Progress: Procedure completed
Role | Committee | Rapporteur | Shadows |
---|---|---|---|
Lead | CONT | BALČYTIS Zigmantas ( S&D) | ORTIZ VILELLA Eva ( PPE), THEURER Michael ( ALDE), STAES Bart ( Verts/ALE), CZARNECKI Ryszard ( ECR), VANHECKE Frank ( EFD) |
Committee Opinion | EMPL | JAZŁOWIECKA Danuta ( PPE) |
Lead committee dossier:
Legal Basis:
RoP 54
Legal Basis:
RoP 54Subjects
Events
The European Parliament adopted by 590 votes to 18 with 11 abstentions, a resolution on the Court of Auditors Special Report 25/2012 entitled ‘Are tools in place to monitor the effectiveness of European Social Fund spending on older workers?’
Improve the rate of employment of older people : Parliament recalled that in 2012 the employment rate for people aged 55 to 64 was less than 50 % in the European Union (54.4 % for men and 41.8 % for women) and in certain Member States it dropped to as low as around 30 %. This trend could be caused by a number of factors such as outdated skills and qualifications, employers’ attitudes towards older workers, difficulties with reconciling professional and family life, and declining health.
It s recalled that several years of economic and financial crisis had meant that the European Social Fund’s (ESF) measures were more important than ever as one of the tools for tackling high unemployment.
The ESF accounted for 8 % of the total EU budget during the programming period 2007-2013, was a key financial instrument intended to help Member States achieve EU employment policy and social inclusion objectives. Parliament noted that older workers accounted for less than 5 % of participants in the lifelong learning activities of the ESF , and they regretted that no reliable data was available reliable data in order to assess how effectively ESF resources were spent. It called for more transparency in this area.
‘ Older workers’ : concerned by the fact that in the operational programmes, for the period 2007-2013, the definition of ‘older workers’ was not used consistently, whilst the Lisbon Agenda defined an ‘older worker’ as any person of working age between 55 and 64 years old, Parliament encouraged the Member States to make sure, in the forthcoming programming period (2014-2020), that the age groups used for needs analysis were the same as the age groups used in the programmes and/or in the related actions and targets. Apart from the problem of definition, Parliament called on Member States to rely more on quantitative and qualitative data when analysing the socioeconomic situation of older workers and to provide for a measurable causal link between actions identified within operational programmes and the objectives pursued, which would facilitate the verification of consistency among identified needs, chosen strategy and specific goals. Generally, Parliament regretted the lack of reliable and qualitative data produced by Member States.
Make older workers a priority : Parliament noted that the operational programmes for the period 2007-2013 there was no priority theme included dealing with initiatives for older workers, such as ‘encouraging active ageing and prolonging working lives’, mainly because of differing interpretations of the form a priority of this kind should take. It was of the opinion that specific groups of workers, such as those working in shifts or in heavy industry, needed specially adapted programmes and projects that differed from those in less physical jobs, such as workers in service industries and sectors. Convinced that the experience of older workers was an asset that they could use when changing jobs, Parliament called on the Commission to put more emphasis on the fight against age discrimination of older workers .
Evaluation of measures on older workers in the ESF: Parliament called for measures to assess not just employability but also progress in terms of skills (including ‘soft’ skills), higher self-esteem and greater motivation. It also called for all barriers that hamper active ageing to be removed and for lifelong learning to be supported.
It was concerned about the fact that some of the goals and indicators used in the projects had no direct connection with the ESF interventions, making it difficult to assess their performance, with regard to achieving the macro-economic targets set in the operational programmes.
Parliament deplored the fact that the Commission was therefore unable to report adequately on the overall results and impact of activities aimed at improving the situation for older workers in Member States funded by the ESF. It called on the Commission to:
· improve methods of evaluation and indicators;
· reinforce the way operational programme performance was assessed through reliable performance data for the period 2014-2020;
· incorporate indicators used under the new programmes to include alerts in respect of financial and physical factors and use relevant performance indicators such as operational goals, result targets and specific impact targets and indicators incorporating gender.
