to update its policies on anti-money laundering and on combating the financing of terrorism, including the establishment of a new responsible taxation policy, starting with a review of its policy on non-cooperative jurisdictions (NCJ policy) in 2016. EIB policies on anti- money laundering should have particular regard to EU Member State Luxembourg;

2015/11/06
Committee: INTA

2015/2104(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Considers that trade policy is crucial in combating climate change, and therefore urges the EU to ensure that its trade policy decisions are in line with the imperative to decarbonise global production and consumption;deleted

2015/09/04
Committee: INTA

2015/2104(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Stresses that the General Assembly representing the governments of all member countries must have ways and means to give direction to the United Nations System and coordinate all its activities; is of the opinion that in the long term the democratic governance of the UN should be strengthened ~~by establishing a World Parliament representing the people;~~

2015/09/17
Committee: AFET

2015/2104(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Notwithstanding the above, the permanent seats of France and the United Kingdom on the UN Security Council must in all circumstances remain;

2015/09/17
Committee: AFET

2015/2104(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Considering the contribution of the EU to peace and security architecture in the world, calls on a reform of the Security Council that would ensure a permanent seat to the European Union; notes that, due to the absence of the EU from the Security Council, the burden of echoing, advocating for and defending the interests of the EU, based on a coordinated CFSP, lies on the two permanent and the rotating European members;deleted

2015/09/17
Committee: AFET

2015/2104(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Notwithstanding the above, under no circumstances will the Sustainable Development Council be deemed to have the same or similar status to the UN Security Council;

2015/09/17
Committee: AFET

2015/2104(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. With a view to ensure the necessary legitimacy, efficiency and effectiveness of the decisions that this Sustainable Development Council would take, considers that its status and composition should be similar to those of the Security Council with a few permanent members, including the EU, and rotating ones; considers however that no justification whatsoever can be found to entitle a country or a regional organisation to the right to stop any decision taken by a majority or a qualified majority of the members, and therefore rejects any form of veto rightand rotating ones;

2015/09/17
Committee: AFET

2015/2104(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Considers that this Council should also have a strong coordinative role in all other fields in the UN System but security; in light of the recurring human catastrophes linked to illegal migrations, and considering that sustainable development of the countries of origin could facilitate in the long run a drying up of illegal migration flows, is of the conviction that this Council should coordinate the work of all agencies related to this concern;deleted

2015/09/17
Committee: AFET

2015/2104(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Is of the view that the Sustainable Development Council should coordinate also the work of the World Bank Group, the International Monetary Fund and the World Trade Organisation, to ensure that their respective decisions are taken and actions are carried out in an efficient and coherent fashion; in the same spirit, is therefore of the opinion that the activities of the unofficial G-20 Group should be merged to those of this Council;deleted

2015/09/17
Committee: AFET

2015/2104(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Believes that, besides promoting economic and social development in the world, the Sustainable Development Council should also be responsible for human well-being related matters; considers that the Sustainable Development Council should also be responsible for cultural sustainability, since culture is recognized as a key factor for building sustainable societies together with social, economic and environmental development, by integrating education, cultural diplomacy, protection of heritage, creative sector and scientific research in the policy-making approach;deleted

2015/09/17
Committee: AFET

2014/2228(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point vi a (new)

(via) That the National Health Service (NHS) of the United Kingdom be excluded from all TTIP provisions in their entirety;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

2014/2228(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point vi b (new)

(vib) That a full carve-out from TTIP be provided to the National Health Service (NHS) of the United Kingdom as part of the negotiations on market access, in such a way that this carve-out cannot be challenged through any dispute settlement mechanism that may arise from TTIP;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

2014/0279(COD)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Draft legislative resolution
Paragraph 1

1. ADeclines to adopts its position at first reading, taking over the Commission proposal.

2014/10/15
Committee: INTA

2014/0279(COD)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Draft legislative resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Calls on the Commission to refer ~~the~~any matter ~~to Parliament again if it intends to amend its proposal substantially or replace it with another tex~~related to accelerated association agreements to Parliament;

2014/10/15
Committee: INTA

2013/2145(BUD)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Notes with grave concern the substantive cuts of 12,5% in commitments for Heading 4; emphasises that even in times of increased budgetary discipline and constraints, it is of vital importance to maintain appropriate funding for the EU's global activities to enable it to live up to its ambitions outlined in the Lisbon treaty; stresses that all efforts should be made to limit the deep cuts and their repercussions for the EU as a global actor;deleted

