28.1.2010   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 21/1

A.

whereas small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) are crucial to Europe's economy, providing over 100 000 000 jobs, contributing to economic growth, being a major source of innovation and promoting gender equality and regional development,

B.

whereas the proposal for a Small Business Act (SBA) for Europe is to be warmly welcomed but will only be effective if there is a concrete commitment to its implementation at Member State and Community level,

C.

whereas the current financial market crisis has made the shortcomings of the present framework for SMEs even more obvious and has heightened the urgency of having their needs better taken into account and of the provisions contained in the SBA being effectively implemented,

1.

Calls on the Member States to confirm that they intend formally to approve the SBA at the Brussels European Council in December 2008 in order to ensure the necessary high visibility, and calls on the Council, when adopting the SBA, to make its provisions binding, in order for it to have a significant and positive effect on the environment for SMEs;

2.

Emphasises the need for the Member States fully to support the implementation of the provisions of the SBAs in order for them to be effective and calls for concrete measures to be taken at both Member State and regional level, to complement the measures adopted at Community level; asks the Member States, therefore, to announce how and within what timeframe the provisions of the SBA will be incorporated into the national regulatory frameworks;

3.

Recalls that, in order to ensure that the provisions of the SBA are effective, a screening system should be set up to monitor its progress and its implementation by the Commission and the Member States; urges that the progress made in the implementation of the provisions of the SBA be included in a stand-alone chapter in the annual reports on the Lisbon Strategy national reform programmes;

4.

Calls on the Commission and the Member States not to forget the ‘real economy’ when tackling the current financial crisis, by providing concrete support for SMEs by ensuring their access to finance in this critical moment; welcomes, in this respect, the new package of the European Investment Bank envisaging EUR 30 000 000 000 for SME loans as agreed by the Council; takes the view that the amount will not be sufficient to solve the current problems of SME financing;

5.

Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States.

28.1.2010   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 21/2

A.

whereas June 2008 marked the tenth anniversary of the European Union Code of Conduct on Arms Exports,

B.

whereas more than three years ago, on 30 June 2005, COARM (the Council Working Party on Conventional Arms) agreed at technical level on the text of a common position as the result of a thorough process of revision of the EU Code of Conduct on Arms Exports, with the aim of transforming the Code into an efficient instrument to control arms exports from EU territory and by EU companies,

C.

whereas adoption of that common position will make the Code a legally binding arms export control instrument for all EU Member States,

D.

whereas despite various calls from Parliament to do so, the Council has since 2005 failed to adopt that common position at political level, leaving the issue unresolved,

E.

whereas this issue has acquired a new sense of urgency owing to a number of developments:

1.

Reiterates forcefully, in the light of the tenth anniversary of the Code, its criticism of the current political impasse caused by the non-adoption of the common position;

2.

Urges the French Presidency, and, if need be, the forthcoming Presidencies, to resolve the issue by ensuring that the common position is adopted without further delay;

3.

Reiterates that the EU's contribution to an internationally binding Arms Trade Treaty will strongly gain in credibility as soon as its own arms exports regime becomes legally binding;

4.

Reiterates that, in parallel with the adoption of the common position, the following measures, inter alia, should be taken:

5.

Is convinced that the adoption of the common position on the Code of Conduct on Arms Exports is vital for the orderly implementation of the impending directive on intra-Community transfers of defence-related goods and for an efficient control of arms exports;

6.

Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States.