Parliament also called for more precise regulatory requirements regarding the evaluations requested from the managing authorities, and for operational programmes a minimum set of topics, to be covered in the evaluation process to be defined.
Lessons from the preceding programming period : Parliament called for efforts to be made to ensure that lessons learned from programme management were duly taken into account in future decision making. It called on the Commission gradually to rebalance its management tools so as to move from simply monitoring compliance – on the basis of legality/regularity principles – towards measuring the progress in achieving the target values and the performance of the use of ESF in the forthcoming period 2014-2020. Lastly, Parliament encouraged the Commission to step up its collaboration with other international institutions, such as the OECD, to help Member States better define key priorities, strategies and sustainable projects eligible for ESF funding in the forthcoming 2014-2020 period.
The Committee on Budgetary Control unanimously adopted the report by Zigmantas BALČYTIS (S&D, LT) on the Court of Auditors Special Report 25/2012 entitled ‘Are tools in place to monitor the effectiveness of European Social Fund spending on older workers?’
The Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, exercising its powers as an associated committee under Rule 50 of Parliament’s Rules of Procedure , also gave an opinion on the report.
Members recalled that several years of economic and financial crisis had meant that the European Social Fund’s (ESF) measures were more important than ever as one of the tools for tackling high unemployment.
The ESF accounted for 8 % of the total EU budget during the programming period 2007-2013, was a key financial instrument intended to help Member States achieve EU employment policy and social inclusion objectives. Members noted that older workers accounted for less than 5 % of participants in the lifelong learning activities of the ESF , and they regretted that no reliable data was available reliable data in order to assess how effectively ESF resources were spent. They called for more transparency in this area.
‘ Older workers’ : concerned by the fact that in the operational programmes, for the period 2007-2013, the definition of ‘older workers’ was not used consistently, whilst the Lisbon Agenda defined an ‘older worker’ as any person of working age between 55 and 64 years old, Members encouraged the Member States to make sure, in the forthcoming programming period (2014-2020), that the age groups used for needs analysis were the same as the age groups used in the programmes and/or in the related actions and targets. Apart from the problem of definition, the report called on Member States to rely more on quantitative and qualitative data when analysing the socioeconomic situation of older workers and to provide for a measurable causal link between actions identified within operational programmes and the objectives pursued, which would facilitate the verification of consistency among identified needs, chosen strategy and specific goals. Members regret the lack of reliable and qualitative data produced by Member States.
Make older workers a priority : Members noted that the operational programmes for the period 2007-2013 there was no priority theme included dealing with initiatives for older workers, such as ‘encouraging active ageing and prolonging working lives’, mainly because of differing interpretations of the form a priority of this kind should take. They were of the opinion that specific groups of workers, such as those working in shifts or in heavy industry, needed specially adapted programmes and projects that differed from those in less physical jobs, such as workers in service industries and sectors. Convinced that the experience of older workers was an asset that they could use when changing jobs, Members called on the Commission to put more emphasis on the fight against age discrimination of older workers.
Evaluation of measures on older workers in the ESF: Members called for measures to assess not just employability but also progress in terms of skills (including ‘soft’ skills), higher self-esteem and greater motivation. They also called for all barriers that hamper active ageing to be removed and for lifelong learning to be supported.
They were concerned about the fact that some of the goals and indicators used in the projects had no direct connection with the ESF interventions, making it difficult to assess their performance, with regard to achieving the macro-economic targets set in the operational programmes.
Members deplored the fact that the Commission was therefore unable to report adequately on the overall results and impact of activities aimed at improving the situation for older workers in Member States funded by the ESF. They called on the Commission to:
· improve methods of evaluation and indicators;
· reinforce the way operational programme performance was assessed through reliable performance data for the period 2014-2020;
· incorporate indicators used under the new programmes to include alerts in respect of financial and physical factors and use relevant performance indicators such as operational goals, result targets and specific impact targets and indicators incorporating gender.
Members also called for more precise regulatory requirements regarding the evaluations requested from the managing authorities, and for operational programmes a minimum set of topics, to be covered in the evaluation process to be defined.
