European Parliament€¦ · Web viewPersistent organic pollutants (recast) Julie GIRLING – A8-0336/2018 CO2 emission performance standards for new heavy-duty vehicles Bas EICKHOUT

COMMISSION EUROPÉENNESECRÉTARIAT GÉNÉRAL

Direction B - Prise de décision & CollégialitéSG.B.3 - Secrétariat du Groupe des Relations Interinstitutionnelles (GRI)

Brussels, 12 June 2019

SP(2019) 440 final

Commission communication on the action taken on opinions and resolutions adopted

by Parliament at the April II 2019 session

Commission européenne, B-1049 Bruxelles – Belgique, Téléphone : (32-2) 299 11 11.

THE FIRST PART OF THIS COMMUNICATION INFORMS PARLIAMENT OF THE ACTION TAKEN BY THE COMMISSION ON AMENDMENTS ADOPTED BY PARLIAMENT RELATING TO PROPOSED LEGISLATION DURING THE APRIL II 2019 PART-SESSION.

IN THE SECOND PART THE COMMISSION LISTS A NUMBER OF NON-LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTIONS ADOPTED BY PARLIAMENT DURING THE SAME PART-SESSIONS, WITH EXPLANATIONS AS TO WHY IT WILL NOT BE RESPONDING FORMALLY.

2

CONTENTS

PART ONE – LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTIONS

ORDINARY LEGISLATIVE PROCEDURE – FIRST READING

Conservation of fishery resources and the protection of marine ecosystemsGabriel MATO – A8-0381/2017

Common framework for European statistics relating to persons and householdsTamás MESZERICS – A8-0247/2017

European business statisticsJanusz LEWANDOWSKI – A8-0094/2018

Transparent and predictable working conditions in the European UnionEnrique CALVET CHAMBON – A8-0355/2018

European Labour AuthorityJeroen LENAERS – A8-0391/2018

Community statistics on migration and international protectionCecilia WIKSTRÖM – A8-0395/2018

Leverage ratio, net stable funding ratio, requirements for own funds and eligible liabilities, counterparty credit risk, market risk (…)Peter SIMON – A8-0242/2018

Exempted entities, financial holding companies, mixed financial holding companies, remuneration, supervisory measures and powers and capital conservation measuresPeter SIMON – A8-0243/2018

Amending Regulation (EU) No 806/2014 as regards loss-absorbing and Recapitalisation Capacity for credit institutions and investment firmsGunnar HÖKMARK – A8-0216/2018

Loss-absorbing and recapitalisation capacity of credit institutions and investment firms and amending Directive 98/26/EC, 2002/47/EC, 2012/30/EU, 2011/35/EU, 2005/56/EC, 2004/25/EC, 2007/36/ECGunnar HÖKMARK – A8-0218/2018

European Banking Authority ; European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority ; European Supervisory AuthorityOthmar KARAS, Pervenche BERÈS – A8-0013/2019

3

Markets in financial instruments and Directive 2009/138/EC on the taking-up and pursuit of the business of Insurance and Reinsurance (Solvency II)Othmar KARAS, Pervenche BERÈS – A8-0012/2019

Macro-prudential oversight of the financial system and establishing a European Systemic Risk BoardOthmar KARAS, Pervenche BERÈS – A8-0011/2019

Prudential requirements of investment firmsMarkus FERBER – A8-0295/2018

Prudential supervision of investment firmsMarkus FERBER – A8-0296/2018

Facilitating cross-border distribution of collective investment fundsWolf KLINZ – A8-0430/2018

Cross-border distribution of collective investment fundsWolf KLINZ – A8-0431/2018

Sovereign bond-backed securitiesJonás FERNÁNDEZ – A8-0180/2019

Framework for interoperability between EU information systems (borders and visa)Jeroen LENAERS – A8-0347/2018

Framework for interoperability between EU information systems (police and judicial cooperation, asylum and migration)Nuno MELO – A8-0348/2018

Marketing and use of explosives precursorsAndrejs MAMIKINS – A8-0473/2018

Creation of a European network of immigration liaison officers (recast)Kashetu KYENGE – A8-0040/2019

Protection of persons reporting on breaches of Union lawVirginie ROZIÈRE – A8-0398/2018

Type-approval requirements for motor vehicles and their trailers, and systemsRóża Gräfin von THUN UND HOHENSTEIN – A8-0151/2019

Investigations conducted by the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) as regards cooperation with the European Public Prosecutor's Office and the effectiveness of OLAF investigationsIngeborg GRÄSSLE – A8-0179/2019

4

Appellations of Origin and Geographical Indications (following accession to the Geneva Act of the Lisbon Agreement)Virginie ROZIÈRE – A8-0036/2019

Adapting a number of legal acts in the area of Justice providing for the use of the regulatory procedure with scrutiny to Article 290 of the TFUEJózsef SZÁJER – A8-0012/2018

Actes juridiques prévoyant le recours à la procédure de réglementation avec contrôleJózsef SZÁJER – A8-0020/2018

Adapting a number of legal acts providing for the use of the regulatory procedure with scrutiny to Articles 290 and 291 of the TFUEJózsef SZÁJER – A8-0190/2019

Conservation and control measures applicable in the Regulatory Area of the Northwest Atlantic FisheriesRicardo SERRÃO SANTOS – A8-0017/2019

Community Code on Visas (Visa Code)Juan Fernando LÓPEZ AGUILAR – A8-0434/2018

European Border and Coast GuardRoberta METSOLA – A8-0076/2019

Tackling the dissemination of terrorist content onlineDaniel DALTON – A8-0193/2019

Facilitating the use of financial and other information for the prevention, detection, investigation or prosecution of certain criminal offencesEmil RADEV – A8-0442/2018

Better enforcement and modernisation of EU consumer protection rulesDaniel DALTON – A8-0029/2019

Rules and procedures for compliance with and enforcement of Union harmonisation legislation on productsNicola DANTI – A8-0277/2018

Supplementary protection certificate for medicinal productsLuis DE GRANDES PASCUAL – A8-0039/2019

Transparency and sustainability of the EU risk assessment in the food chainPilar AYUSO – A8-0417/2018

Promoting fairness and transparency for business users of online intermediation servicesChristel SCHALDEMOSE – A8-0444/2018

5

European Cybersecurity Industrial, Technology and Research Competence Centre and the Network of National Coordination CentresJulia REDA – A8-0084/2019

Persistent organic pollutants (recast)Julie GIRLING – A8-0336/2018

CO2 emission performance standards for new heavy-duty vehiclesBas EICKHOUT – A8-0354/2018

OTC derivatives, registration and supervision of trade repositories and the requirements for trade repositoriesWerner LANGEN – A8-0181/2018

European Supervisory Authority (European Securities and Markets Authority)Danuta Maria HÜBNER – A8-0190/2018

Exposures in the form of covered bondsBernd LUCKE – A8-0384/2018

Covered bonds and covered bond public supervisionBernd LUCKE – A8-0390/2018

Promotion of the use of SME growth marketsAnne SANDER – A8-0437/2018

Disclosures relating to sustainable investments and sustainability risksPaul TANG – A8-0363/2018

The use of digital tools and processes in company lawTadeusz ZWIEFKA – A8-0422/2018

Cross-border conversions, mergers and divisionsEvelyn REGNER – A8-0002/2019

Promotion of clean and energy-efficient road transport vehiclesAndrzej GRZYB – A8-0321/2018

European Maritime Single Window environmentDeirdre CLUNE – A8-0006/2019

‘Customs’ programme for cooperation in the field of customsMaria GRAPINI – A8-0464/2018

Instrument for financial support for customs control equipmentJiří POSPÍŠIL – A8-0460/2018

Horizon Europe – the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation, laying down its rules for participation and disseminationDan NICA – A8-0401/2018

6

Establishing the specific programme implementing Horizon Europe - the Framework Programme for Research and InnovationChristian EHLER – A8-0410/2018

Space programme of the Union and the European Union Agency for the Space ProgrammeMassimiliano SALINI – A8-0405/2018

Digital Europe programme for the period 2021-2027Angelika MLINAR – A8-0408/2018

‘Fiscalis’ programme for cooperation in the field of taxationSven GIEGOLD – A8-0421/2018

Programme for the Environment and Climate Action (LIFE)Gerben-Jan GERBRANDY – A8-0397/2018

Establishing the Justice programmeJosef WEIDENHOLZER, Heidi Anneli HAUTALA – A8-0068/2019

Establishing the Rights and Values programmeBodil VALERO – A8-0468/2018

Establishing the Connecting Europe FacilityHenna VIRKKUNEN, Marian-Jean MARINESCU, Pavel TELIČKA – A8-0409/2018

Establishing the European Defence FundZdzisław Marek KRASNODĘBSKI – A8-0412/2018

InvestEU ProgrammeJosé Manuel FERNANDES, Roberto GUALTIERI – A8-0482/2018

PART TWO – NON-LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTIONS

7

Part OneLegislative opinions

8

ORDINARY LEGISLATIVE PROCEDURE – First reading

Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the conservation of fishery

resources and the protection of marine ecosystems through technical measures, amending Council Regulations (EC) No 1967/2006, (EC) No 1098/2007, (EC) No

1224/2009 and Regulations (EU) No 1343/2011 and (EU) No 1380/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council, and repealing Council Regulations (EC) No 894/97, (EC)

No 850/98, (EC) No 2549/2000, (EC) No 254/2002, (EC) No 812/2004 and (EC) No 2187/2005

1. Rapporteur: Gabriel MATO (EPP / ES)

2. Reference numbers: 2016/0074 (COD) / A8-0381/2017 / P8_TA-PROV(2019)0381

3. Date of adoption of the resolution: 16 April 2019

4. Legal basis: Article 43(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

5. Competent Parliamentary Committee: Committee on Fisheries (PECH)

6. Commission's position: Accepts all amendments. The Commission tabled the following statements:

“Commission statement on the adaptation of tonnage

In the context of the ongoing evaluation of the entry-exit regime set out in Article 23 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013, the Commission will examine whether changes are required on the need to adjust the capacity ceilings set out in Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013.”

