29.8.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 285/1

29.8.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 285/2

—

having regard to Article 225 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU),

—

having regard to Articles 2 and 3 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU),

—

having regard to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and namely its Articles 23, 24, and 25,

—

having regard to its resolution of 24 March 2009 on combating female genital mutilation in the EU (1), and its resolution of 14 June 2012 on ending female genital mutilation (2),

—

having regard to its declaration of 22 April 2009 on the ‘Say NO to Violence against Women’ campaign (3),

—

having regard to its resolution of 26 November 2009 on the elimination of violence against women (4),

—

having regard to its resolution of 5 April 2011 on priorities and outline of a new EU policy framework to fight violence against women (5),

—

having regard to its resolution of 6 February 2013 on the 57th session on UN CSW: elimination and prevention of all forms of violence against women and girls (6),

—

having regard to its resolution of 11 October 2007 on the murder of women (feminicide) in Mexico and Central America and the role of the European Union in fighting the phenomenon (7),

—

having regard to the Commission's Strategy for equality between women and men 2010-2015 which was presented on 21 September 2010,

—

having regard to the Commission’s Action Plan Implementing the Stockholm Programme (COM(2010)0171),

—

having regard to the 2014-2020 Rights, Equality and Citizenship Programme,

—

having regard to the EPSCO Council Conclusions of 8 March 2010 on the eradication of violence against women,

—

having regard to Directive 2011/93/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on combating the sexual abuse of children and child pornography and replacing Council Framework Decision 2004/68/JHA (8),

—

having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 18 September 2012 on ‘Eradicating domestic violence against women’ (9),

—

having regard to the EU guidelines on violence against women and girls and combating all forms of discrimination against them,

—

having regard to the Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence (Istanbul Convention),

—

having regard to Article 11(1)(d) of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, adopted by the UN General Assembly by Resolution 34/180 of 18 December 1979,

—

having regard to the provisions of the UN legal instruments in the sphere of human rights, in particular those concerning women’s rights, such as the UN Charter, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenants on Civil and Political Rights and on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the Convention for the Suppression of the Traffic in Persons and of the Exploitation of the Prostitution of Others, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) and its Optional Protocol, the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, and the principle of non-refoulement, the United Nations Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities,

—

having regard to other UN instruments on violence against women, such as the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action of 25 June 1993 adopted by the World Conference on Human Rights (A/CONF. 157/23) and the Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women of 20 December 1993 (A/RES/48/104),

—

having regard to the UN General Assembly resolutions of 12 December 1997 entitled ‘Crime prevention and criminal justice measures to eliminate violence against women’ (A/RES/52/86), of 18 December 2002 entitled ‘Working towards the elimination of crimes against women committed in the name of honour’ (A/RES/57/179), and of 22 December 2003 entitled ‘Elimination of domestic violence against women’ (A/RES/58/147) and of the UN General Assembly resolution of 5 March 2013 entitled ‘Intensifying global efforts for the elimination of female genital mutilations’ (A/RES/67/146),

—

having regard to the reports by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights’ Special Rapporteurs on violence against women and to General Recommendation No 19 adopted by the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (11th session, 1992),

—

having regard to the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action adopted by the Fourth World Conference on Women on 15 September 1995 and to Parliament’s resolutions of 18 May 2000 on the follow-up to the Beijing Action Platform (10) and of 10 March 2005 on the follow-up to the Fourth World Conference on Women — Platform for Action (Beijing+10) (11) and of 25 February 2010 on Beijing + 15 — UN Platform for Action for Gender Equality (12),

—

having regard to the UN General Assembly resolution of 19 December 2006 entitled ‘Intensification of efforts to eliminate all forms of violence against women’ (A/RES/61/143), and to UN Security Council Resolutions 1325 and 1820 on women, peace and security,

—

having regard to the Conclusions of the 57th session of the Commission on the Status of Women on the elimination and prevention of all forms of violence against women and girls,

—

having regard to the UN Report of the Special Rapporteur on violence against women, its causes and consequences, Rashida Manjoo, of 16 May 2012,

—

having regard to article 5 of the Madrid International Action Plan on Ageing,

—

having regard to the European Added Value Assessment (13),

—

having regard to Rules 42 and 48 of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality and the opinion of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (A7-0075/2014),

A.

whereas in Directive 2012/29/EU (14) establishing minimum standards on the rights, support and protection of victims of crime, gender-based violence is defined as violence that is directed against a person because of that person's gender, gender identity or gender expression or that affects persons of a particular gender disproportionately; whereas it may result in physical, sexual, emotional or psychological harm, or economic loss, to the victim and is understood to be a form of discrimination and a violation of the fundamental freedoms of the victim and includes violence in close relationships, sexual violence (including rape, sexual assault and harassment), trafficking in human beings, slavery, and different forms of harmful practices, such as forced marriages, female genital mutilation and so-called ‘honour crimes’;

B.

whereas gender-based violence involves victims and perpetrators of all ages, educational backgrounds, incomes and social positions and is linked to the unequal distribution of power between women and men and to ideas and behaviours based on stereotypes in our society which need to be combated at the earliest stage with a view to changing attitudes;

C.

whereas women are increasingly being subjected to violence at the hands of husbands, partners, ex-husbands, or former partners; whereas in some countries the number of victims has risen sharply and the consequences that they suffer have shown a tendency to become far more serious, extending even to death and statistics show, the number of women killed is accounting for a growing proportion of the total murders;

D.

whereas statistical surveys in some countries show that although the number of murders has not risen overall, the number of women killed is accounting for a growing proportion of the total, proving that violence against women is increasing;

E.

whereas extreme poverty increases the risk of violence and other forms of exploitation that hamper the full participation of women in all areas of life and the achievement of gender equality;

F.

whereas greater independence and social and economic involvement makes women less vulnerable and reduces gender-based violence;

G.

whereas new stereotypes, and forms of discrimination and violence have arisen recently from the growing use of online social networks, like abusive grooming practices targeting namely teenagers;

H.

whereas sexist attitudes amongst the younger generation about gender roles are persistent; young women who are victims of violence continue to be blamed and stigmatised by their peers and the rest of society;

I.

whereas violence is a traumatic experience for any man, woman or child, but gender-based violence is more often inflicted by men on women and girls, and both reflects and reinforces inequalities between men and women and compromises the health, dignity, security and autonomy of its victims;

J.

whereas children who have witnessed violence to a close relative have to be taken into consideration and cared for from the point of view of the necessary psychological treatment and welfare provisions, furthermore whereas children who have witnessed violence are at great risk of being affected by emotional and relationship problems;

K.

whereas women victims of gender-based violence and their children often require special support and protection because of the high risk of secondary and repeat victimisation, of intimidation and of retaliation connected with such violence;

L.

whereas women and children who experience violence need specific shelters where they would be offered adequate health care services, legal assistance and psychological counselling and therapy; whereas women’s shelters should be given adequate funding by the Member States;

M.

whereas male violence against women alters women’s place in society and their self-determination in terms of their health, access to employment and education, integration into social and cultural activities, economic independence, participation in public and political life and decision-making, and relations with men as well as gaining self-respect;