Lessons from the preceding programming period : the report called for efforts to be made to ensure that lessons learned from programme management were duly taken into account in future decision making. It called on the Commission gradually to rebalance its management tools so as to move from simply monitoring compliance – on the basis of legality/regularity principles – towards measuring the progress in achieving the target values and the performance of the use of ESF in the forthcoming period 2014-2020. Lastly, Members encouraged the Commission to step up its collaboration with other international institutions, such as the OECD, to help Member States better define key priorities, strategies and sustainable projects eligible for ESF funding in the forthcoming 2014-2020 period.
Documents
- Commission response to text adopted in plenary: SP(2014)469
- Results of vote in Parliament: Results of vote in Parliament
- Decision by Parliament: T7-0256/2014
- Committee report tabled for plenary: A7-0151/2014
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE528.007
- Committee opinion: PE521.688
- Committee draft report: PE524.573
- Committee draft report: PE524.573
- Committee opinion: PE521.688
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE528.007
- Commission response to text adopted in plenary: SP(2014)469
Votes
A7-0151/2014 - Zigmantas Balčytis - Vote unique #
Amendments | Dossier |
53 |
2013/2173(INI)
2013/11/14
EMPL
31 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion Recital A A. whereas population ageing,
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion Recital C C. whereas the European Social Fund (ESF) is a key financial instrument intended to help Member States achieve EU employment policy and social inclusion objectives, and reliable data are necessary to assess how effectively ESF resources are spent;
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion Recital C C. whereas the European Social Fund (ESF), which during the programming period 2007- 2013 accounted for 8% of the EU total budget, is a key financial instrument intended to help Member States achieve EU employment policy objectives, and reliable data are necessary to assess how effectively ESF resources are spent;
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion Recital C a (new) Ca. whereas maintaining the employability of older workers as well as keeping a high proportion of the population remaining in work until later age is crucial to address demographic challenges and reach the EU target of 75% of the 20-64-year-old population in employment by 2020;
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion Recital C a (new) Ca. whereas the lifelong learning measures promoted by the ESF are on the whole well suited to keeping people in employment (e.g. by employability training or retraining);
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Regrets that no complete and reliable data are available to assess the effectiveness of ESF spending on older workers; takes the view that the use of ESF appropriations must be transparent and that, when the annual financial statements are drawn up, this information must be available to citizens in an easily accessible manner on a public website, and must include the objectives of the funded programmes and the original amount budgeted, as well as indicators and the possibility of verifying, using easily accessible analytical tools, the achievement of the objectives and the distribution of the funds to their various purposes;
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Regrets that no complete and reliable data, including data disaggregated by gender, are available to assess the effectiveness of ESF spending on older
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Stresses that the implementation of the ESF must comply with the EU Financial Regulation and, in particular, with the fundamental principles of sound financial management such as effectiveness, which should be understood as attaining the specific objectives set and achieving the intended results;
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Calls on the Member States, for the next programming period, to apply and complement as appropriate the common indicators provided for in the ESF Regulation in order to establish how many older workers have
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Calls on the Member States, for the next programming period, to apply and complement as appropriate the common indicators provided for in the ESF Regulation in order to establish how many older workers, disaggregated by gender, have gained new qualifications, improved their situation on the labour market or found a job after having benefited from projects financed by the ESF;
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Calls on the Member States to rely more on quantitative and quality data when analysing the socioeconomic situation of older workers
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion Recital A A. whereas population ageing, incentives for early retirement, the financial crisis
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Calls on the Member States to rely more on quantitative data when analysing the socioeconomic situation of older workers and to provide for a measurable causal link between actions identified within operational programmes and the objectives pursued;
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Calls on the Member States to rely more on quantitative data when analysing the socioeconomic situation of older workers and to provide for a causal link between actions identified within operational programmes and the objectives pursued, which would facilitate verification of consistency between identified needs, chosen strategy and specific goals set ;
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Calls on the Member States to rely more on quantitative data when analysing the
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6.