28.1.2010   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 21/3

A.

whereas value added tax (VAT) evasion and fraud not only affect the financing of Member States’ budgets, but also the EU own resources system insofar as reductions in the VAT own resource have to be compensated by an increase in the gross national income (GNI) own resource and thus distortions caused by VAT fraud affect the overall balance of the own resource system,

B.

whereas the Commission, in its communication of 31 May 2006 concerning the need to develop a coordinated strategy to improve the fight against fiscal fraud (COM(2006)0254), observed that Member States were not making sufficient use of the possibilities for administrative cooperation offered by the reinforcement of the legal framework under Regulation (EC) No 1798/2003 (3), and considered the level of administrative cooperation to be disproportionate to the volume of intra-Community trade,

C.

whereas the Court of Auditors’ analysis in Special Report No 8/2007 as to whether the information exchanges between Member States are carried out in a timely and effective manner and whether adequate administrative structures and procedures are in place to support administrative cooperation confirmed that the main objective of Regulation (EC) No 1798/2003, i.e. effective administrative cooperation to combat VAT evasion, has not been achieved,

1.

Welcomes the Court of Auditors’ Special Report No 8/2007, which provides an independent assessment of administrative cooperation in the fight against VAT evasion and fraud and analyses Member States’ performance and the Commission's role in great detail; concludes, on the basis of the Court of Auditors’ findings, that Regulation (EC) No 1798/2003 is not an effective tool for administrative cooperation as several Member States obstruct its implementation and the Commission's role is limited;

2.

Is aware of the fact that the actual volume of VAT evasion and fraud is difficult to assess, as many Member States either do not collect or do not publish data; notes that according to estimates quoted by the Court of Auditors, VAT revenue losses amounted to EUR 17 billion in Germany for 2005 and EUR 18,2 billion in the UK for the tax year 2005-2006; notes that the volume of VAT fraud could exceed the volume of the Community's total annual budget;

3.

Welcomes the Commission's initiative to launch a study to obtain solid estimates of the amount of tax fraud, including VAT fraud, in the different Member States; invites the Commission to inform Parliament's competent committees of the findings of the study as soon as they are available;

4.

Urges the Council and the Commission to give a higher priority to the development of a common approach in order to quantify and analyse VAT fraud, which should allow assessment as to whether measures taken by Member States against VAT evasion and fraud are successful, or whether they just trigger a displacement of VAT fraud to other economic sectors or Member States;

5.

Requests the Council, the Commission and the Member States to fully take into account the recommendations of the Contact Committee of the Supreme Audit Institutions of the European Union of December 2007, which include proposals as to how Member States could improve their estimates and how a single model for the estimation of VAT fraud could be established;

6.

Is concerned about the shortcomings identified by the Court of Auditors as regards administrative cooperation between Member States in the field of VAT;

7.

Is worried at the Court of Auditors’ observation that in some Member States basic requirements for effective cooperation were missing; notes the following deficiencies in particular:

8.

Urges Member States to guarantee timely exchange of information on request; is convinced that the proposed amendments to the VAT Directive (4) and to Regulation (EC) No 1798/2003 aiming at shortening the deadlines for the collection and the exchange of information will only produce their full effects if Member States which have not yet done so set up monitoring mechanisms to ensure timely answers to requests; requests the Commission to inform it about the progress made by individual Member States in setting up the monitoring mechanisms and to assess their effectiveness;

9.

Calls on the Council to address the discrepancy between the number of requests for information which a Member State claims to have received and the number of requests other Member States claim to have sent to it, and to solve this problem as a matter of urgency;

10.

Recommends to the Commission that, within their national reform programmes under the Lisbon strategy, Member States report on the implementation of data requirements towards other Member States; considers it important, where data provision from one Member State to another is subject to systematic delay, that infringement procedures be initiated by the Commission against the Member State that delays the provision of data;

11.

Calls on the Commission to facilitate further exchange of best practices and coordination between Member States as regards the organisational arrangements for administrative cooperation;

12.

Invites Member States to fully exploit the possibility of delegating competences as regards information exchange to local tax offices in order to speed up and improve the quality of cooperation; notes that a secured electronic information channel between local offices in different Member States was made available by the Commission in 2007;

13.

Recognises that administrative cooperation at EU level is an essential tool for combating tax fraud; encourages Member States to exploit fully the possibility of setting up effective administrative cooperation between local tax offices, including by means of electronic communication;

14.