N.

whereas violence against women can leave deep physical and psychological scars, damage the general health of women and girls, including their reproductive and sexual health, and in some instances results in death, also called feminicide;

O.

whereas there is a need for education and training from a very young age to combat violence against women and gender based violence in general as it develops the skills for young people to treat their partners with respect regardless of their gender and to be aware of the principles of equality;

P.

whereas violence against women is assuming ever more unacceptable forms, including membership of women in groups organising the trafficking of women for sexual exploitation;

Q.

whereas studies on violence against women estimate that one-fifth to one-quarter of all women in Europe have experienced physical acts of violence at least once during their adult lives, and more than one-tenth have suffered sexual violence involving the use of force (15);

R.

whereas, according to the European Added Value Assessment, the annual cost to the EU of gender-based violence against women is estimated at EUR 228 billion in 2011 (i.e 1,8 % of EU GDP), of which EUR 45 billion a year in public and state services and EUR 24 billion of lost economic output;

S.

whereas the Fundamental Rights Agency issued in March 2013 some preliminary results of its European survey on violence against women, showing inter alia that: four in five women did not turn to any service, such as healthcare, social services, or victim support, following the most serious incidents of violence by people other than their partners; women who sought help were most likely to turn to medical services, highlighting the need to ensure that healthcare professionals can address the needs of victims of violence; two in five women were unaware of laws or political initiatives to protect them in cases of domestic violence, and half were unaware of any preventative laws or initiatives;

T.

whereas the Commission stressed in its Strategy for gender equality 2010-2015 that gender-based violence is one of the key problems to be addressed in order to achieve genuine gender equality;

U.

whereas the legal framework defined by the Lisbon Treaty offers new opportunities for increasing cooperation on criminal justice policy at EU level, enabling institutions and Member States to work together, on firm foundations, in establishing a common EU legal culture to combat all types of violence and discrimination against women, in respect of national legal systems and traditions without replacing them;

V.

whereas awareness raising and mobilization, including through media and social media, is an important component of an effective prevention strategy;

W.

whereas no single intervention will eliminate violence against women, but a combination of infrastructural, legal, judicial, enforcement, cultural, educational, social, health, and other service-related actions can significantly raise awareness and reduce violence and its consequences;

X.

whereas the six inseparable goals underlying any measures to combat violence against women are policy, prevention, protection, prosecution, provision and partnership;

Y.

whereas it is important to step up action against the industry which perceives young girls and women as sexual objects;

Z.

whereas women in the Union are not equally protected against male violence, due to differing policies and legislation across Member States, as regards among other the definition of offenses and the scope of the legislation, and are therefore vulnerable to such violence;

AA.

whereas, due to factors such as race, ethnicity, religion or belief, health, civil status, housing, migration status, age, disability, class, sexual orientation and gender identity, women may have special needs and be more vulnerable to multiple discriminations;

AB.

whereas in many cases women fail to lodge complaints against acts of gender-based violence against them, for reasons that are complex and diverse and include psychological, economic, social and cultural factors, and because they may also lack trust in the ability of the police, the legal system, and social and health services to concretely help them; whereas in some cases the authorities consider gender-based violence to be a family problem and hence one that can be resolved at that level;

AC.

whereas reproductive health policy should be at the heart of this debate;

AD.

whereas it is essential to gather comparable disaggregated qualitative and quantitative data, covering all aspects of the problem, in order to comprehend the real extent of violence against women in the Union and hence produce effective policies;

AE.

whereas the rejection on 12 December 2012 by the European Parliament of the Commission's proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on European statistics on safety from crime (16) reiterates the need for a new proposal for EU legislation which establishes a coherent system for collecting statistics on violence against women in the Member States, and whereas the Council, in its conclusions of December 2012, called for improvements to the collection and dissemination of comparable, reliable and regularly updated data concerning all forms of violence against women at both national and EU level;

AF.

whereas Female Genital Mutilations (FGM) is recognised internationally as a violation of human rights, a form of torture against girls and women, and reflects a deep-rooted inequality between the sexes; whereas FGM constitutes an extreme form of discrimination against women, is nearly always carried out on minors and is a violation of the rights of children;

AG.

whereas prostitution may be viewed as a type of violence against women, owing to the effect this has on their physical and mental health, especially in cases of forced prostitution and of trafficking in women for the purpose of prostitution;

AH.

whereas there is an increasing dangerous trend of honour killings within the borders of the Union, a trend which mostly affects young girls;

AI.

whereas elder abuse is recognized internationally as a violation of human rights of older women, as well as the need to prevent and fight elder abuse in all EU countries;

AJ.

whereas the adoption of EU guidelines on Violence against Women and girls and combating all forms of discrimination against them as well as the specific chapter on the protection of women against gender-based violence in the EU Human Rights Strategic Framework and Action Plan are marking the EU’s clear political will to treat the subject of women’s rights as a priority and to take long-term action in that field; whereas coherence between the internal and external dimensions in polices concerning human rights can sometimes expose a gap between rhetoric and behaviour;

AK.

whereas, according to the Commission and to Amnesty International reports, FGM concern hundreds of thousands of women and girls in Europe and the figure of 500 000 victims is commonly cited; whereas the disparities between legal provisions in Member States are leading to the phenomenon of so-called cross border ‘FGM tourism’ within the EU;

AL.

whereas there is a continuing need for the EU to work with third countries to eradicate the violent practice of FGM; whereas those Member States and third countries with national legislation criminalising FGM should act on this legislation;

1.

Requests the Commission to submit, by the end of 2014, on the basis of Article 84 TFEU, a proposal for an act establishing measures to promote and support the action of Member States in the field of prevention of violence against women and girls (VAWG), following the detailed recommendations set out in the Annex hereto;

2.

Calls on the Commission to submit a revised proposal for a Regulation on European statistics that would target violent crimes and include a coherent system for collecting statistics on gender-based violence in the Member States;

3.

Asks the Council to activate the passerelle clause, by adopting a unanimous decision identifying violence against women and girls (and other forms of gender based violence) as an area of crime listed in Article 83(1) TFEU;

4.

Calls on the Commission to promote national ratifications and launch the procedure for the accession of the EU to the Istanbul Convention on violence against women, once it has evaluated the impact and added value the latter would have;

5.

Requests the Commission to present an EU-wide Strategy and an Action Plan to combat all forms of violence against women and girls (VAWG), as foreseen in 2010 in the Action plan implementing the Stockholm programme, with the aim of protecting women’s integrity, equality (Article 2 TEU), and well-being (Article 3(1) TEU) tangibly and effectively in an area of freedom, security and justice, focusing in particular on making women aware of their rights and men and boys (from an early age) of the need to respect women’s physical and psychological integrity, in order to help prevent such violence, stressing the need for police and judicial services to be given proper training in dealing with the specific challenges of gender-based violence, and encouraging Member States to make arrangements to help victims rebuild their lives and recover their self-confidence, so as to guard against future vulnerability or dependence; considers that such strategy should devote particular attention to vulnerable groups such as older persons, people with disabilities, immigrants and LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) persons and that it should also comprise measures to support children who have witnessed violence and recognise them as victims of crime;

6.