“Commission Statement on derogations to Article 13 (3) of Regulation (EC) No 1967/2006 (the Mediterranean Regulation)

Where Member States submit requests for a derogation to Article 13(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1967/2006 (Mediterranean Regulation), these can be granted if the conditions for such a derogation are fulfilled, as a viable way to permit important fisheries whilst protecting the coastal zone.”

“Commission statement on regionalisation

The Commission relies on the Member States’ resolve to make the regionalisation process a success for the Common Fisheries Policy. The Commission trusts that Member States will ensure that regionalised technical measures will continue contributing to the objectives of the Common Fisheries Policy, in particular reduction of unwanted catches, and will act in accordance with the principle of loyal cooperation to swiftly address via joint recommendations any potential deterioration of the conservation status currently in place. The Commission underlines that the empowerment of the Commission to adopt by means of delegated acts measures as set out in the Member States' joint recommendations does not have the power to affect the Commission's discretion to adopt such acts. Moreover, in the absence of such joint recommendations by the Member States having a direct management interest, the Commission will use all legal means available to it to address any such deterioration, including, where necessary, emergency measures in line with Article 12 Regulation (EU) No

9

1380/2013 and the right to submit proposals for the relevant measures in the Common Fisheries Policy field under the Treaty.”

“Commission statement on Article 29 on scientific research

In relation to the provisions laid down in Article 29 of this regulation on scientific research, the Commission envisages to regularly seek the advice of the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF) where scientific research conducted by more than six commercial vessels involves any gears or uses listed in Article 7 of this Regulation to confirm that the level of participation is justified on scientific grounds.”

10


Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a common

framework for European statistics relating to persons and households, based on data at individual level collected from samples

1. Rapporteur: Tamás MESZERICS (Greens/EFA / HU)




5. Competent Parliamentary Committee: Committee on Employment and Social Affairs (EMPL)

6. Commission's position: Accepts all amendments.

The Commission tabled the following statement with respect to Article 13(2) concerning the cooperation with the Union Agencies:

“To ensure coherence and comparability of European social statistics, the Commission will reinforce cooperation with Union Agencies in line with article 13(2) and the related recitals (6aa and 20a). This will include reinforced cooperation on statistical techniques, methodology, quality, new instruments and data sources.”

11


Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on European business

statistics, amending Regulation (EC) No 184/2005 and repealing 10 legal acts in the field of business statistics

1. Rapporteur: Janusz LEWANDOWSKI (EPP / PL)




5. Competent Parliamentary Committee: Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (ITRE)


12


Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on transparent and predictable

working conditions in the European Union

1. Rapporteur: Enrique CALVET CHAMBON (ALDE / ES)



4. Legal basis: Article 153(1)(b) and (2)(b) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union



7. Commission statement: "In accordance with Article 23 of the directive, the Commission will review the application of this directive by entry into force plus 8 years, with a view to propose, where appropriate, the necessary amendments. The Commission undertakes in its report to pay particular attention to the application of Articles 1 and 14 by the Member States. The Commission will also verify compliance with Article 14 when assessing whether Member States have fully and correctly transposed the directive into their national legal systems."

13


Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a European

Labour Authority

1. Rapporteur: Jeroen LENAERS (EPP / NL)



4. Legal basis: Articles 46 and 48 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union



Joint statement of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission

(to be published in the OJ Series L in the issue following that of the ELA Regulation)

The European Parliament, the Council and the Commission note that the process for selecting the location of the seat of the European Labour Authority (ELA) was not concluded at the time of the adoption of its founding regulation.

Recalling the commitment to sincere and transparent cooperation and recalling the Treaties, the three Institutions acknowledge the value of exchange of information from the initial stages of the process for the selection of the seat of the ELA.

Such early exchange of information would make it easier for the three Institutions to exercise their rights according to the Treaties through the related procedures.

The European Parliament and the Council take note of the Commission's intention to take any appropriate steps in order for the founding regulation to provide for a provision on the location of the seat of the ELA, and to ensure that the ELA operates autonomously in line with that regulation.

14


Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC)

No 862/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council on Community statistics on migration and international protection

1. Rapporteur: Cecilia WIKSTRÖM (ALDE / SE)




5. Competent Parliamentary Committee: Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (LIBE)

6. Commission's position:

The Commission takes note of the position of the European Parliament.

The Commission reserves its position in view of the future negotiations with the new European Parliament and the Council in second reading.

Nevertheless, the Commission would like to highlight, as examples, certain amendments that, in its opinion, could lead to undesirable effects.

Amendments concerning the replacement of the statistical term 'sex' by the term 'gender' or introducing new disaggregations using ‘gender’ instead of ‘sex’ could be problematic notably in terms of feasibility and comparability, as the term 'sex' is a standard and internationally recognised concept defined in demographic statistics. This concept is commonly used for collection of population and migration statistics in Eurostat and in the statistical system of the United Nations.

Amendments replacing the term 'illegal' with the term 'irregular' could generate a consistency issue with the terminology used in the EU law, in particular Directive 2008/115/EC (Return Directive).

The production or quality of additional statistics or disaggregations requested by the European Parliament could be hampered by differences in definitions between countries, or could significantly increase the burden on the Member States.

Amendments related to Commission empowerments need to ensure the alignment of provisions providing for Regulatory procedure with scrutiny (RPS) to the system of delegated and implementing acts introduced by the Treaty of Lisbon.

15


Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU)

No 575/2013 as regards the leverage ratio, the net stable funding ratio, requirements for own funds and eligible liabilities, counterparty credit risk, market risk, exposures to

central counterparties, exposures to collective investment undertakings, large exposures, reporting and disclosure requirements and amending Regulation (EU) No 648/2012

1. Rapporteur: Peter SIMON (S&D / DE)

2. Reference numbers: 2016/0360A(COD) / A8-0242/2018 / P8_TA-PROV(2019)0369


4. Legal basis: Article 114 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

5. Competent Parliamentary Committee: Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (ECON)


16


Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive

2013/36/EU as regards exempted entities, financial holding companies, mixed financial holding companies, remuneration, supervisory measures and powers and capital

conservation measures

1. Rapporteur: Peter SIMON (S&D / DE)






17



No 806/2014 as regards loss-absorbing and Recapitalisation Capacity for credit institutions and investment firms

1. Rapporteur: Gunnar HÖKMARK (EPP / SE)






18



2014/59/EU on loss-absorbing and recapitalisation capacity of credit institutions and investment firms and amending Directive 98/26/EC, Directive 2002/47/EC, Directive 2012/30/EU, Directive 2011/35/EU, Directive 2005/56/EC, Directive 2004/25/EC and

Directive 2007/36/EC

1. Rapporteur: Gunnar HÖKMARK (EPP / SE)






19



No 1093/2010 establishing a European Supervisory Authority (European Banking Authority); Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010 establishing a European Supervisory

Authority (European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority); Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010 establishing a European Supervisory Authority (European Securities and Markets Authority); Regulation (EU) No 345/2013 on European venture capital funds; Regulation (EU) No 346/2013 on European social entrepreneurship funds; Regulation (EU) No 600/2014 on markets in financial instruments; Regulation (EU) 2015/760 on European long-term investment funds; Regulation (EU) 2016/1011 on indices used as

benchmarks in financial instruments and financial contracts or to measure the performance of investment funds; Regulation (EU) 2017/1129 on the prospectus to be

published when securities are offered to the public or admitted to trading on a regulated market; and (EU) Directive 2015/849 on the prevention of the use of the financial system

for the purposes of money-laundering or terrorist financing

1. Rapporteur: Othmar KARAS (EPP / AT) / Pervenche BERÈS (S&D / FR)






20



2014/65/EU on markets in financial instruments, Directive 2009/138/EC on the taking-up and pursuit of the business of Insurance and Reinsurance (Solvency II) and Directive

(EU) 2015/849 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purposes of money-laundering or terrorist financing




4. Legal basis: Articles 53(1) and 62 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union



21


Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) No 1092/2010 on European Union macro-prudential oversight of the financial system

and establishing a European Systemic Risk Board







22


Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the prudential supervision

of investment firms and amending Directives 2013/36/EU and 2014/65/EU

1. Rapporteur: Markus FERBER (EPP / DE)






23


Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the prudential

requirements of investment firms and amending Regulations (EU) No 575/2013, (EU) No 600/2014 and (EU) No 1093/2010

1. Rapporteur: Markus FERBER (EPP / DE)






24



2009/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Directive 2011/61/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to cross-border distribution of

collective investment funds

1. Rapporteur: Wolf KLINZ (ALDE / DE)






25


Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on facilitating cross-border

distribution of collective investment funds and amending Regulations (EU) No 345/2013 and (EU) No 346/2013

1. Rapporteur: Wolf KLINZ (ALDE / DE)






26


Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on sovereign bond-backed

securities

1. Rapporteur: Jonás FERNÁNDEZ (S&D / ES)





6. Commission's position: The Commission reserves its position on all amendments of the European Parliament, in view of future negotiations between the Parliament and the Council. The Commission notes that the following amendments, in particular, significantly change the substance of the proposal:

Regulatory treatment of Sovereign bond-backed securities (SBBS) tranches (Article 23).The European Parliament proposes to extend the regulatory treatment of euro area sovereign bonds only to senior SBBS tranches as far as bank regulation is concerned.