2013/07/17
Committee: AFET

2013/2145(BUD)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Emphasises thus the importance of trying to as far as possible match the level of the 2013 budget in terms of commitments to the EU's major foreign policy financial instruments to ensure that the EU's international role is not unnecessarily weakendeleted;

2013/07/17
Committee: AFET

2013/2145(BUD)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. ~~Notes with particular concern~~Applauds the especially severe reductions applied to the European Neighbourhood Instrument (ENI), which could considerably endanger relations with the Eastern and Southern Neighbourhood, one of the main priorities of the EU's external action; stresses that without adequate funding, the ‘more for more’ principle as core mechanism in the relevant financial instruments will be fundamentally undermined; strongly urges to restore a substantial amount of the cuts in commitments to the ENI;

2013/07/17
Committee: AFET

2013/2145(BUD)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Emphasises that in the Southern Mediterranean, there is an urgent need for the EU to play an active role and that it is in the EU's interest to support further democratic developments in the Eastern Neighbourhood; expresses its concern that with deep cuts in the relevant instruments, there would be little room to react to sudden developments and maintain the level of support required to help countries in transition which could fundamentally undermine the EU's policy objectives in the area;deleted

2013/07/17
Committee: AFET

2013/2145(BUD)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Notes that the distribution of the decreases in commitments among the different instruments remains largely unexplained ~~which is especially disconcerting given the enormous differences in the depth of the cuts; asks the Commission to provide further clarification on the reasons for this distribution of cuts~~;

2013/07/17
Committee: AFET

2013/2145(BUD)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Notes that the margin for Heading 4 has been once more considerably reduced this year and leaves little room for flexibility with regard to policy priorities; ~~stresses that such thin margins are unacceptable as they undermine the role that Parliament can play in the budget negotiations;~~

2013/07/17
Committee: AFET

2013/2145(BUD)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Welcomes the savings the European External Action Service (EEAS) has been able to make in its budget but notes with concern rising costs and suggests steps should be taken towards the purchase of delegation buildings where economically sensible; similarly welcomes attempts made to reduce the number of senior level posts but emphasises that the efforts made so far are still insufficient; ~~continues to believe that the special situation of the EEAS requires a partial exemption from the strict savings goals imposed on other institutions.~~

2013/07/17
Committee: AFET

2012/2320(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas Regulation 1233/2011 of Parliament and Council on the ‘Application of certain guidelines in the field of officially supported export credits’ specifies annual reporting requirements of the Member States vis-à-vis the Commission and, at the same time, provides for delegating powers to the Commission, enabling a swift transposition of changes in respective OECD Arrangements into EU law;deleted

2013/05/07
Committee: INTA

2012/2320(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas under Article 207 of the Treaty on the functioning of the European Union (TFEU) ‘the common commercial policy shall be conducted in the context of the principles and objectives of the Union's external action’;deleted

2013/05/07
Committee: INTA

2012/2320(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Motion for a resolution
Recital G

G. whereas the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights is legally binding on the EU institutions and Member States when they implement EU law and whereas the Commission's Strategy for the effective implementation of the Charter explicitly acknowledges that the Charter applies to the EU's external action; notwithstanding this is deemed to specifically exclude Member States' Export Credit Agencies;

2013/05/07
Committee: INTA

2012/2320(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Motion for a resolution
Recital H

H. whereas the Union and its Member States welcomed the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, ~~whose Principle 4 on state-business relations explicitly refers to export credit agencies;~~

2013/05/07
Committee: INTA

2012/2320(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Motion for a resolution
Recital I

I. whereas export credit support is often granted to large projects with difficulties in accessing commercial credit due to high ~~environment~~commercial risks, which Export Credit Agencies (ECAs) need to price accordingly;

2013/05/07
Committee: INTA

2012/2320(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. ~~Recognis~~Deplores the efforts undertaken by the Commission in establishing a framework for the annual reporting of Member States on their export credit activities in accordance with Regulation 1233/2011, in order to step up transparency at the EU level;