Calls on the Commission to promote the collaboration between Member States and women NGOs and organisations in order to prepare and implement an efficient strategy to eliminate violence against women;

7.

Encourages the Commission to adopt the first steps towards establishing a European Observatory on Violence Against Women and girls, building on existing institutional structures (European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE)) and directed by a EU Coordinator on VAWG;

8.

Urges the Commission to establish in the next three years an EU Year to End Violence against Women and Girls with the aim of raising awareness among citizens and among all politicians of this widespread problem which affects all the Member States, with a view to presenting a clear plan of action to end violence against women;

9.

Calls on the Member States to combat honour killings by providing education and shelter for possible victims and to mobilise awareness campaigns of the extreme form of human rights abuses and the numbers of tragic deaths caused by honour killings;

10.

Calls on the Member States and stakeholders, working with the Commission, to help disseminate information about EU programmes and the funding available under them to combat violence against women;

11.

Confirms that the recommendations respect fundamental rights and the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality;

12.

Considers that the financial implications of the requested proposal should be covered by the Union budget, Section III (ensuring full complementarity with existing budget line relating to the subject of the proposal);

13.

Instructs its President to forward this resolution and the accompanying detailed recommendations to the Commission and the Council, and to the parliaments and governments of the Member States, to the Council of Europe and to EIGE.

29.8.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 285/11

—

having regard to Articles 290 and 291 of the Treaty of the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU),

—

having regard to Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member States of the Commission's exercise of implementing powers (1),

—

having regard to the Common Understanding on Delegated Acts, as approved on 3 March 2011 by the Conference of Presidents,

—

having regard to the Framework Agreement on relations between the European Parliament and the European Commission (2), in particular point 15 thereof and Annex 1 thereto,

—

having regard to the judgment of the Court of Justice of 5 September 2012 in Case C-355/10, Parliament v Council (not yet reported), and the pending Case C-427/12, Commission v European Parliament and Council of the European Union,

—

having regard to its resolution of 5 May 2010 on the power of legislative delegation (3),

—

having regard to the information report of the European Economic and Social Committee, adopted on 19 September 2013, on Better regulation: implementing acts and delegated acts,

—

having regard to the letter of 26 November 2012 from the President of Parliament to the Chair of the Conference of Committee Chairs concerning the horizontal principles for the use of delegated acts in relation to the legislative programmes covered by the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF), as endorsed by the Conference of Presidents at its meeting of 15 November 2012,

—

having regard to the letter of 8 February 2013 from the President of Parliament to the Presidents of the Council and of the Commission concerning the lack of progress in the Council with regard to the alignment proposals in the fields of agriculture and fisheries,

—

having regard to Rule 48 of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs and the opinions of the Committee on Development, the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs, the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety, the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy, the Committee on Transport and Tourism, the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development, the Committee on Fisheries, and the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (A7-0435/2013),

A.

whereas the Lisbon Treaty introduced the possibility for Parliament and the Council (together referred to as ‘the legislator’) to delegate part of its own powers to the Commission in a legislative act (‘the basic act’); whereas delegation is a delicate operation whereby the Commission is instructed to exercise a power which is intrinsic to the legislator's own role; whereas it is therefore necessary to ensure the correct application of the Treaty, so as to guarantee a sufficient level of democratic legitimacy for delegated acts as well; whereas the starting-point in examining the issue of delegation must therefore always be the freedom of the legislator; whereas according to settled case-law, the adoption of rules essential to the subject matter envisaged is reserved to the legislator; which means that the adoption of provisions requiring political decisions that fall within the responsibility of the legislator cannot be delegated; whereas therefore that delegated power can only consist in supplementing or amending parts of a legislative act that are not essential; whereas the resulting delegated acts adopted by the Commission will be non-legislative acts of general scope; whereas the basic act must explicitly define the objective, content, scope and duration of that delegation, and must lay down the conditions to which the delegation is subject;

B.

whereas in order to set out the practical arrangements and agreed clarifications and preferences applicable to delegations of legislative power in accordance with Article 290 TFEU, Parliament, the Council and the Commission agreed on a Common Understanding on Delegated Acts with a view to a smooth exercise of delegated power and an effective control of that power by the European Parliament and the Council;

C.

whereas the Treaties provide that Member States are to adopt all measures of national law necessary to implement legally binding Union acts; whereas, however, where uniform conditions for implementing legally binding Union acts are needed, those acts are to confer implementing powers on the Commission (and in certain exceptional cases on the Council), as laid down in Article 291 TFEU; whereas where the basic act requires that the adoption of implementing acts by the Commission must be subject to control by the Member States, the basic act should confer those implementing powers on the Commission in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011; whereas a key commitment made by the Commission in a statement annexed to that Regulation was the urgent alignment of the acquis to the new system of delegated and implementing acts to be completed during the current legislative term, including basic acts referring to the regulatory procedure with scrutiny (RPS);

D.

whereas it is for the legislator to determine, on a case-by case basis, the level of detail of each legislative act and thereby also to decide whether to delegate any power to the Commission to adopt delegated acts as well as whether there will be any need for powers to ensure uniform conditions for implementing the legislative act; whereas the conferral of such delegated or implementing powers is never an obligation; whereas such conferral should however be considered where flexibility and efficiency are needed and cannot be delivered by means of the ordinary legislative procedure; whereas the decision as to whether to confer delegated or implementing powers must be based on objective factors which must permit judicial review of the solution adopted; whereas the absence of case law on Article 290 TFEU and on the criteria laid down therein has made it more difficult for the European Parliament and Council to agree on a delimitation between implementing and delegated acts;

E.

whereas the delegation of power to the Commission is not merely a technical issue but can involve questions of considerable political importance for Union citizens and consumers, enterprises and entire sectors, on account of their possible socio-economic, environmental and health impacts;

F.

whereas legislative negotiations on many files have shown divergent interpretations among the institutions on certain issues; whereas, in accordance with Rule 37a of its Rules of Procedure, Parliament's committees may request an opinion from the Committee on Legal Affairs when scrutinising a proposal which provides for delegated acts; whereas the Conference of Presidents on 13 January 2012 endorsed a common line, and on 19 April 2012 endorsed a horizontal approach to be followed by individual committees in order to overcome differences of opinion; whereas that common line needs to be taken one step further by Parliament setting out its own criteria for the application of Articles 290 and 291 TFEU and by endeavouring to agree on such criteria with the Council and the Commission;

1.

Considers that the following non-binding criteria should be followed by Parliament in applying Articles 290 and 291 TFEU; this list of criteria should not be considered as exhaustive:

2.

Urges the Commission and the Council to enter into negotiations with Parliament in order to reach an agreement on the above-mentioned criteria; considers that this can be achieved within the framework of a revision of the Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making that would include such criteria;

3.

Reiterates the decisions taken by the Conference of Presidents at its meetings on 13 January 2011 and 19 April 2012 in relation to delegated and implementing acts, and stresses that Parliament should always insist on the use of delegated acts for all powers delegated to the Commission that fulfil the criteria set out in Article 290 TFEU, and that files in which the institutional rights of Parliament as regards the inclusion of delegated acts are not safeguarded should not be put on the plenary agenda for a vote leading to an agreement; emphasises that Parliament should, already at the start of the negotiations, flag the issue of delegated and implementing acts as a key institutional issue for Parliament;

4.