SBBS underlying portfolio (Article 4).The European Parliament expands the set of circumstances warranting a change in the composition of the SBBS underlying portfolio, and envisages a more active role for the Commission.

Monitoring compliance with the SBBS regulation (Articles 9 to 18).The European Parliament envisages a greater role for the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA), including through ex-ante certification of individual SBBS issuances.

27


Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the amended proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on establishing a

framework for interoperability between EU information systems (borders and visa) and amending Council Decision 2004/512/EC, Regulation (EC) No 767/2008, Council Decision 2008/633/JHA, Regulation (EU) 2016/399, Regulation (EU) 2017/2226,

Regulation (EU) 2018/XX [the ETIAS Regulation], Regulation (EU) 2018/XX [the Regulation on SIS in the field of border checks] and Regulation (EU) 2018/XX [the eu-

LISA Regulation]

1. Rapporteur: Jeroen LENAERS (EPP / NL)



4. Legal basis: Article 16(2), Article 74 and points (a), (b), (d) and (e) of Article 77(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union



28


Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the amended proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on establishing a

framework for interoperability between EU information systems (police and judicial cooperation, asylum and migration) and amending Regulation (EU) 2018/XX [the

Eurodac Regulation], Regulation (EU) 2018/XX [the Regulation on SIS in the field of law enforcement], Regulation (EU) 2018/XX [the ECRIS-TCN Regulation] and

Regulation (EU) 2018/XX [the eu-LISA Regulation]

1. Rapporteur: Nuno MELO (EPP / PT)



4. Legal basis: Article 16(2), Article 74, point (e) of Article 78(2), point (c) of Article 79(2), point (d) of Article 82(1), Article 85(1), point (a) of Article 87(2) and Article 88(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union



29


Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the marketing and use of

explosives precursors, amending Annex XVII to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 and repealing Regulation (EU) No 98/2013 on the marketing and use of explosives precursors

1. Rapporteur: Andrejs MAMIKINS (S&D / LV)





6. Commission's position: Accepts all amendments. The Commission tabled the following statement:

“The Commission strongly regrets that the co-legislators’ agreement does not include the possibility to restrict additional substances through delegated acts, depriving the Union of the appropriate procedure to respond swiftly to developments in the misuse of substances as explosives precursors.

The Commission also regrets that the co-legislators’ agreement has not made sufficiently clear that the current regulation leaves Article 14 of the e-Commerce Directive unaffected.”

30


Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the creation of a European

network of immigration liaison officers (recast)

1. Rapporteur: Cécile Kashetu KYENGE (S&D / IT)



4. Legal basis: Articles 74 and 79(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union



31


Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of persons

reporting on breaches of Union law

1. Rapporteur: Virginie ROZIÈRE (S&D / FR)



4. Legal basis: Articles 16, 33, 43, 50, 53(1), 62, 91, 100, 103, 109, 114, 168, 169, 192, 207 and 325(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and Article 31 of the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community

5. Competent Parliamentary Committee: Committee on Legal Affairs (JURI)


“At the time of the review to be conducted in accordance with Article 21 of the directive, the Commission will consider the possibility of proposing to extend its scope of application to certain acts based on Articles 153 TFEU and 157 TFEU, after consulting the social partners, where appropriate, in accordance with Article 154 TFEU.”

32


Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on type-approval

requirements for motor vehicles and their trailers, and systems, components and separate technical units intended for such vehicles, as regards their general safety and the protection of vehicle occupants and vulnerable road users, amending Regulation

(EU) 2018/.... and repealing Regulations (EC) No 78/2009, (EC) No 79/2009 and (EC) No 661/2009

1. Rapporteur: Róża Gräfin von THUN UND HOHENSTEIN (EPP / PL)




5. Competent Parliamentary Committee: Committee on Internal Market and Consumer Protection (IMCO)


“The Commission is of the opinion that, in view of road safety, consumer protection, reduction of waste and the circular economy, it is important that tyres are not only tested in new, but also in worn condition. To this effect, the Commission will support the development of appropriate testing protocols in the context of the United Nations world forum for the harmonization of vehicle regulations. If this process is however not finalised by July 2023, the Commission intends to propose EU legislation that specifically covers testing of tyres in worn condition.”

33


Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on European Parliament legislative resolution of 16 April 2019 on the proposal for a

Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 883/2013 concerning investigations conducted by the European Anti-

Fraud Office (OLAF) as regards cooperation with the European Public Prosecutor's Office and the effectiveness of OLAF investigations

1. Rapporteur: Ingeborg GRÄSSLE (EPP / DE)




5. Competent Parliamentary Committee: Committee on Budgetary Control (CONT)

6. Commission's position: The Commission reserves its position on all the amendments of the European Parliament in view of future negotiations between the Parliament and the Council. However, the Commission expresses its particular concerns as regards amendments which go beyond the limited scope of the Commission proposal, notably the Parliament's amendments listed below:

Procedural safeguards (amendment 110): the European Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO) should be able to instruct OLAF to apply higher standards of procedural safeguards and data protection when OLAF is acting at the request of the EPPO. In the absence of any specific indication by the EPPO, the rules of the EPPO regulation on procedural safeguards and data protection would automatically apply in such cases.

Admissibility of evidence (amendments 85 to 88): the amendment goes beyond the Commission proposal in that it not only provides for OLAF reports to be admissible in all non-criminal proceedings, but in criminal proceedings as well.

Procedural Code for investigations (amendments 14 and 136): a procedural code to be adopted by delegated act would replace the current Guidelines on Investigation Procedures and lay down detailed rules governing investigation powers, procedures and guarantees.

Access to and public disclosure of OLAF final reports (amendments 75 and 80): the person concerned should have access to the final report unless the EPPO or a national judicial authority objects within six months. Moreover, OLAF should in principle publicly disclose its reports after all related procedures have been concluded, subject to the applicable data protection and confidentiality rules.

Judicial review (amendment 94): OLAF reports and recommendations should be subject to judicial review before the General Court of the EU. This review would come in addition to the already existing possibilities for review of the individual administrative decisions taken on those reports.

Abolishment of the distinction between internal and external investigations (amendments 28, 30, 34-38, 41-47, 51-54, 56, 61, 64, 78, 79, 89-91, 95, 97 and 129).

Restriction of the personal involvement of the Director-General in investigations (amendment 59): the Director-General of OLAF shall not conduct investigations him/ herself.

34


Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the action of the Union following its accession to the Geneva Act of the Lisbon Agreement on Appellations of

Origin and Geographical Indications

1. Rapporteur: Virginie ROZIÈRE (S&D / FR)






‘The Union has exclusive external competence on Geographical Indications (GIs) and is acceding to the Geneva Act of the Lisbon Agreement as a Party on its own right. This follows from the ruling of the European Court of Justice of 25/10/2017 (case C-389/15- Commission v Council). Given the EU’s exclusive external competence, Member States are prevented from becoming Parties to the Geneva Act and should no longer themselves protect GIs newly registered by third country members of the Lisbon system. The Commission, mindful of the exceptional circumstances given that seven Member States have been Parties to the Lisbon Agreement for a long time, that they have extensive intellectual property registered under it and that a smooth transition is needed, agrees that, in this particular case, BG, CZ, SK, FR, HU, IT, PT should be authorised to accede to the Geneva Act in the interest of the EU Further, given that the Union has exercised its internal competence for agricultural GIs, EU Member States cannot have national agricultural GI protection systems of their own. In addition, this case does not create a precedent for any other international/ WIPO agreements.’

‘Declaration on non-agricultural GIs:

The Commission takes note of the European Parliament resolution of 6 October 2015 on the possible extension of EU geographical indication protection to non-agricultural products.

The Commission launched a study in November 2018 to get further economic and legal evidence on the protection of non-agricultural GIs within the Single Market, as a complement to a study of 2013, and to obtain further data on issues such as competitiveness, unfair competition, counterfeiting, consumer perceptions, costs/benefits as well as on the effectiveness of non-agricultural GI protection models in light of the proportionality principle.

In accordance with the principles of Better Regulation and to the commitments laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement of 13 April 2016 on Better Law-Making, the Commission will examine the study as well as the report on the participation of the Union in the Geneva Act as referred to in Article [13a] of Regulation […] and consider any possible next steps.’