2013/05/07
Committee: INTA

2012/2320(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Underlines that the annual reports of the Member States, and the Commission's evaluation of these reports, do not yet satisfy Parliament's intention to be able to make an assessment as to whether the Member States' export credit activities' are in compliance with the Union's foreign policy goals, as enshrined in Articles 3 and 21 TEU, and the treatment of ~~environment~~commercial risks in the calculation of ECA premiums;

2013/05/07
Committee: INTA

2012/2320(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Shares the observation of the Commission in the annual report that ‘it is difficult to define a precise benchmark for measuring compliance in EU law’; ~~reiterates, however, that Article 21 provisions remain the background against which the policies applied to export credit transactions have to be evaluated;~~

2013/05/07
Committee: INTA

2012/2320(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Recommends that the Council Working Group on Export Credits and the Commission cooperate with the European External Action Service (EEAS) on developing a methodology for meaningful reporting on Article 21 compliance before the next annual report is due;deleted

2013/05/07
Committee: INTA

2012/2320(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Considers it of prime importance to call on the Member States to monitor and report on the existence, outcome and effectiveness of due diligence procedures in the screening of projects officially supported by export credits with regard to their potential impact on human rights;deleted

2013/05/07
Committee: INTA

2012/2320(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Considers progress in reporting on human rights compliance by ECAs ~~a front- runner~~has no direct relevance for better reporting also on other European external action goals enshrined in Article 21, such as the eradication of poverty, and on the treatment of environmental risks;

2013/05/07
Committee: INTA

2012/2320(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Notes that Member State ECAs currently report on their evaluation of environmental risks but not on how these are included in the calculation of ECA premiums; ~~considers such reporting to be essential to ensuring a level playing field;~~

2013/05/07
Committee: INTA

2012/2320(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Calls on the Commission to provide guidance to the Member States for the next reporting period, inter alia on how to report on the existence and effectiveness of due diligence procedures with regard to their human rights policies, and on how to report on the treatment of environmental risks;deleted

2013/05/07
Committee: INTA

2012/2320(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. EDoes not expects the next Annual Report of the Commission to contain a statement on whether is has been able to evaluate the compliance of Member States with the Union's external action goals and, if the answer is negative, recommendations on how to improve reporting to this end;

2013/05/07
Committee: INTA

2012/2320(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Recommends a sectoral approach in developing the IWG~~, in order to build the base for horizontal provisions in a second phase that will ensure the common adoption of effective environmental, social and human rights standards by OECD and non-OECD ECAs~~;

2013/05/07
Committee: INTA

2012/2320(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)

19a. The activities of Member States' Export Credit Agencies in relation to the export of jet engines are excluded from any obligation to report to the Commission and/or the External Action Service;

2013/05/07
Committee: INTA

2012/2320(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 b (new)

19b. The activities of Member States' Export Credit Agencies in relation to the export of aircraft are excluded from any obligation to report to the Commission and/or the External Action Service;

2013/05/07
Committee: INTA

2011/2056(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Stresses the importance of trade in raw materials for economic growth and ~~calls for an integrated raw materials diplomacy to be developed by the EU, based on its industrial policy agenda and in line with its development and environment policy~~notes the role of the market in such trade;

2011/05/30
Committee: INTA

2011/2056(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Calls on the Commission to draw up ~~rules~~a voluntary code of conduct on the social responsibility of European undertakings involved in the mining of raw materials in source countries;

2011/05/30
Committee: INTA

2011/2056(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Calls on the Commission to further develop raw materials traceability systems and to introduce a ~~binding~~voluntary certification scheme for raw materials and trading chains (Certified Trading Chains), so that trade can be guaranteed to be fair;

2011/05/30
Committee: INTA

2011/2056(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Calls on the Commission to take the necessary measures to ensure there is transparency on commodity markets ~~and to act against commodities speculation~~;

2011/05/30
Committee: INTA

2011/2056(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. ~~Stress~~Notes that substantial quantities of recyclable waste and waste that contains raw materials are still being exported from the EU; calls on the Commission to take all possible steps to put a stop to illegal exports and to incorporate EU-equivalent recycling standards into international agreements; calls on the Member States to significantly reinforce export control regimesMember States to act as they judge appropriate.