Calls on the Commission in future to provide an explicit and sustainable justification as to why it is proposing a delegated or implementing act in a particular legislative proposal and why it considers its regulatory content to be non-essential; recalls that, as is clear from the provisions of Articles 290 and 291 TFEU, delegated and implementing acts are intended to address different needs and cannot therefore be substituted one for another;

5.

Believes that, in order to strengthen the position of its rapporteurs in legislative negotiations, greater recourse should be had to the possibility of requesting an opinion from the Committee on Legal Affairs under Rule 37a of the Rules of Procedure;

6.

Expresses serious concern that the alignment of the acquis to the Treaty of Lisbon is only partly a reality four years after its entry into force; welcomes the presentation by the Commission of the recent proposals for alignment of the remaining legislative acts providing for the use of the regulatory procedure with scrutiny (RPS); stresses however the need to start negotiations on those proposals as soon as possible, in order to finalise this exercise before the end of the current parliamentary term; considers that at least all cases previously dealt with under RPS should now be aligned to Article 290 TFEU, as RPS measures are also measures of general scope designed to amend non-essential elements of a basic act, inter alia by deleting some of those elements or by supplementing the basic act by the addition of new non-essential elements; at the same time, calls on the Council to progress with talks on those specific alignment proposals that are still stalled in the Council, including proposals in the fields of agriculture and fisheries;

7.

Expresses concern that, despite the fact that it can be a good solution in certain cases, systematically keeping all policy elements in the basic act could, in due course, deprive Article 290 TFEU of its use as a valuable means of rationalisation of the legislative process, which was its initial rationale in order to avoid micro-management and a heavy and lengthy co-decision procedure; stresses that this approach could be extremely difficult to apply in some cases, such as in sectors where technologies are still being developed;

8.

Emphasises that in those cases where it has been decided to use implementing acts, the Parliament's negotiating team should carefully assess what kind of control by Member States is needed and whether the advisory or the examination procedure should be used; stresses that Parliament's negotiation teams, in cases where the examination procedure is used, should accept the so-called ‘no opinion clause’ only in exceptional, duly justified cases, as it prevents the Commission from adopting the draft implementing act in the event of ‘no opinion’ by the committee composed of representatives of the Member States and chaired by the Commission;

9.

Recommends that the Commission not misuse delegated acts in order to reopen discussions on matters agreed at political level in trilogues; points out that the power to adopt delegated acts should preferably be conferred on the Commission only for a limited period of time;

10.

Encourages its committees to closely monitor the use of delegated and implementing acts within their respective spheres of responsibility; to that end, requests the Commission to improve the administrative arrangements for the transmission and filing of documents related to delegated acts, including preparatory documents, in order to ensure at least the same level of information and transparency as for the existing register of implementing acts and to guarantee a simultaneous flow of information to Parliament and to the Council as the legislator;

11.

Considers that significant progress has been made in ensuring the swift transmission of the delegated acts to the lead committees, which in turn has positively influenced the exercise by Members' of their right of scrutiny;

12.

Points to the political responsibility of the legislator and the need for the regular and timely involvement of Parliament in the preparatory phase of delegated acts; calls on the Commission to keep Parliament, including the Rapporteur responsible for the file in question, fully informed of the planned timetable, the scheduled meetings of expert groups and the content of envisaged delegated acts, including by providing access to the relevant Commission databases, such as CIRCA;

13.

Urges the Commission to fully respect paragraph 15 of the Framework Agreement on relations between the European Parliament and the European Commission, inter alia by simplifying the procedure for inviting Parliament's experts to meetings with national experts, if so requested by the responsible Parliamentary committee; recognises that, as a result of Parliament's experts attending those meetings, the Commission may be invited to meetings in Parliament in order to have a further exchange of views on the preparation of delegated acts; urges the Commission to apply paragraph 15 of the Framework Agreement also for those parts of meetings of Member States and the Commission where matters other than implementing acts within the meaning of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 are discussed;

14.

Takes the view that the time between the transmission of final draft implementing acts and their adoption by the Commission is often too short, thereby not allowing for adequate oversight by Parliament; urges the Commission, therefore, to fully respect the Parliament's right to scrutinise final draft implementing acts within a period of one month in accordance with the 2008 agreement between Parliament and Commission on comitology procedures;

15.

Calls for sufficient technical and personal resources to be assigned for delegated and implementing acts, inter alia in order to ensure an efficient internal flow of information; considers that circulation of delegated acts to Members by means of a newsletter facilitates the scrutiny of such acts and allows Members to raise possible objections in due time;

16.

Recommends that permanent rapporteurs be appointed in each committee for delegated and implementing acts, guaranteeing coherence within the committee concerned and with other committees; considers that similar issues must be dealt with in a coherent manner, while preserving the required flexibility;

17.

Welcomes the availability of the Commission’s experts to participate in information meetings with Members, as the organisation of such meetings, in good time before the adoption of the delegated acts, is useful for the purposes of clarifying key aspects of such acts and facilitating Parliament’s work in assessing the acts concerned;

18.

Continues to call on the members of negotiating teams in particular to pay particular attention to delegated and implementing acts when reporting to the competent committee following each trilogue pursuant to Rule 70(4) of Parliament's Rules of Procedure;

19.

Deplores the fact that the alignment dossiers on essential agricultural and fisheries legislation were blocked by the Council after the failure of negotiations in informal trilogues and Parliament's first reading; underlines that the reason for this situation often lies in the Council's unwillingness to make use of delegated acts; notes that only in the context of the full legislative procedures relating to the reform of the CAP and the CFP was it possible to find an alignment solution which was acceptable to both sides, although some provisions could be agreed upon only on condition that they would not constitute a precedent; urges the Council to make progress on the outstanding alignment dossiers, so that the procedures can be concluded before the end of the current parliamentary term;

20.

Recalls that, especially in the case of the Development Cooperation Instrument (DCI), Parliament has since 2006 practised a process of ‘democratic scrutiny’ in the form of a political dialogue with the Commission on draft measures; notes, however, that Parliament’s experience with this practice has been mixed, and that its influence over Commission decisions has been limited;

21.

Points out that in the sphere of development cooperation implementing acts are often based on prior consultations with third parties, rendering changes at a late stage of the formal comitology procedure more difficult; stresses, therefore, that earlier notification of, and dialogue with, Parliament would be an important step towards a more effective use of Parliament’s power of scrutiny;

22.

Points out that in the area of financial services the regulations on the European Supervisory Authorities (ESAs) introduce regulatory technical standards (RTS) and implementing technical standards (ITS) under which ESAs submit draft RTS and ITS to the Commission for adoption; takes the view that, given the technical expertise and specialist skills of the ESAs, delegated acts should take the form of RTS rather than ordinary delegated acts wherever possible; also considers that, before adopting ordinary delegated acts the Commission should seek technical advice from the relevant ESA on the content of those acts;

23.