35

‘Declaration on the use of the "droit de regard" by the Commission in the context of the Article 9a (3) of the Regulation of the European Parliament and the Council on the action of the Union following its accession to the Geneva Act:

The Commission notes that whilst the procedure set out in Article 9a(3) of the regulation is a legal necessity given the exclusive competence of the Union in can nevertheless state that in the context of the current EU acquis any such intervention of the Commission would be exceptional and duly justified. During consultations with a Member State, the Commission will make every effort in order to resolve together with the Member State any concerns in order to avoid the issuing of a negative opinion. The Commission notes that any negative opinion would be notified in writing to the Member State concerned and pursuant to Article 296 TFEU would state the reasons on which it was based. The Commission would further note that a negative opinion would not preclude the submission of a further application concerning the same appellation of origin, if the reasons for the negative opinion have been duly addressed thereafter or are no longer applicable.’

36


Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council adapting a number of legal

acts in the area of Justice providing for the use of the regulatory procedure with scrutiny to Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

1. Rapporteur: József SZÁJER (EPP / HU)





6. Commission's position: The Commission is ready to explore compromises for some amendments and cannot accept other amendments.

The Commission proposal aims at the alignment of three acts in the area of justice providing for the use of the regulatory procedure with scrutiny to the procedures for delegated and implementing acts provided for in Articles 290 and 291 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. This proposal is linked to the agreement between the Council and the Parliament on part A in file 2016/0400A (COD) / A8-0020/2018 / P8_TA-PROV(2019)410.

I. Amendments relating to the regulation

Regarding the recitals to the regulation, the Commission maintains its proposal and suggests that any evolution in wording should be modelled on the compromises found for part A, including, in particular, the proposal for a new recital on bundling, which would be a cause of concern for the Commission. The three institutions after long and difficult negotiations have agreed on rules for bundling, which are laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making and which should be the basis for an agreement in future trilogues.

II. Amendments relating to the annex

1. Duration of empowerment

Contrary to the indeterminate duration of the empowerments proposed by the Commission, the Parliament proposes a limited duration of five years for all empowerments, coupled with a reporting obligation and tacit renewal.

The Commission believes that the unlimited duration of the empowerments is more appropriate for the following reasons:

(1) the right of the European Parliament and the Council to revoke the empowerment in line with Article 290(2)(a) TFEU is ensured in all cases;

(2) the alignment exercise is dealing with existing empowerments, in many cases their use is triggered by technical progress, and there is sufficient experience how the Commission has been using them in the past;

37

(3) the reporting requirement for all empowerments covered by this exercise would create a disproportionate administrative burden for the Commission;

(4) the new register on delegated acts (operational since 12 December 2017) provides an easy and simple overview of how empowerments have been used.

In part A of file 2016/0400A (COD) / A8-0020/2018 / P8_TA-PROV(2019)410 the Commission in a spirit of compromise accepted such limited duration with tacit renewal. The Commission issued a statement, however, in which it underlined that - in particular in view of the high number of reports which would become due at regular intervals of time and the fact that easily available information about the use of the empowerments is available through the Register of Delegated Acts - it has discretion about the way in which it will comply with the reporting obligation. The Commission also underlined that it may group reports due under several basic acts in one single document.

2. Longer objection period (three months)

The Commission has systematically proposed objection periods of two months, which can be extended by further two months by either the Parliament or the Council. This reflects the Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making, which provides in relation to the objection period: ‘Without prejudice to the urgency procedure, the period for objection defined on a case-by-case basis in each basic act should in principle be of two months, and not less than that, extendable for each institution (the European Parliament or the Council) by two months at its initiative.’ Deviations from that should only be made if there are good reasons to do so. On several occasions, the European Parliament proposes longer objection periods without providing appropriate justification for that. The Commission therefore maintains its proposal as regards these points.

38



acts providing for the use of the regulatory procedure with scrutiny to Articles 290 and 291 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union


2. Reference numbers: 2016/0400A (COD) / A8-0020/2018 / P8_TA-PROV(2019)410


4. Legal basis: Article 33, Article 43(2), Article 53(1), Article 62, Article 64(2), Article 91, Article 100(2), Article 114, Article 153(2)(b), Article 168(4) (a), Article 168(4)(b), Article 172, Article 192(1), Article 207, Article 214(3), and Article 338(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union


6. Commission's position: Accepts all amendments. The Commission endorses the compromise found between the institutions and reflected in the Parliament’s first reading position.

The Commission tabled the following statement:

“The Commission notes the choice of the legislators to provide for a limited duration for all the empowerments in which the regulatory procedure with scrutiny is aligned through this regulation, coupled with a reporting obligation and tacit renewal of the empowerment. In particular in view of the high number of reports which would become due at regular intervals of time and the fact that easily available information about the use of the empowerments is available through the Register of Delegated Acts, the Commission underlines that it has discretion about the way in which it will comply with the reporting obligation. Where appropriate, the Commission may therefore group reports due under several basic acts in one single document.’

Joint Statement by the Parliament, the Council and the Commission:

‘In point 27 of the Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making the three institutions acknowledged the need for the alignment of all existing legislation to the legal framework introduced by the Lisbon Treaty, and in particular the need to give high priority to the prompt alignment of all basic acts which still refer to the regulatory procedure with scrutiny. Following the proposal of the Commission to that end, this regulation responds to that need by providing for the alignment of the regulatory procedure with scrutiny in a significant number of acts included in that proposal. The three institutions will continue to work on the alignment of the remaining acts of that proposal.”

39



acts providing for the use of the regulatory procedure with scrutiny to Articles 290 and 291 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union


2. Reference numbers: 2016/0400B (COD) / A8-0190/2019 / P8_TA-PROV(2019)409


4. Legal basis: Article 33, Article 43(2), Article 53(1), Article 62, Article 64(2), Article 91, Article 100(2), Article 114, Article 153(2)(b), Article 168(4) (a), Article 168(4)(b), Article 172, Article 192(1), Article 207, Article 214(3), and Article 338(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union


6. Commission's position: The Commission takes note of Parliament’s amendments but reserves its position on them pending future trilogue negotiations, with the goal of reaching an overall agreement.

The Commission proposal aims at the alignment of 168 legal acts providing for the use of the regulatory procedure with scrutiny to the procedures for delegated and implementing acts provided in Articles 290 and 291 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. As the positions of the European Parliament and the Council diverged on a significant number of points, no agreement was found on the whole of the Commission proposal within the term of this Parliament. Therefore, the proposal was split and the negotiations concentrated on the 66 acts on which an agreement between the Council and the Parliament was possible and voted on 17 April 2019 (2016/0400A (COD) / A8-0020/2018 / P8_TA-PROV(2019)410). The remaining acts on which no agreement was found yet and on which negotiations will continue are included in part B, the subject of this follow up.

III. Amendments relating to the regulation

Amendments to the regulation which are a direct consequence of the splitting (such as changes to the list of Treaty articles on which it is based, given the revised content) would be acceptable in principle.

Regarding the recitals to the regulation, the Commission maintains its proposal and suggests that any evolution in wording should be modelled on the compromises found for part A, including, in particular, the proposal for a new recital on bundling, which would be a cause of concern for the Commission. The three institutions after long and difficult negotiations have agreed on rules for bundling, which are laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making and which should be the basis for an agreement in future trilogues.

IV. Amendments to the annex

The altogether 485 amendments to the annex can be grouped as follows:

40

1. Changes to the wording of the empowerment

The European Parliament proposes a number of amendments aiming to clarify the supplementing nature of some empowerments or to describe more fully the nature of empowerments, their scope or what should trigger their use. While maintaining its proposal at this stage, the Commission is open to discussing such amendments on a case-by-case basis in future trilogues insofar as they provide greater clarity, but do not change the intended substance or scope of the empowerments concerned.

2. Duration of empowerment

Contrary to the indeterminate duration of the empowerments proposed by the Commission, the European Parliament proposes a limited duration of five years for all empowerments, coupled with a reporting obligation and tacit renewal.

The Commission believes that the unlimited duration of the empowerments is more appropriate for the following reasons:

(1) the right of the European Parliament and the Council to revoke the empowerment in line with Article 290(2)(a) TFEU is ensured in all cases;

(2) the alignment exercise is dealing with existing empowerments, in many cases their use is triggered by technical progress, and there is sufficient experience how the Commission has been using them in the past;

(3) the reporting requirement for all empowerments covered by this exercise would create a disproportionate administrative burden for the Commission;

(4) the new register on delegated acts (operational since 12 December 2017) provides an easy and simple overview of how empowerments have been used.

In part A the Commission in a spirit of compromise accepted such limited duration with tacit renewal. The Commission issued a statement, however, in which it underlined that - in particular in view of the high number of reports which would become due at regular intervals of time and the fact that easily available information about the use of the empowerments is available through the Register of Delegated Acts - it has discretion about the way in which it will comply with the reporting obligation. The Commission also underlined that it may group reports due under several basic acts in one single document.