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 a (new) 6a. Invites Member States to consider introducing two different categories of older workers benefiting from ESF funding, such as workers aged 45- 55 and over 55, and adapting operational programmes to specific needs identified for these two age groups;
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 a (new) 6a. Calls for a tracking system whereby providers can monitor the progress of individual participants, enabling evaluation to take place at regular intervals so that strengths and weaknesses can be judged and improvements made;
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 b (new) 6b. Calls for measures to target not just employability but also progress in terms of skills (including ‘soft’ skills), higher self- esteem and greater motivation; notes that imparting life skills and providing informal training can make a major contribution in this respect;
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 c (new) 6c. Calls on the Member States to provide a broad range of activities enabling participants to make an individual choice; notes that the availability of choices forms an important part of the employment and reintegration process;
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Calls for all barriers that hamper active aging
Amendment 29 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Calls for all barriers that hamper active aging and life-long learning opportunities to be monitored and removed
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion Recital A A.
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Calls for all barriers that hamper active aging and life-long learning opportunities among older women and men to be monitored and removed.
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Calls, in the new operational programmes, for a more uniform approach to the choice of target groups and use of labour market data, in order to set ambitious but realistic targets; notes, given the future importance of the growing cohort of older workers, that preparations for the operational programmes should also include a dialogue on the prioritisation of target groups.
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion Recital A A. whereas population ageing, incentives – which still unfortunately exist – for early retirement, the financial crisis and changes in production patterns require strong responses to enable older workers to remain active in the labour market;
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion Recital B B. whereas in 2012 the employment rate of people aged 55-64 was less than 50 % in the European Union and in certain Member States it dropped as low as around 30%;
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion Recital B B. whereas in 2012 the employment rate of people aged 55-64 was less than 50 % in the European Union and this could be caused by a number of factors such as outdated skills and qualifications, employers' attitudes towards older workers, difficulties with reconciliation of professional and family life or poorer health;
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion Recital B B. whereas in 2012 the employment rate of people aged 55-64 was less than 50 % in the European Union - 54.4% for men and 41.8% for women;
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion Recital B a (new) Ba. whereas an older labour force and longer working lives can make a positive contribution to recovery and future growth;
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion Recital B b (new) Bb. whereas older people are indispensable with a view to passing on knowledge and experience to future generations;
source: PE-523.011
2014/01/27
CONT
22 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution Recital H H. whereas several years of economic and financial crisis have meant that the European Social Fund’s (ESF) measures are more important than ever as one of the tools for tackling high unemployment, and lessons learned from implementing previous measures will be vital when the new programmes are put in place from 2014;
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Notes that the operational programmes contain no provisions which would cover incentives for employers or which would motivate employers to employ older workers, who could be an asset thanks to their many years of experience and practical knowledge;
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Is of the opinion that specific groups of workers needs special adapted programmes and projects, like those working in shifts or heavy industry versus those in less physical jobs like the service industry/sectors, further points out that gender as a policy factor should be incorporated;
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 b (new) 4b. Strongly believes that the experience of older workers is an asset which should be used in the best possible way, not only for individual workers to remain active in the labour market in their own job but to see to it that they can use this acquired experience by and in changing jobs;
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 c (new) 4c. Calls on the European Economic and Social Committee to pay due attention to this Special report of the Court of Auditors and to closely monitor if the European Commission and the Member - States are giving a proper follow up to its conclusions;
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Is concerned about the fact that, in the OPs for the period under assessment, ‘older workers’, although identified as a target group, did not always have their own indicators or target values, leading to a situation where it is difficult or even