Points out that, under certain legislative acts, the period for scrutinising RTS may be extended by a further month, given their volume and complexity, and considers that this kind of flexibility should become the norm; furthermore points out that the legislator has set a period of scrutiny of three months, extendable by three months, for all delegated acts in the area of financial services, and considers that this practice should be extended to other areas of a complex nature;

24.

Emphasises that the arrangements whereby no delegated act may be submitted to Parliament during its recess periods should also apply to RTS;

25.

Believes that the call for stakeholders to sit in the ESA stakeholder groups should last for a sufficient length of time (not less than two months), should be issued via a variety of channels and should follow a clear and streamlined process in order to ensure that applications are received from a broad base of candidates; recalls the need for balanced ESA stakeholder groups in line with the provisions of the respective regulations;

26.

Recalls that in the field of employment and social affairs, Parliament has challenged the validity of the EURES decision before the Court of Justice in order to defend its prerogatives;

27.

Calls on the Commission to include in its work programme proposals to amend all legal acts of the former third pillar in order to align them with the new hierarchy of norms and to respect Parliament’s powers, competences and right to information with regard to the delegation of powers to the Commission under the Treaty of Lisbon; stresses that this will require an individual assessment of each legal act in order to identify decisions which — as essential elements — need to be taken by the legislator, particularly where they touch upon the fundamental rights of the persons concerned, and those that can be considered as non-essential elements (see ruling of the Court of Justice in Case C-355/10);

28.

Draws attention to the fact that the Council continues to adopt legal acts on the basis of provisions of the former third pillar, long after the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon, such that Parliament has been required to bring legal action before the Court of Justice;

29.

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

29.8.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 285/18

—

having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 136 in combination with Article 121(2) thereof,

—

having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1175/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 November 2011 amending Council Regulation (EC) No 1466/97 on the strengthening of the surveillance of budgetary positions and the surveillance and coordination of economic policies (1),

—

having regard to Council Directive 2011/85/EU of 8 November 2011 on requirements for budgetary frameworks of the Member States (2),

—

having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1174/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 November 2011 on enforcement measures to correct excessive macroeconomic imbalances in the euro area (3),

—

having regard to Council Regulation (EU) No 1177/2011 of 8 November 2011 amending Regulation (EC) No 1467/97 on speeding up and clarifying the implementation of the excessive deficit procedure (4),

—

having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1176/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 November 2011 on the prevention and correction of macroeconomic imbalances (5),

—

having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1173/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 November 2011 on the effective enforcement of budgetary surveillance in the euro area (6),

—

having regard to its resolution of 5 February 2013 on improving access to finance for SMEs (7),

—

having regard to the Commission Communication of 6 December 2012 entitled ‘An Action Plan to strengthen the fight against tax fraud and tax evasion’ (COM(2012)0722),

—

having regard to Regulation (EU) No 473/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2013 on common provisions for monitoring and assessing draft budgetary plans and ensuring the correction of excessive deficit of the Member States in the euro area (8),

—

having regard to Regulation (EU) No 472/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2013 on the strengthening of economic and budgetary surveillance of Member States in the euro area experiencing or threatened with serious difficulties with respect to their financial stability (9),

—

having regard to its resolution of 23 October 2013 on the European Semester for economic policy coordination: implementation of 2013 priorities (10),

—

having regard to the Commission Communication of 13 November 2013 on the Annual Growth Survey 2014 (COM(2013)0800),

—

having regard to its resolution of 21 May 2013 on fight against tax fraud, tax evasion and tax havens (11),

—

having regard to its resolution of 12 December 2013 on the call for a measurable and binding commitment against tax evasion and tax avoidance in the EU (12),

—

having regard to its resolution of 12 December 2013 on preparations for the European Council meeting (19-20 December 2013) (13),

—

having regard to Rule 48 of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs and the opinion of the Committee on Budgets (A7-0084/2014),

A.

whereas the latest Autumn Commission forecast shows that real GDP growth in the euro area is slowly returning and is expected to be reach 1,1 % in 2014, unemployment is expected to fall and inflation is expected to remain well below 2 %;

B.

whereas growth in emerging markets is stagnating, while it remains robust in the US and positive in Japan;

C.

whereas on 20-22 January 2014, Parliament held a high-level meeting with national parliamentarians (in the context of the European Parliamentary Week) to discuss the Annual Growth Survey 2014, as well as general economic policy objectives for growth and jobs, with a view to taking greater account of the effectiveness of policies and of potential spill-over effects in the EU;

D.

whereas the Commission acknowledges that most of the Europe 2020 objectives will not be met even in the most optimistic of scenarios;

E.

whereas Parliament has welcomed the introduction of the Convergence and Competitiveness Instrument as part of the efforts to strengthen the governance framework;

1.

Notes that economic recovery in the EU is under way but is still fragile; underlines that growth-friendly fiscal consolidation is required and efforts need to be sustained in order to ensure compliance with the current economic governance framework on the one hand and to deliver more sustainable growth and jobs in the medium and long term on the other;

2.

Welcomes the recognition of the need for growth-friendly fiscal consolidation; urges the Commission to turn this priority into concrete recommendations to the Member States and for the EU as a whole, including those under economic adjustment programmes, so that they not only address fiscal consolidation but also structural reforms that lead to real, sustainable and socially balanced growth, employment, strengthened competitiveness and increasing convergence;

3.

Notes that widening sovereign interest rate spreads have significantly reduced the room for manoeuvre as regards fiscal policy in a number of Member States; notes, also, that the monetary policy approach taken by the European Central Bank (ECB) has helped to reduce sovereign interest rate spreads; notes that the ECB, through forward guidance, will maintain this policy in the short and medium term, and will thereby contribute to stronger growth;

4.

Notes that the Commission monitors the Europe 2020 objectives at national and European level in the country-specific recommendations and thus keeps a closer eye on targets set for employment, R&D, education, poverty, renewable energy and emissions reduction;

5.

Believes that the EU economy as a whole needs to further boost its cost and non-cost competitiveness in the global economy, particularly by increasing competition in the product and services markets to enhance productivity, resource efficiency and to lower prices, and by keeping labour costs in line with productivity and ensuring that internal macroeconomic imbalances are reduced;

6.

Acknowledges the ambitious structural reforms implemented by those Member States that have experienced serious difficulties; encourages Member States to continue in their efforts; points out that the efforts for structural reforms need to be maintained with determination and monitored in order to ensure the effectiveness of reform and to build on the progress made; encourages the adoption and implementation of structural reform programmes that promote convergence and competitiveness at national and European level, and increase sustainable growth and foster employment; underlines the importance of the swift and effective implementation of programmes and schemes to fight unemployment, especially among young people;

7.

Underlines the importance of launching or continuing the process of coherent and sustainable structural reforms for stability in the medium and long term; stresses that the EU cannot compete on general or labour costs alone, but needs to invest more in research, innovation and development, education and skills, and resource efficiency, at both national and European level;

8.