Notes that Belgium founded the Eurocanet (European Carousel Network) in order to improve the spontaneous exchange of information; notes that, meanwhile, 24 Member States participate in this exchange of information on companies suspected of being involved in missing trader fraud;

15.

Notes that, according to experts, Eurocanet enables tax administrations to detect VAT fraud quicker as it provides for a comprehensive information exchange, uses the Belgian authorities as a central coordinating point and provides for the involvement of operational administrative anti-fraud services;

16.

Observes however that the efficiency of Eurocanet is reduced by the fact that three big Member States, Germany, Italy and the UK, do not participate; calls on Germany, Italy and the UK to join Eurocanet;

17.

Is worried at the Court of Auditors’ detection of serious weaknesses in the VAT Information Exchange System (VIES) due to delays in collecting and capturing data and problems in correcting wrong data; requests Member States and the Commission to remedy these weaknesses as a matter of urgency by the end of 2008;

18.

Fails to understand why Member States, despite the Commission's efforts to facilitate an agreement, still have not agreed on common criteria for the cancellation of VAT numbers, although the possibility for a quick withdrawal of a VAT number is an essential element in stopping and preventing VAT fraud;

19.

Regrets that simultaneous, multilateral controls are not sufficiently used by Member States, although the Community provides for their funding and the Court of Auditors reports that good results can be achieved;

20.

Regrets, particularly in the light of the abovementioned shortcomings observed by the Court of Auditors with regard to Germany, that Germany did not comply with the Court of Auditors’ audit request; supports the Court of Auditors’ view that Germany's refusal constitutes a breach of its obligations under the EC Treaty; notes that the Commission has started infringement proceedings before the Court of Justice against Germany; invites the Court of Auditors to carry out the planned audit in Germany in the case of a finding of infringement by the Court of Justice;

21.

Notes that the Council's working party on tax questions discussed the Court of Auditors’ Special Report; invites the Council to adopt formal conclusions regarding the Court of Auditors’ findings, as it is done for the other Special Reports during the Commission discharge procedure, before December 2008;

22.

Welcomes the Commission's proposals for amendment of the VAT Directive (5) and of the VAT Administrative Cooperation Regulation (6) designed to speed up the collection and exchange of information on intra-Community transactions from 2010 onwards, and urges the Council to adopt the proposed measures quickly;

23.

Invites the Commission to submit further proposals aimed at reinforcing Member States’ ability to collect non-paid VAT by making traders jointly and severally liable for tax losses in cases where their non-compliance with reporting obligations facilitated the fraud;

24.

Invites the Commission to submit further proposals on automated access by all other Member States to certain non-sensitive data held by Member States on their own taxable persons and on the harmonisation of procedures for the registration and de-registration of persons liable for VAT to ensure the swift detection and de-registration of counterfeit taxable persons;

25.

Notes that, under Regulation (EC) No 1798/2003, the Commission evaluates the functioning of administrative cooperation and pools Member States’ experience; notes the Commission's intention to set up a monitoring system with quantifiable indicators in order to assess whether Member States are able and actually do provide efficient assistance to each other; requests the Commission to inform Parliament of the state of play before the start of the forthcoming discharge procedure;

26.

Notes that the Commission has no access to the content of information exchanged under Regulation (EC) No 1798/2003, but that its role is limited to the maintenance and development of the communication network; agrees with the Court of Auditors that this hampers the Commission's ability to detect the reasons for problems and to put forward solutions;

27.

Notes that Member States refuse to grant the Commission (OLAF) access to the content of the data exchanged under Regulation (EC) No 1798/2003 and to data exchanged in the framework of Eurocanet; notes the position of the Commission (OLAF) that, if it was granted access to the data, it would generate significant added value by providing analysis on trends and newly detected fraudulent schemes from a Community perspective;

28.

Notes that Europol opened an analytical work file on missing trader intra-Community fraud in April 2008, which aims at identifying the organisers of fraud, uncovering their criminal networks and analysing the most common forms of missing trader intra-Community fraud;

29.