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Calls on the Commission to put more emphasis on the fight against age discrimination of older workers and to use its prerogatives under the existing legal instruments to tackle blatant forms of age discrimination in certain Member- States and in certain sectors of the economy;
Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 a (new) 9a. Welcomes the fact that the new focus of the Common Strategic Framework funds for the next programming period 2014-2020 is on results, under which any measure proposed must be designed to achieve a specific objective;
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 b (new) 9b. Stresses that setting clear priorities in the new programmes with a view to achieving results will enable synergies to be found between the various funds and other sources of financing, thereby helping to ensure that measures to achieve the proposed objectives are as effective as possible at both national and transnational level;
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 c (new) 9c. Believes it necessary for the indicators used under the new OPs to include alerts in respect of financial and physical factors, and welcomes the fact that these are subject to special monitoring so that the reasons for any deviation from a given threshold in respect of the programmed objectives is analysed by the evaluation unit in cooperation with the intermediary bodies for the programmes, with a view to determining whether the deviations are caused by temporary situations or structural problems requiring more in-depth analysis or, where necessary, modifications to the programme;
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 d (new) 9d. Believes it also necessary to monitor whether or not changes occur in the socio-economic context and in the national and/or Community priorities, and whether problems arise when the programmes are being implemented which require a programme to be evaluated and substantially modified;
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution Recital J J. whereas reliable data are necessary to determine how effectively ESF resources are spent; whereas regarding the period from 2007 to the end of 2013 neither the Member States nor the Commission can establish how many older workers have gained new qualifications, found or kept a job after participating in an action funded by the ESF;
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Calls for the systematic use of relevant performance indicators such as quantified operational goals, result targets and specific impact targets to be included from the project condition stage so that the 2014-2020 ESF programmes can improve not only the amount and quality of the data collected on ‘older workers’ in the labour market but also the decision-making process;
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Welcomes the fact that MAs generally defined the monitoring data they required clearly; recalls, nevertheless, that monitoring and evaluation systems should allow for the timely and periodic verification of progress made towards the established objectives, as well as the possibility of reacting quickly to significant divergences from the established objectives;
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 17. Calls on the Commission gradually to rebalance and enhance its management tools so as to move from simply monitoring compliance – on the basis of legality/regularity principles – towards measuring the progress in achieving the target values and the performance of the use of ESF in the forthcoming period 2014- 2020; recalls that successfully establishing a robust performance framework, with clear and measurable aims and targets which provide accountability and results, is key to maximising the impact on growth and jobs and requires common and equivalent efforts from the Commission and the Member States;
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution Recital K a (new) Ka. whereas older workers account for less than 5 % of participants in the lifelong learning activities of the ESF, which is evidence of lower levels of participation in training programmes but not of a lack of training or qualifications on the part of those workers;
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution Recital O Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Regrets the fact that in the OPs, the definition of ‘older workers’ is not used consistently; notes that many MAs do not use in their respective OPs the definition of ’older workers’ as defined in the Lisbon
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Regrets the fact that in the OPs for the period 2007-2013, the definition of ‘older workers’ is not used consistently; notes that many MAs do not use in their respective OPs the definition of ‘older workers’ as defined in the Lisbon Agenda, namely any person of working age between 55 and 64 years old, but instead use different age groups;
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1.
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Regrets that the data necessary for evaluating the current employment situation for older workers, assessing future development and adopting measures to achieve the established objectives provided by the Member States are unreliable and of unsatisfactory quality; calls for measures to be adopted that will motivate the Member States to submit reliable and high-quality data;
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Notes that no priority theme dealing with initiatives for older workers, such as ‘encouraging active ageing and prolonging working lives’, is included in the OPs for the period 2007-2013, mainly because of differing interpretations of the form a priority of this kind should take;