2011/05/30
Committee: INTA

2010/2277(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Advocates coherence between the Union’s internal and external policies and its overall objectives, contributing to sustainable growth and employment in line with the EU 2020 strategy; urges that such coherence be pursued in the context of multilateral organisations and bilateral trade agreements through ex ante sustainable impact assessments (SIAs) and periodic ex post evaluations, the inclusion in agreements of clauses on human rights, social and environmental responsibility and corporate social responsibility (CSR) and their enforcement, with sanctions in the event of infringement;

2011/02/16
Committee: INTA

2010/2277(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Considers it important to ensure market access, symmetry and transparency in public procurement procedures, as well as security and predictability in relation to investments; believes that quality and price and not any other policy or criteria must be the deciding factor in awarding public contracts; deplores the fact that, by increasing competitive pressure among countries to attract foreign investors, as well as competition between corporations, globalisation has resulted, in some cases, in serious abuses of human rights and labour rights and in damage to the environment; points out that companies have duties, and calls for a binding CSR clause to be included in trade agreements.;

2011/02/16
Committee: INTA

2010/2277(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Considers it important to ensure market access, symmetry and transparency in public procurement procedures, as well as security and predictability in relation to investments; deplores the fact that, by increasing competitive pressure among countries to attract foreign investors, as well as competition between corporations, globalisation has resulted, in some cases, in serious abuses of human rights and labour rights and in damage to the environment; points out that companies have duties~~, and calls for a binding CSR clause to be included in trade agreements~~.

2011/02/16
Committee: INTA

2010/2277(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Asks the Commission to take account of the specific circumstances of SMEs and micro-businesses which can best be achieved by exempting them from the burden of regulation;

2011/02/16
Committee: INTA

2010/2277(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)

4b. Believes that reference to coordination of national tax policies, notably by proposing a Directive introducing a common consolidated corporate tax base (CCCTB) must not remove from the Member States the right to determine their own tax policy and tax rates;

2011/02/16
Committee: INTA

2010/2277(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 c (new)

4c. Believes strongly that the posting of workers directive must not create two classes of citizens' rights within a single company or location and that the power of Member States to create and operate their own welfare structures must remain sacrosanct;

2011/02/16
Committee: INTA

2010/2277(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 d (new)

4d. Reminds the Commission that central planning failed throughout Central and Eastern Europe as well as all other countries in the world under socialism; therefore voices its alarm at the Commission's plans to create a European framework for the planning in advance of industrial restructuring;

2011/02/16
Committee: INTA

2010/2277(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 e (new)

4e. Points out that modern behavioural economics has demonstrated the perversity of the behavioural incentives given to people through interference in the market;

2011/02/16
Committee: INTA

2010/2277(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 f (new)

4f. Feels strongly that the Social Business Initiative should be permissive and not restrictive, that social ratings should be voluntary, that any use of savings must be limited to cases where ownership and title cannot be established, and that dormancy must not function as an unusual and cruel form of state punishment and an act of legalised theft for leaving money unused;

2011/02/16
Committee: INTA

2010/2277(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 g (new)

4g. Feels strongly that attempts to improve the quality of legal structures must not deprive shareholders and stakeholders of the right to determine for themselves the form of legal status they prefer;

2011/02/16
Committee: INTA

2010/2277(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 h (new)

4h. Points out that modern economics is riddled with examples of state planning going wrong and damaging the quality of people's lives; reminds the Commission that it is far from infallible and asks it to remember this at all times when seeking to develop and implement this programme;

2011/02/16
Committee: INTA

2010/2277(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 i (new)

4i. Feels strongly that mortgage market integration should have the effect of expanding and widening consumer choice not limiting it; urges that Commission action must not therefore cause products and offerings to be withdrawn from the market but add to their numbers; moreover, notes that mortgages are denominated in a currency, meaning exchange rates can have as much impact as interest rates, and urges, in this context, that stability must not be used to stultify the market;

2011/02/16
Committee: INTA

2010/2277(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 j (new)

4j. Recommends that the Commission understands that the best way to achieve its objective of eliminating the tax obstacles still facing European citizens is to take less of people's money;

2011/02/16
Committee: INTA

2010/2277(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 k (new)

4k. Notes that the Laffer Curve definitively demonstrates that tax rates which are too high reduce the incentive to work and the revenue generated by a particular tax and further notes that taxes can have wider, damaging consequences;

2011/02/16
Committee: INTA

2010/2277(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 l (new)

4l. Feels strongly that the development of dispute resolution must not undermine the freedom to choose the legal jurisdiction applying to any and all contracts.