Notes the conclusions of the Ecofin Council of 7 October 2008, which agreed to establish a new mechanism to improve cooperation between Member States in order to combat VAT fraud, the so-called ‘Eurofisc’; notes that Eurofisc would build on Eurocanet; further notes that, according to the guidelines adopted by the Ecofin Council, Eurofisc would be a decentralised network for the exchange of information between Member States, would involve all Member States on a voluntary basis and would be organised by agreement of the participating Member States, with the support of the Commission;

30.

Agrees that a strong political impetus is needed in order to achieve substantial improvements in cooperation in the fight against VAT fraud; is, however, convinced that the introduction of Eurofisc can only provide added value if participation in it is compulsory for all Member States in order to avoid the problems encountered by Eurocanet and if the Commission fully participates in the activities of Eurofisc and plays a coordinating role;

31.

Asks the Council to continue negotiations on the proposal for a regulation on mutual administrative assistance in the fight against fraud affecting the financial interests of the European Community, including VAT fraud, which would provide a detailed framework for multidisciplinary administrative anti-fraud cooperation;

32.

Invites the Commission's responsible services, DG Taxation and Customs Union and the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF), to create a task force in order to examine the following questions:

33.

Calls on Member States to remove legal obstacles in national law which hamper cross-border prosecution, in particular in cases where the VAT losses occur in another Member State;

34.

Notes that, according to the Commission, Community revenue resulting from the VAT own resource is protected by the Convention on the protection of the European Community's financial interests of 1995 (7); observes that the Council adopted an explanatory report in 1997 which explicitly excluded VAT from the scope of the Convention; notes that the explanatory report has no legally binding effects; invites the Council to review its interpretation in order to remove legal obstacles hampering the prosecution of cross-border VAT fraud;

35.

Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the Court of Auditors, Europol and Eurojust and the governments and parliaments of the Member States.

28.1.2010   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 21/8

1.

Considers that the continuation of political and economic stabilisation and the creation of democratic institutions in the countries of the Balkans requires the active participation of women (given that they comprise just over half of the population);

2.

Notes with anxiety that gender equality laws and practices (institutional, financial, human) are not fully guaranteed although there is a difference between countries which have started accession negotiations and those which have not;

3.

Stresses the importance of women's equal rights and equal participation in the labour market, which are indispensable for women's economic independence, for national economic growth and for the fight against poverty, to which women are more vulnerable than men;

4.

Notes that women were disproportionately affected by cuts in social services and public spending such as health care, child and family care; points out that these non-wage benefits and services which were previously provided enabled women to participate in paid employment and consequently to reconcile work and family life;

5.

Notes with concern that women, while generally under-represented in the labour market, are over-represented in some (traditionally ‘female’) jobs where their situation, especially in rural areas, is more precarious; in that respect, calls for special measures to avoid the feminisation of ‘lower paid’ sectors; is also concerned that the ‘gender pay gap’ phenomenon exists, and that women have difficulties in setting up their own businesses;

6.

Invites the governments of the countries in the Balkans to establish a legal framework for equal pay for both sexes, to assist women in the reconciliation of private and professional life and to provide good quality, accessible and affordable childcare facilities and care facilities for the elderly to that effect, and in addition to remove obstacles which inhibit female entrepreneurship;

7.

Underlines the importance of education in eliminating stereotypes relating to the social roles of both women and men and cultural stereotypes and the fact that the education system itself should not promote stereotypical patterns, including in career choices;

8.

Draws attention to the generally insufficient healthcare infrastructure, especially in rural areas, and calls on governments to ensure regular screening of cervical and breast cancer for women, and of HIV/AIDS, to which women are more vulnerable than men; stresses the importance of psychological and medical rehabilitation of female war victims;

9.