3. Amendments related to change of nature of empowerment from implementing act empowerments to delegated act empowerments

Generally, the Commission considers that the measures which may be covered by a delegation of power under Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union correspond to those covered by the regulatory procedure with scrutiny. However, when preparing the proposal, the Commission carried out a case-by-case assessment of each empowerment and in some cases proposed to align to implementing act empowerments. The European Parliament in the majority of these cases proposes to align to delegated act empowerments. These amendments not only alter the nature of the empowerment but then also trigger amendments in the provisions on the exercise of delegated power and therefore also imply the deletion of the article on the adoption of implementing acts.

The Commission maintains its proposal that implementing acts are more appropriate in the cases concerned.

41

4. Longer objection period (three months)

The Commission has systematically proposed objection periods of two months, which can be extended by further two months by either the European Parliament or the Council. This reflects the Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making, which provides in relation to the objection period: ‘Without prejudice to the urgency procedure, the period for objection defined on a case-by-case basis in each basic act should in principle be of two months, and not less than that, extendable for each institution (the European Parliament or the Council) by two months at its initiative.’ Deviations from that should only be made if there are good reasons to do so. On several occasions, the European Parliament proposes longer objection periods without providing appropriate justification for that. The Commission therefore maintains its proposal as regards these points.

5. Deletion of proposed urgency procedure

The Commission had proposed in one act, relating to the case of possible imminent risks to the stability of financial markets, the possibility to adopt delegated acts concerning the applicability of international accounting standards by means of an urgency procedure. The European Parliament proposes to delete this urgency procedure. The Commission believes the proposal to introduce urgency procedure in this case is justified and therefore maintains its original proposal.

6. Other

Amendments which propose substantial changes going beyond the scope of the current exercise are a matter of concern in view of the goal of reaching early agreement in trilogues.

7. Acts included in the proposal of the Commission which have in the meantime been aligned or repealed

Some amendments (4, 5, 6, 409, 410 and 411) have in the Commission’s view become obsolete as they relate to acts that have in the meantime been aligned or repealed.

42


Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down conservation and control measures applicable in the Regulatory Area of the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries

Organisation and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 2115/2005 and Council Regulation (EC) No 1386/2007

1. Rapporteur: Ricardo SERRÃO SANTOS (S&D / PT)




5. Competent Parliamentary Committee: Committee on Fisheries (PECH)


43



No 810/2009 establishing a Community Code on Visas (Visa Code)

1. Rapporteur: Juan Fernando LÓPEZ AGUILAR (S&D / ES)



4. Legal basis: Article 77(2)(a) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union



44


Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the European Border and

Coast Guard and repealing Council Joint Action n°98/700/JHA, Regulation (EU) n° 1052/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EU)

n° 2016/1624 of the European Parliament and of the Council

1. Rapporteur: Roberta METSOLA (EPP / MT)

2. Reference numbers: 2018/0330A (COD) / A8-0076/2019 / P8_TA-PROV(2019)415


4. Legal basis: Points (b) and (d) of Article 77(2) and point (c) of Article 79(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union



45


Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on preventing the

dissemination of terrorist content online

1. Rapporteur: Daniel DALTON (ECR / UK)




5. Competent Parliamentary Committee: Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (LIBE), Committee on Culture and Education (CULT) (joint committee procedure)


The Commission takes note of the first reading position of the European Parliament concerning the proposal for a regulation on preventing the dissemination of terrorist content online. In view of future negotiations between the Parliament and the Council, the Commission reserves is position overall on Parliament’s amendments.

The Commission notes that the European Parliament maintained, to some extent, some key elements of the Commission’s proposal to prevent the dissemination of terrorist content online:

The report maintains the 1-hour time limit for hosting service providers to remove terrorist content upon receipt of a removal order, however it adds a 12-hour advance warning for the first order.

The essence the safeguards proposed in the Commission proposal, including the obligation for companies to put in place complaint mechanisms for users as well as the obligation to notify the users.

The position supports (and extends) transparency obligations.

The position supports cooperation mechanisms between hosting service providers, the Member State authorities and Europol.

The Commission also notes that in several respects the European Parliament's first reading position took a different approach to the central elements in the Commission's proposal, in particular:

The position of the European Parliament limits the scope of hosting service providers by excluding all cloud services, and not just cloud infrastructure services, thus undermining the effectiveness of the proposal.

The European Parliament limits the scope of terrorist content online by requiring that the material would cause a danger that terrorist offences may be committed intentionally. In addition, the European Parliament gives a blanket exclusion to content, which is disseminated for educational, artistic, journalistic or research purposes, or for awareness raising purposes against terrorist activity thereby creating a potential loophole.

46

The European Parliament limits the issuing of EU-wide removal orders to the Member State where the hosting service provider is established; other Member States could ask providers to disable content for their territory and request the Member State of establishment for an additional EU wide removal order. Eliminating the possibility for all affected Member States to issue EU-wide removal orders runs counter the objective of swift removal of terrorist content across the EU and set a disproportionate burden on those Member States, which have a large number of hosting service providers.

The European Parliament deletes obligations related to referrals. The deletion undermines the functioning of an effective cooperation tool between providers, the Member States and Europol to stem the dissemination of terrorist content online. While it does not prohibit the current voluntary referral practices, it eliminates obligations for hosting service providers to give priority treatment to content referred by competent authorities and Union bodies and to provide feedback on the action taken.

The European Parliament limits obligations related to proactive measures. These changes and in particular the exclusion of the obligation to take proactive measures to detect terrorist content undermines the effectiveness of the proposal, reducing hosting service providers' responsibility to remove terrorist content online. The measures taken proactively by the hosting service providers, in particular automated tools that will allow hosting service providers to identify large amounts of terrorist content being disseminated through their services are important to ensure effective removal of terrorist content, subject to appropriate safeguards.

47


Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down rules facilitating

the use of financial and other information for the prevention, detection, investigation or prosecution of certain criminal offences and repealing Council Decision 2000/642/JHA

1. Rapporteur: Emil RADEV (EPP / BU)






48


Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993, Directive 98/6/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and

Directive 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards better enforcement and modernisation of EU consumer protection rules

1. Rapporteur: Daniel DALTON (ECR / UK)






49


Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down rules and

procedures for compliance with and enforcement of Union harmonisation legislation on products and amending Regulations (EU) No 305/2011, (EU) No 528/2012, (EU)

2016/424, (EU) 2016/425, (EU) 2016/426 and (EU) 2017/1369 of the European Parliament and of the Council, and Directives 2004/42/EC, 2009/48/EC, 2010/35/EU,

2013/29/EU, 2013/53/EU, 2014/28/EU, 2014/29/EU, 2014/30/EU, 2014/31/EU, 2014/32/EU, 2014/33/EU, 2014/34/EU, 2014/35/EU, 2014/53/EU, 2014/68/EU and

2014/90/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council

1. Rapporteur: Nicola DANTI (S&D / IT)






Declaration on the legal base:

“The Commission takes note that the text agreed replaces the triple legal basis of the Commission proposal (Article 114 TFEU - internal market, Article 33 TFEU – customs cooperation, Article 207 – common commercial policy) by a double legal basis, through deletion of the common commercial policy legal basis. The Commission continues to consider that the triple legal basis is fully justified in relation to the provisions that regulate conditions for access to the EU market of products originating from third countries. Moreover, the common commercial policy legal basis is in line with the legal basis of Regulation (EC) 765/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 July 2008 setting the requirements for accreditation and market surveillance relating to the marketing of products and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 339/93. The Commission regrets the deletion of Article 207 TFEU as legal basis of the regulation.”

Declaration on the implementing act to set uniform conditions for customs controls, Article 26(8a):

“In order to strengthen controls on products at customs, the regulation empowers the Commission to adopt implementing acts to determine benchmarks and techniques for checks on the basis of common risk analysis on the Union level. The Commission intends to make use of this empowerment.”

50



No 469/2009 concerning the supplementary protection certificate for medicinal products

1. Rapporteur: Luis DE GRANDES PASCUAL (EPP / ES)






51


Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the transparency and

sustainability of the EU risk assessment in the food chain amending Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 [on general food law], Directive 2001/18/EC [on the deliberate release into the

environment of GMOs], Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 [on GM food and feed], Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003 [on feed additives], Regulation (EC) No 2065/2003 [on

smoke flavourings], Regulation (EC) No 1935/2004 [on food contact materials], Regulation (EC) No 1331/2008 [on the common authorisation procedure for food

additives, food enzymes and food flavourings], Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 [on plant protection products] and Regulation (EU) No 2015/2283 [on novel foods]

1. Rapporteur: Pilar AYUSO (EPP / ES)



4. Legal basis: Articles 43, 114 and 168(4)(b) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

5. Competent Parliamentary Committee: Committee on Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (ENVI)


“The Commission welcomes the political agreement reached by the European Parliament and the Council on the proposal for a regulation on the transparency and sustainability of the EU risk assessment in the food chain.

However, the Commission regrets that the co-legislators have decided to deviate from the Common Approach of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on decentralised agencies of 19 July 2012.

In particular, the Commission regrets the deviation from the Common Approach with regard to the composition of the Management Board of the European Food Safety Authority (number of members designated by the European Parliament).

This deviation should not be considered as a precedent for other agencies.”