source: PE-528.007
|
History
(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)
committees/0/associated |
Old
TrueNew
|
committees/0/shadows/4 |
|
docs/0/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE524.573New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/CONT-PR-524573_EN.html |
docs/1/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE521.688&secondRef=02New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/EMPL-AD-521688_EN.html |
docs/2/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE528.007New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/CONT-AM-528007_EN.html |
events/0/type |
Old
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single readingNew
Committee referral announced in Parliament |
events/2/type |
Old
Vote in committee, 1st reading/single readingNew
Vote in committee |
events/3 |
|
events/3 |
|
events/5 |
|
events/5 |
|
procedure/Modified legal basis |
Rules of Procedure EP 150
|
procedure/Other legal basis |
Rules of Procedure EP 159
|
procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure EP 54
|
procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure EP 052
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1 |
|
docs/3/body |
EC
|
events/3/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2014-0151&language=ENNew
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-7-2014-0151_EN.html |
events/5/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P7-TA-2014-0256New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-7-2014-0256_EN.html |
activities |
|
commission |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1 |
|
docs |
|
events |
|
links |
|
other |
|
procedure/Modified legal basis |
Old
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 150New
Rules of Procedure EP 150 |
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee |
Old
CONT/7/13707New
|
procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure EP 052
|
procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 052
|
procedure/subject |
Old
New
|
activities/0/committees |
|
activities/0/date |
Old
2014-04-02T00:00:00New
2013-09-12T00:00:00 |
activities/0/docs |
|
activities/0/type |
Old
Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single readingNew
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading |
activities/1/committees |
|
activities/1/date |
Old
2014-03-03T00:00:00New
2014-02-18T00:00:00 |
activities/1/docs |
|
activities/1/type |
Old
Committee report tabled for plenary, single readingNew
Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading |
activities/2/committees |
|
activities/2/date |
Old
2013-09-12T00:00:00New
2014-03-03T00:00:00 |
activities/2/docs |
|
activities/2/type |
Old
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single readingNew
Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading |
activities/3/committees |
|
activities/3/date |
Old
2014-02-18T00:00:00New
2014-04-02T00:00:00 |
activities/3/docs |
|
activities/3/type |
Old
Vote in committee, 1st reading/single readingNew
Results of vote in Parliament |
committees/0/rapporteur/0/mepref |
Old
4de183700fb8127435bdbc15New
4f1ac627b819f25efd000021 |
committees/0/shadows/0/group |
Old
EPPNew
PPE |
committees/0/shadows/1/mepref |
Old
4de188eb0fb8127435bdc3f0New
4f1adbe7b819f207b30000ee |
committees/0/shadows/2/mepref |
Old
4de188650fb8127435bdc331New
4f1adb8fb819f207b30000cf |
committees/0/shadows/3/mepref |
Old
4de183f10fb8127435bdbcdcNew
4f1ac75eb819f25efd000082 |
committees/0/shadows/4/mepref |
Old
4de1888a0fb8127435bdc36aNew
4f1adb84b819f207b30000cb |
committees/0/shadows/5/mepref |
Old
4de189170fb8127435bdc41fNew
4f1adc48b819f207b300010e |
committees/1/rapporteur/0/group |
Old
EPPNew
PPE |
committees/1/rapporteur/0/mepref |
Old
4de185b00fb8127435bdbf4dNew
4f1ac946b819f25efd000126 |
procedure/Modified legal basis |
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 150
|
procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Old
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 048New
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 052 |
activities/3/docs |
|
activities/3/type |
Old
Vote scheduledNew
Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading |
procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Awaiting Parliament 1st reading / single reading / budget 1st stageNew
Procedure completed |
activities/3/type |
Old
Vote in plenary scheduledNew
Vote scheduled |
activities/2/docs |
|
activities/2 |
|
activities/3/type |
Old
Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single readingNew
Vote in plenary scheduled |
procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Awaiting committee decisionNew
Awaiting Parliament 1st reading / single reading / budget 1st stage |
activities/1 |
|
activities/1 |
|
activities/1/docs/0/url |
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE524.573
|
activities/1 |
|
activities/0/committees/0/shadows/0 |
|
activities/0/committees/0/shadows/1 |
|
activities/0/committees/0/shadows/3 |
|
activities/0/committees/0/shadows/5 |
|
committees/0/shadows/0 |
|
committees/0/shadows/1 |
|
committees/0/shadows/3 |
|
committees/0/shadows/5 |
|
activities/1/date |
Old
2014-03-10T00:00:00New
2014-04-02T00:00:00 |
activities/0/committees/1/date |
2013-10-15T00:00:00
|
activities/0/committees/1/rapporteur |
|
committees/1/date |
2013-10-15T00:00:00
|
committees/1/rapporteur |
|
activities/1 |
|
activities/0/committees/0/date |
2013-09-20T00:00:00
|
activities/0/committees/0/rapporteur |
|
activities/0/committees/0/shadows |
|
committees/0/date |
2013-09-20T00:00:00
|
committees/0/rapporteur |
|
committees/0/shadows |
|
activities |
|
committees |
|
links |
|
other |
|
procedure |
|