Reiterates its demand for a legal act on ‘convergence guidelines’ to be adopted under the ordinary legislative procedure, laying down, for a set period, a very limited number of targets for the most urgent reform measures and its request that the Member States ensure that the national reform programmes should be established on the basis of the aforementioned convergence guidelines and verified by the Commission; calls on the Member States to commit themselves to fully implementing their national reform programmes; suggests that, on this basis, the Member States could enter into a ‘convergence partnership’ with the EU institutions, with the possibility of conditional funding for reform activities; reiterates that such stronger economic cooperation should go hand in hand with an incentive-based financial mechanism; considers that any additional funding or instruments, such as a solidarity mechanism, must be an integral part of the EU budget, but outside the agreed multiannual financial framework (MFF) envelope;

9.

Expresses concern with the overall public and private indebtedness of Member States in the euro area; points out that the EU needs to go beyond a growth model based on excessive debt accumulation and resource consumption;

10.

Calls on the Member States, therefore, to pay particular attention, when devising economic policies and reforms, to the impact on the young generation of Europeans and on future generations, so as not to deprive young people of opportunities from the start; underlines that further efforts need to be made to fight the long-term effects of unemployment and in particular of youth unemployment;

11.

Acknowledges those Member State authorities that have successfully implemented macroeconomic adjustment programmes or financial sector programmes;

12.

Points out that a necessary condition for the success of financial assistance programmes is a combination of solidarity and conditionality, strong ownership and commitment to reform; urges the Commission and the Member States, however, to incorporate financial assistance and the ad hoc system of the Troika into an improved legal structure compliant with the EU economic governance framework and community law, thereby guaranteeing democratic accountability;

13.

Underlines the fact that the Economic and Monetary Union (EMU) is far from complete, and reminds the Commission of its obligations and commitments to enhance growth and economic convergence, and to strengthen competitiveness in the EU; believes that this could best be achieved if the Commission was to finally put forward proposals for the completion of the EMU in accordance with all the guidelines in its blueprint on a deep and genuine EMU; notes that the completion of the EMU should be based on the community method;

14.

Acknowledges the achievements of new and revised EU financial regulations in overcoming the financial crisis; notes that the completion of the three pillars of the Banking Union and the implementation of the new rules on capital requirements for banks contribute to re-establishing confidence in the resilience of the European banking sector;

15.

Welcomes the Commission statement to the effect that the top priority of the Annual Growth Survey (AGS) 2014 is to build sustainable, smart and inclusive growth and competitiveness leading to additional job creation;

16.

Agrees with the Commission that the Member States need to continue to pursue growth-friendly fiscal consolidation; calls on Member States to simplify tax systems, reduce taxes and social security contributions, especially for low and medium incomes, and shift taxes away from labour to consumption and environmentally damaging activities in order to stimulate growth, private investment and job creation, to make consolidation efforts more efficient, and to enhance investments in education, R&D, and active labour market policies;

17.

Encourages Member States under an adjustment programme to continue implementing or implement growth-friendly and sustainable structural reforms while enhancing the efforts for the achievement of the Europe 2020 objectives; expresses concern at the lack of ownership on specific reforms in those Member States experiencing excessive budget or current account deficits; considers that the principle of frontloading plus immediate distribution should be applied to all funds for the 2014-2020 period designed to boost economic growth, employment and strategic investment, in particular as regards the Youth Employment Initiative;

18.

Emphasises the importance of the monitoring and the implementation of the country-specific recommendations, multilateral surveillance, the exchange of experiences and best practices and peer reviews as a means of stimulating debate and peer pressure, thereby providing direction that helps to create the necessary momentum for and acceptance of reforms;

19.

Points out once more that a lack of ambitious reforms to enhance the competitiveness of the European economies, as well as to safeguard the sustainability of the social security systems and health care systems will put an excessive burden on future generations; points also to the importance of rectifying excessive deficit situations and current account imbalances;

20.

Points out once again that sovereign and financial institutions show persistent vulnerabilities in a low-growth environment;

21.

Stresses that structural reforms need to be complemented by longer-term investment in education, research, innovation and sustainable energy; believes that public-private partnerships can also be considered as tools to promote investment and to deliver smart and sustainable growth which complement public investment programmes;

22.

Calls for stronger and more consistent action to be taken on the basis of the Commission’s comprehensive Action Plan to strengthen the fight against tax evasion; urges the Commission to incorporate tangible and measurable targets into the Europe 2020 Strategy;

23.

Stresses that access to finance, particularly for SMEs, is one of the biggest obstacles to growth in the EU; believes that more alternatives to bank financing are needed by improving the efficient allocation of capital through capital markets, stimulating long-term investment and making full use of the EU’s new innovative financial instruments designed to support access to capital markets for SMEs; believes that the completion of the Banking Union should enhance access to finance and create a level playing field for SMEs to gain access to finance; underlines the need to further limit the administrative burden for SMEs and to continuously take account of the principle of proportionality in the development of regulatory regimes; believes that the European Investment Bank (EIB) can play an even more active role in providing access to finance for the real economy; considers that the proposals on EIB financing made at the most recent Councils, in particular those relating to financing for SMEs, can and should be more ambitious;

24.

Reiterates the importance of the completion of the Single Market for growth in the EU; believes that the Member States and the Commission are not delivering on their commitment to complete the Single Market;

25.

Underlines the fact that the absence of a well-functioning internal labour market and a sustainable approach to immigration hampers growth in the EU; stresses the macroeconomic advantages for Member States to modernise their labour markets and encourages the Commission and the Member States to consider specific measures for the enhancement of a successful common labour market based on the free movement of workers, an effective level playing field and the principle of upwards social convergence, as well as a modern, adequate and inclusive immigration policy at both national and European level;

26.

Calls on the Commission to explain to Parliament the specific measures it intends to take in order to facilitate and deliver on its objectives of higher sustainable growth and strengthened competitiveness;

27.

Believes that overall the AGS is not detailed enough and does not provide the means to achieve its objectives;

28.

Takes note of the Alert Mechanism Report; notes the gradual reduction of internal imbalances in the EU economy; draws attention also to the external imbalances, including the excessive external surpluses and the reduction of export market shares in the majority of the Member States;

29.

Points out that the objective of the macroeconomic imbalance procedure is to prevent the negative spill-over effects of ill-designed national policies to other euro area Member States; is concerned that the Commission, in its reading of the scoreboard, does not take sufficient account of the fact that the euro area and the Member States included therein are interdependent and open economies;

30.

Takes notes of the Commission’s assessment that a number of important macroeconomic imbalances are being corrected; points out that, in order to further strengthen the overall competitiveness of the EU, the Commission needs to look at the current account surplus of a Member State relative to the rest of the euro area;

31.

Is concerned that most Member States are still losing market shares globally and have a large negative net international investment position; regrets that other important features which have a strong influence on competitiveness, such as unit capital costs, are not yet integrated in the scoreboard for macroeconomic imbalances despite repeated requests by Parliament;

32.

Is still concerned at the lack of progress in reducing excessive private debt levels; points out that this is not only a concern for financial stability, but also limits the EU’s growth potential;

33.

Points out that the ongoing situation of extraordinarily low interest rates across the yield curve is a matter of concern regarding private savings and retirement provisions for European citizens;

34.