52


Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on promoting fairness and

transparency for business users of online intermediation services

1. Rapporteur: Christel SCHALDEMOSE (S&D / DK)




5. Competent Parliamentary Committee: Committee on Internal Market and Consumer Protection (IMCO), Committee on Legal Affairs (JURI), (associated committee procedure)


“The Commission takes note of the text of Article 1(4) agreed by the European Parliament and the Council.

The Commission wishes in this context to note that the present regulation does not preclude Member States' ability to prohibit or sanction unilateral conduct or unfair commercial practices under their national law, provided that the relevant provisions of national law are applied in conformity with other provisions of Union law and are compatible with the provisions of the present regulation.

The principle that national law should be compatible with this regulation however only applies to the extent that the specific issue in question is specifically regulated therein. The Commission notes in this regard that this regulation does not regulate all aspects of the commercial relationships between providers of online intermediation services and their business users.

In particular, the Commission considers that where the provisions of this regulation set out a specific level of transparency or specific information obligations, in relation to these matters, Member States cannot prescribe different levels of transparency or different information obligations. However, this regulation does not preclude the application of national rules which prohibit or sanction unilateral conduct or unfair commercial practices and which concern other matters, not regulated by the provisions of this regulation.”

53


Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the European

Cybersecurity Industrial, Technology and Research Competence Centre and the Network of National Coordination Centres

1. Rapporteur: Julia REDA (Greens-EFA / DE)



4. Legal basis: Article 173(3) and the first paragraph of Article 188 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union



The European Parliament’s resolution of 17 April 2019 formally closes the Parliament’s first reading. The Commission reserves its position on the Parliament’s amendments in view of future negotiations between the Parliament and the Council on the proposal.

The main amendments compared to the Commission proposal are the following:

The European Parliament has added European Defence Fund as a financing source of the Competence Centre in addition to Digital Europe and Horizon Europe Programmes. The European Defence Fund should, according to the European Parliament, fund operational and administrative costs of activities related to dual use and defence. The European Parliament also added that the cooperation between the civil and defence spheres shall be reactive and include defensive cyber defence technology, applications and services. This is specified in a definition on “cyber defence’ and ‘defence dimensions of cybersecurity” in Article 2 and in Article 4 in relation to the relevant tasks of the Centre. The Commission has continuously insisted that the European Defence Fund should not be among the programmes financing the Competence Centre. Even if indirect management is now possible in accordance with the European Defence Fund Regulation, it is only exceptional and limited (e.g. it cannot cover selection of projects) and only possible if provided for in the European Defence Fund Regulation. With regard to the definitions of “cyber defence” and “defence dimensions of cybersecurity”, such definitions do not exist currently in any Union law. The Commission prefers to delete such definitions. In case there is a need to include such definitions, the drafting should be reviewed in order to be correct and sound and the Commission should insist to specify that any definition in this context can only be for the purposes of the Competence Centre Regulation.

The European Parliament amendments also propose that the Centre shall have additional and more detailed missions and tasks to those defined in the Commission proposal. These would for example include enhancement of capabilities, knowledge and infrastructure, promoting “security by design”, supporting

54

cybersecurity research in the field of cybercrime etc. The Commission can accept additional priorities introduced by the European Parliament as long as these are broadly in line with the spirit of the Commission proposal, although the Commission has continuously insisted that the tasks should not be too detailed and prescriptive.

The European Parliament suggests different voting modalities according to the type of decision taken by the Governing Board. These different types of decisions concern governance and organisation, allocation of budget, joint actions and any other decision. Although the amendments deviate from the original proposal, the Commission will still hold at least 50 % of the voting rights, which has been central for the Commission in order to fulfil its budgetary responsibilities. The Commission can support the amendments proposed by the European Parliament.

55


Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on persistent organic

pollutants (POPs) (recast)

1. Rapporteur: Julie GIRLING (EPP / UK)






The Commission has issued the following statements in response to the final compromise text regarding the recast of the POPs Regulation

1. “The Commission underlines that, notwithstanding the right of the co-legislators to choose the ordinary legislative procedure over delegated acts, the use of the ordinary legislative procedure to amend Annexes IV and V could compromise the ability of the EU and its Member States to comply with their international obligations under the Stockholm Convention and to negotiate concentration limits for POPs wastes within the Basel Convention, in view of the timelines and procedures that apply.”

2. “The Commission notes that as the definition of “article” in the recast of the POPs Regulation refers directly to the definition of “article” in Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (REACH), the Commission interprets this term in the same way as it is interpreted in REACH, including any clarifications provided by relevant case-law. Guidance will be prepared by the European Chemicals Agency, in agreement with the Commission, to confirm this interpretation of the term “article” in the POPs regulation, in line with relevant case-law, at the earliest opportunity following the entry into force of the recast of the POPs Regulation.”

3. “The Commission confirms its intention to launch without delay a review of the limit value for polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) in Annex IV to the POPs Regulation, taking into account the available scientific and technical evidence, with the objective of proposing a lower limit value which would include consideration of a possible limit value of 500 ppm.”

56


Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council setting CO2 emission

performance standards for new heavy-duty vehicles

1. Rapporteur: Bas EICKHOUT (Greens/EFA / NL)






57



No 648/2012 as regards the clearing obligation, the suspension of the clearing obligation, the reporting requirements, the risk-mitigation techniques for OTC derivatives

contracts not cleared by a central counterparty, the registration and supervision of trade repositories and the requirements for trade repositories

1. Rapporteur: Werner LANGEN (EPP / DE)






58



No 1095/2010 establishing a European Supervisory Authority (European Securities and Markets Authority) and amending Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 as regards the

procedures and authorities involved for the authorisation of CCPs and requirements for the recognition of third-country CCPs

1. Rapporteur: Danuta Maria HÜBNER (EPP / PL)






59


Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on amending Regulation (EU)

No 575/2013 as regards exposures in the form of covered bonds

1. Rapporteur: Bernd LUCKE (ECR / DE)






60


Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the issue of covered bonds

and covered bond public supervision and amending Directive 2009/65/EC and Directive 2014/59/EU

1. Rapporteur: Bernd LUCKE (ECR / DE)






“Statement on change of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/61 with regard to liquidity coverage requirements for credit institutions

The requirements for a dedicated liquidity buffer for covered bonds set out in Article 16 of the proposal for [a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the issue of covered bonds and covered bond public supervision and amending Directive 2009/65/EC and Directive 2014/59/EU] may result in an overlap with the requirements for credit institutions to maintain a general liquidity buffer, as set out in Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/61.

In order to address this overlap and to ensure, at the same time, that a dedicated liquidity buffer for covered bonds is applied also during the period covered by the Liquidity Coverage Ratio (LCR), the Commission is willing to amend Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/61 in order to cater for the specific situation of covered bonds. Such amendment should be adopted in time for it to be able to enter into force before the date of application of the directive on the issue of covered bonds and covered bond supervision.”

61


Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulations (EU) No 596/2014 and (EU) 2017/1129 as regards the promotion of the use of SME growth

markets

1. Rapporteur: Anne SANDER (EPP / FR)






62


Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on sustainability-related

disclosures in the financial services sector

1. Rapporteur: Paul TANG (S&D / NL)






63


Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive (EU)

2017/1132 as regards the use of digital tools and processes in company law

1. Rapporteur: Tadeusz ZWIEFKA (EPP / PL)



4. Legal basis: Article 50 (1) and points (b), (c), (f) and (g) of Article 50 (2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union



64


Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive (EU)

2017/1132 as regards cross-border conversions, mergers and divisions

1. Rapporteur: Evelyn REGNER (S&D / AT)



4. Legal basis: Article 50 (1) and (2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union



65



2009/33/EU on the promotion of clean and energy-efficient road transport vehicles

1. Rapporteur: Andrzej GRZYB (EPP / PL)






66


Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a European

Maritime Single Window environment and repealing Directive 2010/65/EU

1. Rapporteur: Deirdre CLUNE (EPP / IE)




5. Competent Parliamentary Committee: Committee on Transport and Tourism (TRAN)


67


Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the ‘Customs’

programme for cooperation in the field of customs

1. Rapporteur: Maria GRAPINI (S&D / RO)



4. Legal basis: Article 33, Article 114 and Article 207 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union



The Commission welcomes the European Parliament’s resolution and believes that some of the proposed amendments could be addressed while remaining as close as possible to the original proposal.

In view of future negotiations between the Parliament and the Council, it however, reserves its position on all amendments proposed by the European Parliament, in particular, on the elements that are linked to the overall Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) agreement.

The Commission expresses its specific concerns on:

The use of delegated acts for the adoption of the work programmes as they do not supplement the regulation but are linked to its implementation.

Making eligible the purchase of software as this is not part of the scope of the proposal.

68


Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing, as part of the

Integrated Border Management Fund, the instrument for financial support for customs control equipment

1. Rapporteur: Jiří POSPÍŠIL (EPP / CZ)



4. Legal basis: Article 33, Article 114 and Article 207 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union



The Commission welcomes the European Parliament’s resolution and believes that some of the proposed amendments could be addressed while remaining as close as possible to the original proposal.

In view of future negotiations between the European Parliament and the Council, it however, reserves its position on all amendments proposed by the European Parliament, in particular, on the elements that are linked to the overall Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) agreement.