2011/02/16
Committee: INTA

2010/2245(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Not withstanding all the above, innovation cannot be legislated nor can it be generated by regulation; therefore calls on the Commission to interfere as little as possible and to ensure that as a starting point the Commission refrains from damaging that which it aims to encourage;

2011/02/15
Committee: INTA

2010/2205(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Wants the Commission, in its future communication on the internationalisation of SMEs‘ activities, to propose measures that help support and promote their initiatives in the field of CSR that take account of their specific circumstances. which can best be achieved by exempting SMEs and micro businesses from the burden of regulation;

2011/02/18
Committee: INTA

2010/2103(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Considers that, notwithstanding anything below, international trade relations are not an appropriate mechanism for dealing with climate change;

2010/10/07
Committee: INTA

2010/2103(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Points out, however, that the impact of the introduction of climate change measures into the European Union's trade policies will be to displace specific industries and commercial activities from the Member States or the Member States' trading partners where standards are high, to developing and other countries with laxer regimes, and this is damaging to, inter alia, employment, tax revenue, climate concerns and prosperity and therefore calls upon the Commission to ensure that no perverse incentives and unintended consequences are generated;

2010/10/07
Committee: INTA

2010/2080(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Calls on the Commission to confirm that contracting parties to commercial and all other agreements, including specifically international trade agreements, will continue to have the absolute right to write into an agreement the legal jurisdiction competent to settle any dispute, including after the Stockholm Programme has come fully into force in all its aspects;

2010/07/20
Committee: INTA

2010/0816(CNS)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Proposal for a decision
Recital 1 a (new)

(1a) The EEAS should not frustrate the foreign policy of individual Member States and the foreign policy of each Member State should in all circumstances prevail.

2010/05/04
Committee: INTA

2009/2219(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph –1 (new)

-1. Notwithstanding anything below international trade relations are not an appropriate mechanism for dealing with human rights;

2010/10/06
Committee: INTA

2009/2201(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Calls on the Commission to remember that CSR was originally a voluntary activity by responsible companies intended to ensure that their impact was beneficial to the Member States and states in which they operate and to recognise that, in this context, maintaining the voluntary principle and having organisations choose to act at their discretion is the best method to ensure the most productive outcomes;

2010/10/07
Committee: INTA

2009/2201(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Notes that legal requirements, regulation and bureaucratic procedure can have a particularly damaging impact on SMEs as they attempt to grow with limited resources and / or enter new markets, and therefore calls upon the Commission to ensure that any actions which arise from this report do not add to the bureaucratic burden particularly on SMEs or have a deleterious impact upon their entrepreneurial initiatives;

2010/10/07
Committee: INTA

2009/2201(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10a. Notes that the imposition of legal requirements from supra-national bodies can reduce the functioning of electoral democracy and calls on the Commission to ensure that the terms of all international agreements which it seeks to implement do not reduce the democratic rights of self-determination of any of the parties to the agreement;

2010/10/07
Committee: INTA

2009/2201(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 point g a (new)

ga. a particular focus on the impact of the employment of children and child labour practices;

2010/10/07
Committee: INTA

2009/2201(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)

13a. Points out, that if the impact of the introduction of a CSR legal requirement as a mandatory element in European Union FTAs is to displace industries and commercial activities from the Member States or the Member State's trading partners where standards are high, to countries with laxer regimes, this is then damaging to all of employment, tax revenue, climate concerns and prosperity and therefore calls upon the Commission to ensure that no perverse incentives and unintended consequences are generated;

2010/10/07
Committee: INTA

2009/2201(INI)

William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Advocates once again the establishment within the WTO of a Trade and Decent Work Committee, along the lines of the Trade and Development Committee, which would provide a forum for the discussion, in particular, of the issues of labour standards, especially as they relate to the employment of children, and CSR as they relate to international trade; proposes once again a revision of the dispute settlement procedure, so that in cases involving possible breaches of international environmental or labour agreements special groups (panels) or the appeal body can ask the competent international organisations to draw up opinions, which would then be published;

2010/10/07
Committee: INTA