Notes the first Commission assessment of Member States’ draft budgetary plans; underlines that the examination of draft budgetary plans improves the multilateral surveillance and monitoring of the budgetary situation of the Member States;

35.

Is concerned that only two Member States have attained their medium-term objective; calls on Member States to continue and if necessary strengthen their efforts, given that growth-friendly consolidation in the non-compliant Member States is necessary;

36.

Stresses that the European Semester must in no way jeopardise the prerogatives of the European Parliament and those of the national parliaments; underlines the fact that there should be a clear division between EU and national competences and that Parliament is the seat of accountability at Union level; urges the Commission to ensure Parliament’s proper, formal involvement in all steps of the European semester process in order to increase the democratic legitimacy of the decisions taken;

37.

Stresses the need to strengthen the democratic accountability of the European Parliament and that of the national parliaments as regards essential elements of the euro area’s operation, such as the European Stability Mechanism, Eurogroup decisions and the monitoring and evaluation of financial assistance programmes; asks the Commission to conduct and publish internal ex-post evaluations of its recommendations and its participation in the Troika;

38.

Points out that the main problem in a number of Member States is that the fragmentation of financial markets results in a shortage of funding and increased funding costs, especially for SMEs; considers that the ECB should maintain its pro-active role in favour of defragmentation and considers that the EIB can further promote funding for SMEs, entrepreneurship, exports and innovation, which are vital for economic recovery;

39.

Notes that the AGS 2014 differs only marginally from the 2013 edition; regrets, therefore, once again the absence of new proposals from the Commission on the role which the EU budget can play in stimulating growth and job creation in order to achieve the Europe 2020 goals;

40.

Regrets that the Commission has failed to provide Parliament with an exhaustive report on the implementation of the growth and jobs pact agreed in June 2012;

41.

Calls on the Commission to provide a regularly updated scoreboard on the implementation of the new programmes, allowing for comparisons to be made between Member States permitting more informed decisions regarding spending priorities in light of observable trends by the budgetary authority;

42.

Underlines the fact that the low level of payment appropriations and the tight ceiling on payments remain a crucial problem for the EU budget which has a particularly negative effect on economic recovery, as late payments are harmful primarily to the direct beneficiaries; underlines, moreover, that this low level of payments in the 2014 EU budget is in total contradiction with the measures agreed by the co-legislators to increase temporarily EU co-financing rates for EU programmes under shared management in Member States experiencing or threatened with serious difficulties with respect to their financial stability; recalls the need to ensure, in the light of implementation, an orderly progression of payments so as to avoid any abnormal shift of outstanding commitments (‘RAL’) onto the 2015 budget and, in this connection, to make use, where appropriate, of the various flexibility mechanisms included in the MFF Regulation; intends to continue its in-depth monitoring of the overall situation on payments, especially in relation to the very high level of payments still needed for the completion of the programmes of the previous MFF;

43.

Regrets once again that Member States persist in considering their contribution to the EU budget as an adjustment variable to their consolidation efforts, which in turn leads to artificial reductions in the volume of payments available in the EU budget; calls on the Commission to take full account of this recurring and dangerous trend when assessing the budgetary plans of the Member States and to propose concrete actions to reverse it;

44.

Recalls its view that the fiscal situation of Member States can be eased through a new system of own resources to finance the Union budget that will reduce gross national income contributions, thus enabling Member States to meet their consolidation efforts without jeopardising EU funding to support investment in economic recovery and reform measures; underlines, therefore, the importance it attaches to the new high-level group on own resources, which should lead to a true reform of EU financing;

45.

Reiterates that stronger economic cooperation should go hand in hand with an incentive-based mechanism; considers that any additional funding or instruments, such as a solidarity mechanism, must be an integral part of the EU budget, but outside the agreed MFF envelope;

46.

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

29.8.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 285/24

—

having regard to Article 9 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU),

—

having regard to Articles 145, 148, 152 and 153(5) TFEU,

—

having regard to Article 28 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,

—

having regard to the Commission communication of 13 November 2013 entitled ‘Annual Growth Survey 2014’ (COM(2013)0800), and to the draft Joint Employment Report annexed thereto,

—

having regard to its resolution of 23 October 2013 on ‘the European Semester for economic policy coordination: implementation of 2013 priorities’ (1),

—

having regard to the Commission communication of 2 October 2013 entitled ‘Strengthening the social dimension of the Economic and Monetary Union’ (COM(2013)0690),

—

having regard to Oral Question O-000122/2013 — B7-0524/2013 to the Commission, and to Parliament’s related resolution of 21 November 2013 on the Commission communication entitled ‘Strengthening the social dimension of the Economic and Monetary Union (EMU)’ (2),

—

having regard to the Commission communication of 3 March 2010 entitled ‘Europe 2020: A strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth’ (COM(2010)2020),

—

having regard to its resolution of 8 September 2010 on ‘the proposal for a Council decision on guidelines for the employment policies of the Member States: Part II of the Europe 2020 Integrated Guidelines’ (3),

—

having regard to the Commission communication of 18 April 2012 entitled ‘Towards a job-rich recovery’ (COM(2012)0173),

—

having regard to Oral Question O-000120/2012 to the Commission, and to Parliament’s related resolution of 14 June 2012 on ‘Towards a job-rich recovery’ (4),

—

having regard to the Commission communication of 23 November 2010 entitled ‘An Agenda for new skills and jobs: A European contribution towards full employment’ (COM(2010)0682), and to Parliament’s resolution of 26 October 2011 thereon (5),

—

having regard to the Commission communication of 16 December 2010 entitled ‘The European Platform against Poverty and Social Exclusion: A European framework for social and territorial cohesion’ (COM(2010)0758), and to Parliament’s resolution of 15 November 2011 thereon (6),

—

having regard to the Commission communication entitled ‘Youth Opportunities Initiative’ (COM(2011)0933),

—

having regard to its resolution of 20 November 2012 on ‘the Social Investment Pact — as a response to the crisis’ (7),

—

having regard to the Commission communication of 20 February 2013 entitled ‘Towards Social Investment for Growth and Cohesion — including implementing the European Social Fund 2014-2020’ (COM(2013)0083),

—

having regard to Oral Question O-000057/2013 — B7-0207/2013 to the Commission, and to Parliament’s related resolution of 12 June 2013 on the Commission communication ‘Towards Social Investment for Growth and Cohesion — including implementing the European Social Fund 2014-2020’ (8),

—

having regard to its resolution of 5 February 2013 on improving access to finance for SMEs (9),

—

having regard to Rule 48 of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs (A7-0091/2014),

A.

whereas the recession in the eurozone came to an end, numerically speaking, in the second quarter of 2013, but whereas annual growth in the eurozone will remain fragile this year and unemployment is still at a very high level; whereas sustainable growth needs to be significantly enhanced for this to be considered a long-lived recovery, and in order to generate the necessary momentum to relieve the EU of its socio-economic challenges;

B.

whereas unemployment in the EU has reached the alarming figure of 26,6 million, and long-term unemployment has risen in most Member States and has reached an all-time high in the EU as a whole; whereas the decline in employment has been more pronounced in those countries that had to undertake a substantial fiscal reform;