Considers that women in the Balkans, who have been victims of war, should no longer be seen only as war victims but rather as actors of stabilisation and conflict resolution; stresses that women in the Balkans in general can only fulfil this role once equally represented in political and economic decision-making; welcomes quotas and calls on the countries which have not done so already, to promote female representation and, where necessary, to apply quotas effectively in political parties and national assemblies, and encourages the countries which have already done so to continue this process in order to ensure that women can participate in political life and overcome their under-representation, with a view to removing the ‘glass ceiling’ once and for all and to implement positive action to ensure that women and men learn about and engage with citizenship from an early age;

10.

Notes with concern that, despite the legislative framework recently put in place in most of the Balkan countries, domestic violence and verbal abuse remain present; therefore invites the countries concerned to take measures to create shelters for victims and to ensure that law enforcement institutions, legal authorities and public servants are more sensitive to this phenomenon;

11.

Stresses that domestic violence is even more widespread than existing data show and that relevant statistics and data are fragmented, poorly collected and not standardised, even in the countries that have adopted specific legislation in this field;

12.

Underlines the importance of awareness-raising campaigns in the fight against stereotypes, discrimination (gender-based, cultural, religion-based) and domestic violence, and for gender equality in general; notes that these campaigns should be complemented by the promotion of a positive picture through female role models in the media and advertising, educational materials and the Internet;

13.

Welcomes the recent evolution of the legislative and institutional framework which reflects a strong commitment to ensuring equal opportunities for women and men in the countries concerned; at the same time reiterates that strong measures are needed so that these provisions can be fully implemented in practice;

14.

Calls on Balkan governments to take action to pave the way for implementation of an integrated approach to gender equality at all levels and in all areas of social and political life;

15.

Calls on all Member States which have not yet done so to accept National Plans for the implementation of the above mentioned UN Security Council Resolution and to implement them when dealing with the Balkan countries;

16.

Notes with anxiety that the countries of the Balkans are transit countries in the process of trafficking in human beings and that generally women and children are the victims of the trafficking; stresses that gender equality, awareness-raising campaigns, measures against corruption and organised crime are essential in order to prevent negative phenomena in the Balkan countries such as prostitution and trafficking and to protect potential victims;

17.

Calls on the Balkan countries to take urgent action to prevent prostitution, and more specifically child prostitution and pornography, to strengthen penalties for coercion into, or incitement to, prostitution and/or participation in the creation of pornographic materials, and to criminalise child pornography on the Internet;

18.

Stresses the importance of NGOs and women's organisations in identifying women's problems and in finding adequate solutions, particularly the Gender Task Force under the Stability Pact for South-Eastern Europe, in developing the democratic processes and stability in the region; encourages the work of these NGOs and suggests the sharing of best practice in the field of gender equality among the countries concerned, as well as with European NGO networks;

19.

Calls on the Commission to provide pre-accession funds for strengthening women's rights in the Balkans, in particular through women's NGOs and women's organisations;

20.

Calls on the Commission closely to monitor and to press for the fulfilment of the Copenhagen Criteria, in particular in relation to equal opportunities for women and men and women's rights in the candidate and potential candidate countries; invites the candidate and potential candidate countries of the Balkans to harmonise their anti-discrimination and gender equality legislation with the acquis communautaire in view of possible future accession;

21.

Calls on the Commission to ensure that its policy laid down in the above mentioned communication of 5 March 2008, which is directed at strengthening NGOs in the Western Balkans, should be particularly focused on the empowerment of women's participation in civil society;

22.

Stresses that Roma women suffer from multiple discrimination (racial, ethnic, gender), and are more vulnerable to poverty and social exclusion; therefore a differentiated approach is needed to tackle these problems; Roma women in particular encounter prejudice in many countries and are affected by lack of citizenship, have limited access to quality education, face inadequate living conditions, are unable to access healthcare services and encounter high unemployment and low levels of political and public participation in society;

23.

Notes with concern the lack of up-to-date statistical information and indicators which would assist in the assessment of the situation of women in the Balkans;

24.