The Commission expresses its specific concerns on the following ones:

The use of delegated acts for the adoption of the work programmes as they do not supplement the regulation but are linked to its implementation.

The involvement of the European Border and Coast Guard Agency in programme coordination. While the Agency has a mandate to implement the EU Integrated Border Management (IBM), including as regards its component on inter-agency cooperation, it has to be emphasised that customs control is not a component of the EU IBM. The agency has no mandate and no role to play in coordinating customs matters. Its proposed involvement in the implementation of the Customs control equipment instrument is therefore not relevant.

69


Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing Horizon Europe

– the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation, laying down its rules for participation and dissemination

1. Rapporteur: Dan NICA (S&D / RO)



4. Legal basis: Articles 173(3), 182(1), 183 and 188 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union


6. Commission's position: The Commission welcomes the European Parliament’s position adopted at first reading on the partial agreement reached by the co-legislators during the last trilogue on 19 March 2019. The Commission accepts all amendments that have been subject to interinstitutional negotiations and reserves its position on the budgetary aspects and some horizontal provisions, which are subject to the overall agreement on the EU's next long-term budget.

During the interinstitutional negotiations, the Commission presented the following statements in response to the text of the common understanding:

“Upon request, the Commission intends to exchange views with the responsible Committee in the European Parliament on: (i) the list of potential partnerships candidates based on the Articles 185 and 187 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union which will be covered by (inception) impact assessments; (ii) the list of tentative missions identified by the Mission boards; (iii )the results of the Strategic Plan before its formal adoption, and to present and share with that Committee documents related to work programmes.”

“The Commission takes note of the compromise reached by the co-legislators on the wording of Article 5. In the Commission’s understanding the specific programme on defence research mentioned in Article 1(3)(b) is limited only to the research actions under the future European Defence Fund while the development actions are considered outside the scope of this regulation”

“The Commission intends to implement the European Innovation Council (EIC) Accelerator budget in a way to ensure that the grant-only support to SMEs, including start-ups, corresponds to the support provided under the SME instrument budget of the Horizon 2020 Programme, in accordance with the terms established in Article 43, paragraph and recital X of the Horizon Europe Regulation”.

“Furthermore, the Commission will repeat the declaration on ethics/ stem cell research as in Horizon 2020.”

70


Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council on establishing the specific

programme implementing Horizon Europe - the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation

1. Rapporteur: Christian EHLER (EPP / DE)



4. Legal basis: Articles 173(3) and 182(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union


6. Commission's position: The Commission welcomes the European Parliament’s position adopted at first reading on the partial agreement reached by the co-legislators during the last trilogue on 19 March 2019. The Commission accepts all amendments that have been subject to interinstitutional negotiations and reserves its position on the budgetary aspects and some horizontal provisions, which are subject to the overall agreement on the EU's next long-term budget. The Commission also accepts the amendment to the legislative resolution aimed at adapting, at a later stage of the procedure for this file, the legal basis for the decision on the Specific Programme in light of the significant changes made in the Specific Programme compared to the original Commission proposal.

The Commission has entered the following statement in response to the text of the common understanding:

“The Commission underlines that it is contrary to the letter and to the spirit of Regulation 182/2011 (OJ L 55 of 28.2.2011, p. 13) to invoke Article 5 § 4, subparagraph 2, point b) in a systematic manner. Recourse to this provision must respond to a specific need to depart from the rule of principle, which is that the Commission may adopt a draft implementing act when no opinion is delivered. Given that it is an exception to the general rule established by Article 5 (4) recourse to subparagraph 2, point b), cannot be simply seen as a "discretionary power" of the legislator, but must be interpreted in a restrictive manner and thus must be justified. While the Commission notes the agreement reached by the European Parliament and the Council on the recourse to this provision, it regrets that such justification is not reflected in a recital.”

71


Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the space

programme of the Union and the European Union Agency for the Space Programme and repealing Regulations (EU) No 912/2010, (EU) No 1285/2013, (EU) No 377/2014 and

Decision 541/2014/EU

1. Rapporteur: Massimiliano SALINI (EPP / IT)





6. Commission's position: The Commission accepts the amendments agreed in the inter-institutional negotiations (common understanding), but reserves its position with regard to the other amendments, in particular horizontal aspects relating to the overall Multi-annual Financial Framework negotiations, including budgetary aspects and provisions of a more horizontal nature (such as participation of third countries, cumulative funding and recourse to implementing acts).

The Commission has issued the following statements in response to the text of the common understanding:

Configurations of the committee:

“As regards the introduced by the co-legislators configurations of the committee (within the meaning of Regulation (EU) N0 182/2011), the Commission notes that the Member States remain free and solely responsible to choose their representatives in the committee and the Commission does not interpret this provision as conferring on it any power to indicate or select the right experts for a particular configuration.”

Member States’ participation in space surveillance and tracking (SST) and related implementing act:

“In the understanding of the Commission, its empowerment under Article 56(4) of the regulation includes inter alia, as indicated in recital 65a, establishing whether offers submitted by Member States under Article 56(3) should relate to all or some orbits. The Commission furthermore understands that Article 56(3) allows the presentation of several joint proposals, each of them by at least 5 Member States and that the Commission may select several offers to maximise the participation of Member States in SST.”

Access to space:

“As stated in recital 4, in view of the limited budget, activities under Article 5 on access to space should be without prejudice to the main implementation of the programme components indicated in Article 3 (a) to (e). The Commission therefore intends to prioritise the implementation of the programme’s components.”

72

Security configuration committee for security:

“The Commission emphasises that, due to the sensitivity of the security aspects of the programme and in accordance with Article 3(4) and Article 6(2) of Regulation (EU) 182/2011, it is particularly important that the chair of the Programme Committee meeting in the Security Configuration makes every effort to find solutions which command the widest possible support on the security aspects of the programme within the Committee.”

Copernicus Market Development as core task of the EU Agency:

“The Commission regrets that additional tasks (Copernicus market development) will be given to the EU Agency while it would not have the resources to cope with them. Bearing in mind the overall resources constraints, the Agency may have to cope with these new activities by means of internal redeployment, notably through seeking further synergies and efficiencies.”

73


Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the Digital

Europe programme for the period 2021-2027

1. Rapporteur: Angelika MLINAR (ALDE / AT)



4. Legal basis: Articles 172 and 173(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union


6. Commission's position: The Commission accepts the amendments agreed in the inter-institutional negotiations (common understanding), but reserves its position with regard to the other amendments, in particular horizontal aspects relating to the overall Multi-annual Financial Framework negotiations, including budgetary aspects and related horizontal provisions of the future programme (such as the adoption of the work programme, the Committee procedure).

The Commission has entered the following statement in response to the text of the common understanding (the following statement was circulated at Coreper of 13 March 2019 and to European Parliament on 16 April 2019):

“The Commission cannot agree to the changes regarding the provision on transfers of resources allocated to Member States under shared management as agreed by the European Parliament and the Council in the common understanding on the Digital Europe programme.

The changes introduced to Article 9(5) raise questions of compatibility with other legislative proposals currently discussed by the European Parliament and the Council, in particular the Common Provisions Regulation (COM(2018)375). The top-up of a previously awarded grant would call into question the principles applicable to grants from the EU budget, in particular the principles of transparency and equal treatment that underpin the award of grants from the EU budget. As specific conditions attached by Member States to the transfers can imply State aid, Member States would be responsible for ensuring compliance with State aid rules.

The Commission calls on the co-legislators to ensure a horizontal approach on this issue in the negotiations on the next Multiannual Financial Framework.”

74


Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the ‘Fiscalis’

programme for cooperation in the field of taxation

1. Rapporteur: Sven GIEGOLD (Greens/EFA / DE)




5. Competent Parliamentary Committee: Committee Economic and Monetary Affairs (ECON)


The Commission welcomes the first reading of the Parliament reflecting the common understanding reached between the co-legislators on this proposal. The compromise text on which such common understanding was reached remains largely aligned to the original Commission proposal.

The Commission reserves its position on the elements that are excluded from the common understanding and that are linked to the overall Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) agreement.

As far as the outstanding open issues are concerned, the Commission cannot accept the use of delegated acts for the adoption of the work programmes as they do not supplement the regulation but are linked to its implementation.

75


Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a Programme for

the Environment and Climate Action (LIFE) and repealing Regulation (EU) No 1293/2013

1. Rapporteur: Gerben-Jan GERBRANDY (ALDE / NL)





6. Commission's position: Accepts the amendments agreed in the inter-institutional negotiations that form the common understanding reached between the co-legislators but reserves its position with regard to all horizontal aspects relating to the overall Multi-annual Financial Framework that are not included in the common understanding.

The Commission has issued the following statements in response to the common understanding reached between the co-legislators regarding the LIFE programme:

1. Statement on the Programme’s logo

“The Commission regrets that the co-legislators decided to maintain the LIFE logo. This runs counter to the horizontal approach of not having programme-specific logos under the future long-term budget. The Commission’s intention is to make sure that Europeans can relate to the Union as a whole thanks to the use of the single European emblem by its different programmes.

This emblem is common to all EU Institutions and will be an important part of the simple, coherent and binding communication and visibility requirements across programmes.

For the sake of reaching overall agreement on the programme, the Commission can accept to maintain the LIFE logo under the condition that it remains limited to the LIFE programme in the concerned programming period.

The Commission remains convinced that communication and visibility of EU action towards a broad public is more effective without programme-specific logos. The Commission remains at the co-legislators’ disposal to demonstrate this well ahead of the negotiations of the subsequent programming period”.

2. Statement on the lack of justification for the examination procedure and the no-opinion clause

“The Commission recalls that where the legislator departs from the criteria set out in Article 2 of the Regulation 182/2011, its choice for a different procedure should be justified. The Commission considers that the condition for having recourse to examination procedure which

76

is that the implementing act has "substantial implications" relates to the amount of the budget involved and that this condition is not fulfilled in the case of the LIFE programme.

In addition, the Commission underlines that it is contrary to the letter and to the spirit of Regulation 182/2011 (OJ L 55 of 28.2.2011, p. 13) to invoke Article 5 § 4, subparagraph 2, point b) in a systematic manner. Recourse to this provision must respond to a specific need to depart from the rule of principle, which is that the Commission may adopt a draft implementing act when no opinion is delivered. Given that it is an exception to the general rule established by Article 5 (4) recourse to subparagraph 2, point b) cannot be simply seen as a "discretionary power" of the legislator, but must be interpreted in a restrictive manner and thus must be justified”.

3. Statement on the lack of end date

“The Commission underlines that its proposal identifies the budget of the LIFE programme for the period 2021-2027 in line with the corresponding multiannual financial framework, while leaving open-ended the duration of the Programme. This will enhance certainty about continuity of funding under the LIFE Regulation. The Commission confirms that the open-ended duration for the programme is without prejudice to the prerogative of the Commission to present a LIFE successor programme for the next MFF, for full consideration by the co-legislators”.

77


Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the Justice

programme

1. Rapporteur: Josef WEIDENHOLZER (S&D / AT), Heidi HAUTALA (Greens/EFA / FI)



4. Legal basis: Article 81(1) and (2) and Article 82(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

5. Competent Parliamentary Committee: Committee on Legal Affairs (JURI) and Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (LIBE)


78


Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the Rights and

Values programme

1. Rapporteur: Bodil VALERO (Greens/EFA / SE)



4. Legal basis: Articles 16(2), 19(2), 21(2), 24, 167 and 168 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

5. Competent Parliamentary Committee: Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (LIBE) and Committee on Culture and Education (CULT)


79


Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the Connecting Europe Facility and repealing Regulations (EU) No 1316/2013 and (EU) No 283/2014

1. Rapporteur: Henna VIRKKUNEN (EPP / FI), Marian-Jean MARINESCU (EPP / RO), Pavel TELIČKA (ALDE / CZ)




5. Competent Parliamentary Committee: Committee on Transport and Tourism (TRAN) and Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (ITRE)


The voted text reflects the Common Understanding reached at the final trilogue of 7 March 2019. This Common Understanding left aside at this stage all budgetary and certain horizontal provisions, pending further progress on the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF). For these elements, the European Parliament voted their position as adopted in the previous plenary vote of 12 December 2018.

The Commission can support the text of the Common Understanding and has made the following declaration regarding the co-funding rate for missing links under the CEF cohesion envelope, which was transmitted to the European Parliament in advance of the plenary vote:

“The partial agreement reached on 7 March 2019 concerning the Connecting Europe Facility foresees an increase of the co-financing rate for missing links supported under the CEF cohesion envelope to 85 %, in addition to the 85 % exception for cross-border links proposed by the Commission.

The Commission expressed its reservation concerning such increase because it would potentially extend the 85 % co-financing rate to most actions supported under the CEF cohesion envelope and thus introduce an inconsistency with the co-funding rates proposed for the Cohesion Fund in the Common Provisions Regulation.

The Commission regrets that a consistent approach could not be maintained and points out that the partial agreement reached on CEF shall not affect its position regarding the ongoing negotiations on the Common Provisions Regulation.”

Regarding the European Parliament’s position on provisions outside of those reached for the Common Understanding, the Commission retains the position of the Commission proposal for budgetary amounts, the modalities of the Cohesion envelope and certain horizontal provisions. These elements will be negotiated as part of the overall MFF negotiations.

80


Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing

the European Defence Fund

1. Rapporteur: Zdzisław KRASNODĘBSKI (ECR / PL)

2. Reference numbers: 2018/0254 COD / A8-0412/2018 / P8_TA -PROV(2019)0430


4. Legal basis: Article 173(3), Article 182(4), Article 183 and the second paragraph of Article 188 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union


6. Commission's position: The Commission welcomes the first reading of the Parliament reflecting the common understanding reached between the co-legislators on this proposal. The Commission reserves its position on the elements that are excluded from the common understanding and that are linked to the overall Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) agreement.

The following statements were tabled in response to the text of the partial agreement:

“The Commission intends to provide guidance on ethics in defence-related research and development to applicants, as well as to independent experts tasked with ethics screenings and assessments of proposals”.

“When implementing Article 16 of this regulation, which provides for two alternative ways of determining indirect eligible costs, the Commission will respect the principle of sound financial management (and thus principles of economy, efficiency and effectiveness) as embedded in the Financial Regulation”.

81


Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the InvestEU

Programme

1. Rapporteur: José Manuel FERNANDES (EPP / PT), Roberto GUALTIERI (S&D / IT)



4. Legal basis: Article 173 and the third paragraph of Article 175 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

5. Competent Parliamentary Committee: Committee on Budget (BUDG) and Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (ECON)

6. Commission's position: The Commission welcomes the “common understanding” between the European Parliament and the Council and accepts the relevant amendments reflected in the Parliament’s first reading as this preserves the key elements of its proposal:

• the policy steer that will ensure that the InvestEU Guarantee supports high-added value projects in areas that are key for the achievement of the EU’s policy objectives;

• the opening-up of the InvestEU guarantee to implementing partners other than the European Investment Bank (EIB) Group.

The Commission reserves its position on elements that are linked to the overall Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) discussions and not part of the partial agreement with the Council, such as the overall budget figures, the overall climate target and the participation of third countries.

This partial agreement will enable the Commission to proceed with the programme’s preparation with a view to a smooth and prompt implementation upon the start of the next period. Once an overall agreement on the MFF is reached, the text will again go to European Parliament and the Council for adoption.

The Commission will then be able to adopt the two delegated acts foreseen by the legal basis – one setting out the InvestEU Fund’s investment guidelines and another one on the scoreboard of indicators. Swift agreement on the overall MFF would therefore help keep the programme preparation on track.

During the vote, the Commission made the following statement on Member States’ one-off contributions to the InvestEU Member State Compartment and their treatment under the Stability and Growth Pact (SGP). The statement was part of the overall agreement reached in trilogues:

“Without prejudice to the prerogatives of the Council in the implementation of the Stability and Growth Pact, one-off contributions by Member States, either by a Member State or by national promotional banks classified in the general government sector or acting on behalf of

82

a Member State, into thematic or multi-country investment platforms should in principle qualify as one-off measures, within the meaning of Articles 5(1) and 9(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1466/97 and Article 3(4) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1467/97. In addition, without prejudice to the prerogatives of the Council in the implementation of the Stability and Growth Pact, the Commission will consider in future updates of the implementation guidelines of the SGP to what extent the same treatment as for EFSI in the context of the Commission communication on flexibility can be applied to InvestEU as the successor instrument to EFSI with regard to one-off contributions provided by Member States in cash to finance an additional amount of the EU guarantee for the purposes of the Member State compartment”.

83

Part TwoNon-legislative resolutions

84

THE COMMISSION DOES NOT INTEND TO RESPOND FORMALLY TO THE FOLLOWING NON-LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTIONS, ADOPTED BY THE EUROPEAN

PARLIAMENT DURING THE APRIL II 2019 PART-SESSION

Negotiations with Council and Commission on European Parliament's right of inquiry: legislative proposal (2019/2536 (RSP))(PE: B8-0238/2019)Minutes, Part 2, 18 April 2019Commissioner responsible: Frans TIMMERMANS

Secretariat-General

Reason: The Commission will not be responding formally to the requests addressed in the resolution as they were comprehensively addressed in plenary by Commissioner Bieńkowska on behalf of the First Vice-President Frans Timmermans.

Brunei (2019/2692 (RSP))(PE: B8-0242/2019)Minutes, Part 2, 18 April 2019Commissioner responsible: Federica MOGHERINI

European External Action Service

Reason: The Commission will not be responding formally to the requests addressed in the resolution as they were comprehensively addressed in plenary by the High Representative / Vice-President Mogherini.

Cameroon (2019/2691 (RSP))(PE: B8-0245/2019)Minutes, Part 2, 18 April 2019Commissioner responsible: Federica MOGHERINI



China, notably the situation of religious and ethnic minorities (2019/2690 (RSP))(PE: B8-0255/2019)Minutes, Part 2, 18 April 2019Commissioner responsible: Federica MOGHERINI



85

Documents

European Parliament€¦ · Web viewPersistent organic pollutants (recast) Julie GIRLING – A8-0336/2018 CO2 emission performance standards for new heavy-duty vehicles Bas EICKHOUT