Calls on the candidate and potential candidate countries in the Balkans to guarantee the elimination of all forms of discrimination and prejudice against women who suffer from multiple discrimination, especially the Roma; calls on the Balkan countries to introduce an effective and practical antidiscrimination strategy to be implemented at all levels (national and local);

25.

Calls on the European Institute for Gender Equality also to monitor gender equality in the countries of the Balkans with special attention on candidate countries;

26.

Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission, the governments and the Parliaments of the Member States and the candidate and potential candidate countries concerned.

28.1.2010   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 21/11

A.

whereas the number of cormorants (Phalacrocorax carbo) has been rapidly growing on the territory of the European Union, with the total population having grown twenty-fold over the past 25 years and now estimated to comprise at least 1,7 to 1,8 million birds,

B.

whereas proven and sustained damage has been suffered by aquaculture undertakings and stocks of many wild fish species in the inland waterways and along sea coasts in many Member States,

C.

whereas implementing an ecosystem approach to the management of marine and coastal areas and inland waterways requires a balanced policy which can reconcile the differing but entirely legitimate objectives of the sustainable use of fish stocks: bird conservation and the maintenance of diverse bird and fish fauna, on the one hand, and the legitimate interest of fishermen and fish farmers in the commercial use of fish stocks, on the other; whereas, furthermore, Council Regulation (EC) No 1100/2007 of 18 September 2007 establishing measures for the recovery of the stock of European eel (5) sets an example for a balanced policy of this type,

D.

whereas, moreover, in many Member States cormorants have caused proven permanent damage to vegetation in certain geographical areas,

E.

whereas there is at present no adequate bilateral or multilateral scientific or administrative coordination, either within the EU or with the third countries concerned, to address this phenomenon and counteract this trend, particularly with a view to collecting reliable and generally recognised data on the total cormorant population in the EU,

F.

whereas the sub-species Phalacrocorax carbo sinensis (‘continental cormorant’) was deleted from the list of bird species to which special conservation measures in terms of habitat apply as far back as 1997 (Annex I to the Wild Birds Directive), since it had attained a favourable conservation status by 1995 at the latest, whilst the sub-species Phalacrocorax carbo carbo (‘Atlantic cormorant’), which had never been endangered, was never included on that list at all,

G.

whereas Article 9(1)(a), third indent, of the Wild Birds Directive permits the Member States to take temporary measures to prevent ‘serious damage’, provided that this does not jeopardise the conservation aims of the Directive (specifically, the favourable conservation status of the bird species in question),

H.

whereas the risk of serious damage increases disproportionately the closer the cormorant population in a given region approaches the carrying capacity of the region's large bodies of water, thus at the same time greatly reducing the effectiveness of local protective measures,

I.

whereas the term ‘serious damage’, which is not clearly defined in Article 9(1)(a), third indent, of the Wild Birds Directive and is the criterion permitting Member States to take direct action to regulate a bird population, has led to considerable legal uncertainty in national administrations and represents a major potential source of social conflict,

J.

whereas the conclusions of the international committees of experts on the cormorant problem in Europe are fundamentally contradictory, as the concluding reports by Redcafe (6), FRAP (7) and EIFAC (8) show,

K.

whereas, although the approval and funding of measures to restrict cormorant damage falls within the area of responsibility of the Member States and/or regions, the migratory nature of the cormorant means that sustainable management of populations can only be ensured by coordinated action by all affected Member States and regions with the help of the European Union,

L.

whereas the Commission, in its abovementioned Communication entitled ‘A strategy for the sustainable development of European aquaculture’, in the section headed ‘Predation by protected species’, states that: ‘Aquaculture facilities may suffer from predation by some protected wild species of birds and mammals. Predation may significantly reduce the profitability of an aquaculture enterprise and predator control is difficult, especially in large extensive ponds or lagoons. The efficacy of scaring devices is doubtful, because animals quickly become used to them. In the case of cormorants, probably the only protection for fisheries and aquaculture activities consists in the management of the still-growing wild populations’,

M.

whereas the Council, at its meeting of 27 and 28 January 2003 stated, in connection with a strategy for the sustainable development of European aquaculture, that it ‘is also necessary to develop a common strategy on fish-eating animals (for instance, cormorants)’,

N.

whereas according to the Guidelines for Population Level Management Plans for Large Carnivores (9) recently issued by the Commission, particularly as regards the clarification of the terms ‘favourable conservation status’ and ‘minimum viable population’, it may be easier to achieve conservation aims if the number of individuals of a species is kept below an area's theoretical maximum carrying capacity,

O.

whereas the wide variety of national, regional and local measures attempted so far have clearly had only a very limited impact in restricting damage by cormorant populations,

P.

whereas in recent years the resources available for data collection in the fisheries sector (e.g. budget heading 11 07 02: Support for the management of fishery resources (improvement of scientific advice)) have not been fully exploited,

Q.

whereas the derogations for local damage prevention currently in force in nearly all Member States under Article 9 of the Wild Birds Directive have not led to a sustainable alleviation of the problem in spite of considerable administrative expenditure and social costs,

R.

whereas, in spite of repeated requests from those affected (fishermen's and anglers’ associations, aquaculture undertakings, etc.), from the scientific world and from bodies and delegations from the Member States and regions, the Commission has not been prepared to submit new proposals to resolve this Europe-wide problem,

1.

Calls on the Commission and the Member States, by promoting regular scientific research, to provide reliable and generally recognised data on the total size and structure of cormorant populations in Europe, as well as their fertility and mortality parameters;

2.

Proposes that, by means of systematic monitoring of cormorant populations supported by the EU and the Member States, a reliable, generally recognised and annually updated database should be drawn up on the development, size and geographical distribution of cormorant populations in Europe, with closer involvement on the part of fishery research institutes and fishery authorities;

3.

Calls on the Commission to put out to tender, and finance, a scientific project aimed at supplying an estimation model for the size and structure of the total cormorant population on the basis of currently available data on breeding population, fertility and mortality;

4.

Calls on the Commission and the Member States to foster in an appropriate manner the creation of suitable conditions for bilateral and multilateral scientific and administrative exchanges, both within the EU and with third countries, identifying the origin of the findings, communications, contributions or publications, and in particular the statistics, in such a way as to make clear whether they come from academic or official sources or from associations, in particular nature and bird conservation associations;

5.

Calls on the Commission to carry out a comparative study of the contradictory conclusions concerning a cormorant management plan reached by Redcafe, on the one hand, and FRAP and EIFAC, on the other;

6.

Calls on the Commission to set up a working party with a binding mandate to carry out within one year a systematic cost-benefit analysis of possible cormorant management actions at Member State level, to assess their credibility on the basis of logical and scientific criteria and to submit a recommendation; the composition of the working party should reflect the degree to which the stakeholders are affected;

7.

Calls on the Commission to submit a cormorant population management plan in several stages, coordinated at European level and seeking to integrate cormorant populations into the environment as developed and cultivated by man in the long term without jeopardising the objectives of the Wild Birds Directive or Natura 2000 as regards fish species and marine and freshwater ecosystems;

8.

Urges the Commission, in the interests of greater legal certainty and uniform interpretation, to provide without delay a clear definition of the term ‘serious damage’ as used in Article 9(1)(a), third indent, of the Wild Birds Directive;

9.

Calls on the Commission also to produce more generalised guidance on the nature of the derogations allowed under Article 9(1) of the Wild Birds Directive, including further clarification of the terminology where any ambiguity may exist;

10.

Urges the Commission and the Member States to promote the sustainable management of cormorant populations by means of increased scientific and administrative coordination, cooperation and communication, and to create appropriate conditions for the drafting of a Europe-wide cormorant population management plan;

11.

Calls on the Commission to consider all the legal means at its disposal to reduce the negative effects of cormorant populations on fishing and aquaculture and to take into account, when developing its initiative for the promotion of aquaculture in Europe, the positive effects of a Europe-wide cormorant population management plan and, where appropriate, to propose solutions to the cormorant problem in this context;

12.

Calls on the Commission and the Member States to make some of the funds earmarked in the EU budget for data collection in the fisheries sector, in particular under heading 11 07 02: ‘Support for the management of fishery resources (improvement of scientific advice)’, available for investigations, analyses and forecasts of the cormorant population on the territory of the European Union, in preparation for the future regular monitoring of these species;

13.

Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States.

28.1.2010   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 21/16

1.

Approves the proposal for a Council decision as amended and approves conclusion of the agreement;

2.

Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and Commission, and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and the Republic of Korea.

28.1.2010   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 21/17

1.

Approves the Commission proposal as amended;

2.

Calls on the Commission to alter its proposal accordingly, pursuant to Article 250(2) of the EC Treaty;

3.

Calls on the Council to notify Parliament if it intends to depart from the text approved by Parliament;

4.

Asks the Council to consult Parliament again if it intends to amend the Commission proposal substantially;

5.

Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and the Commission.

28.1.2010   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 21/21

1.

Approves the Council text;

2.

Calls on the Council to notify Parliament if it intends to depart from the text approved by Parliament;

3.

Asks the Council to consult Parliament again if it intends to amend the text submitted for consultation substantially;

4.

Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and the Commission.

28.1.2010   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 21/22

A.

whereas, according to the Consultative Working Party of the Legal Services of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission, the proposal in question does not include any substantive amendments other than those identified as such in the proposal and whereas, as regards the codification of the unchanged provisions of the earlier acts together with those amendments, the proposal contains a straightforward codification of the existing texts, without any change in their substance,

1.

Approves the Commission proposal as adapted to the recommendations of the Consultative Working Party of the Legal Services of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission;

2.

Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend its proposal substantially or replace it with another text;

3.

Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and the Commission.

28.1.2010   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 21/23

1.

Approves the Commission proposal as amended;

2.

Approves the two joint statements of the Parliament, the Council and the Commission annexed hereto;

3.

Considers that the reference amount indicated in the legislative proposal is not compatible with the ceiling of heading 4 of the multi-annual financial framework without adjusting the ceiling in accordance with the provisions laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission, of 17 May 2006, on budgetary discipline and sound financial management (1) (IIA); considers that the financing of this facility instrument should not jeopardise the financing of other priorities and current commitments of the European Union;

4.

Stresses that the provisions of Point 14 of the IIA shall be applied in the event that the legislative authority decides in favour of the adoption of the legislative proposal; stresses that Parliament will enter into negotiations with the other arm of the budgetary authority with a view to reaching a timely agreement on the financing of this facility instrument;

5.

Considers that, in the course of these negotiations, the two arms of the budgetary authority should examine all possibilities of financing, including the extension of the Emergency Aid Reserve; considers that this total financing must not exceed EUR 1 billion;

6.

Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and the Commission.

28.1.2010   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 21/24

1.

Approves the Commission proposal as amended;

2.

Calls on the Commission to alter its proposal accordingly, pursuant to Article 250(2) of the EC Treaty;

3.

Calls on the Council to notify Parliament if it intends to depart from the text approved by Parliament;

4.

Asks the Council to consult Parliament again if it intends to amend the Commission proposal substantially;

5.

Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and the Commission.

28.1.2010   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 21/27

1.

Approves the Commission proposal as amended;

2.

Calls on the Commission to alter its proposal accordingly, pursuant to Article 250(2) of the EC Treaty;

3.

Calls on the Council to notify Parliament if it intends to depart from the text approved by Parliament;

4.

Asks the Council to consult Parliament again if it intends to amend the Commission proposal substantially;

5.

Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and the Commission.