C.

whereas youth unemployment rates have reached unprecedented levels, averaging 23 % for the EU as a whole, and whereas in some Member States the unemployment rate among young people aged 16 to 25 is higher than 50 %; whereas the labour market situation is particularly critical for young people, who, regardless of their level of education, often end up unemployed, with precarious employment contracts, in unpaid traineeships or emigrating; whereas in 2011 the economic loss due to the disengagement of young people from the labour market was estimated at EUR 153 billion in the Member States, corresponding to 1,2 % of EU GDP; whereas the excessive rigidity of labour market regulation in several Member States leads to a lack of flexibility for effectively absorbing shocks; whereas current labour market legislation can in some cases disproportionately protect insiders and adversely affect the inclusion of young people in the workforce;

D.

whereas this has been the deepest and longest-lasting recession in the economic history of the last 100 years, but a catastrophe has been avoided, with the effects of the crisis being distributed over many years, even decades; whereas these effects include the fact that long-term unemployment is still on the rise, possibly resulting in structural unemployment; whereas labour market segmentation has continued to increase, average household incomes are declining in many Member States, and indicators point to a trend of somewhat higher levels and deeper forms of poverty and social exclusion, including in-work poverty, for some years ahead;

E.

whereas the International Monetary Fund (IMF) recently pointed out that there is scope to tax better and more progressively, which could help in reducing inequalities in the EU; whereas there is a need to shift the tax burden away from labour towards other forms of sustainable tax in order to promote growth and job creation and bring in additional revenue along the way and to enhance the legitimacy of the consolidation effort;

F.

whereas the effects of the crisis have resulted in an unprecedented and growing divergence in output and employment between core and periphery countries; whereas the core-periphery gap in unemployment rates reached 10 percentage points in 2012, compared with only 3,5 percentage points in 2000; whereas that divergence is forecast to peak this year;

G.

whereas it is necessary to continue with growth-friendly and differentiated fiscal consolidation in order to guarantee the sustainability of the welfare state and public finances in the long term;

H.

whereas economic improvements should thus be taken as an encouragement to pursue efforts with determination to focus on growth and employment, in order to keep up the reform programmes with a view to improving competitiveness and securing a lasting recovery;

I.

whereas errors in the Commission’s economic forecasts for growth and unemployment in recent years demonstrate the need for an improved model of forecasting and strategy with a view to ending the crisis; whereas the pace of fiscal consolidation has slowed; whereas job creation in the eurozone is still very weak; whereas, according to Eurostat, inflation in the eurozone is below the ECB targets;

J.

whereas there is pressure from demographic developments on national budgets and pension systems; whereas life expectancy is continuing to rise;

K.

whereas there is a need to take the life expectancy coefficient into account with a view to ensuring the sustainability of pension systems;

L.

whereas the focus on speed and intensity in pursuing structural reforms has been asymmetrical among Member States during the crisis, being much more demanding for periphery countries than for core countries; whereas all Member States should share the same impetus and undertake the necessary structural reforms in order to promote a sustainable and balanced growth and job creation in the area;

M.

whereas all Member States need to improve their performance and competitiveness, and a real challenge is posed to the eurozone at the moment by the growing socio-economic divergences between Member States; whereas it is in the interest of all Member States to ensure that employment and social challenges are addressed in a timely and effective manner to avoid an economic deterioration;

N.

whereas investment in education and training, research and innovation — key areas for economic growth and job creation — in the EU is still lower than among its main economic partners and competitors elsewhere in the world; whereas productive investment in these areas is essential for a sustainable exit from the crisis;

O.

whereas support for entrepreneurs should be a priority for Member States;

P.

whereas a coherent policy mix combining macroeconomic policies, structural policies, sound labour market institutions, unsegmented labour markets, collective bargaining and well-resourced welfare systems is essential for absorbing cyclical shocks; whereas a system based on rapid reintegration into the labour market with flanking measures based on flexicurity is also important in absorbing cyclical shocks;

Q.

whereas poverty levels have been increasing since 2007, such that 24,2 % of the EU population is currently at risk of poverty or social exclusion; whereas social protection expenditure has decreased in nearly all the Member States, and whereas the Social Protection Committee (SPC) is warning that increasing numbers of people are at risk of income poverty, child poverty, unmet medical needs, severe material deprivation and social exclusion;

R.

whereas the EU is failing to achieve almost all of the Europe 2020 targets, and whereas progress in the Member States in delivering on the Europe 2020 objectives has been disappointing; whereas the commitments made in the 2013 national reform programmes are insufficient to meet most of the EU-level targets;

S.

whereas it is essential to foster democratic accountability, ownership and legitimacy in respect of all actors involved in the European Semester; whereas the appropriate involvement of Parliament is a crucial part of this process; whereas national parliaments are the representatives and guarantors of the rights acquired and delegated by citizens; whereas the introduction of the European Semester should fully respect the prerogatives of national parliaments;

T.

whereas arrangements are lacking to ensure that the European Council respects the position of Parliament before its annual adoption of the priorities proposed by the Commission in the Annual Growth Survey;

U.

whereas, on 20-22 January 2014, it held high-level meetings with national parliamentarians (European Parliamentary Week) to discuss the Annual Growth Survey 2014, including its employment and social aspects;

1.

Welcomes the fact that this year, for the first time, the draft Joint Employment Report annexed to the Annual Growth Survey (AGS) includes a scoreboard for employment and social policies, which will help to strengthen the monitoring of employment and social developments as part of macroeconomic surveillance within the European Semester; considers that this should impact policy guidance in the European Semester in order to reinforce the social dimension of the Economic and Monetary Union, since this is not only desirable but also necessary in order to address the crisis and prevent serious socio-economic divergences in the eurozone, thereby enhancing its sustainability; expresses its deep concern at the limited nature of the role of Parliament in the European Semester; deplores the fact that little progress has been made by the Commission and Council to strengthen democratic scrutiny of the economic policy guidance; is of the opinion that under the existing Treaties Article 136 TFEU allows the Council, on a recommendation from the Commission and with the vote of only the Member States whose currency is the euro, to adopt binding economic policy guidelines for the eurozone countries in the framework of the European Semester; stresses that an incentive mechanism would reinforce the binding nature of the economic policy coordination; calls for an Interinstitutional Agreement in order to involve Parliament in the drafting and approval of the AGS and the Economic Policy and Employment Guidelines;

2.

Stresses that the social and economic priorities as agreed within the framework of the EU 2020 strategy are deeply interconnected; believes that economic sustainability and macroeconomic balance cannot be achieved, whether in the medium term or in the long run, without the enhancement and safeguarding of the social dimension of the EMU; considers that the social and economic aspects of the Union are two sides of the same coin and that both play a key role in the development of the EU;

3.

Notes, however, that these indicators have not been made binding, unlike the Macroeconomic Imbalance Procedure scoreboard; asks the Commission and the Member States to assess this situation in the light of the growing social and employment imbalances in the EU;

4.

Considers it regrettable that the employment and social indicators proposed by the Commission are insufficient to cover the Member States’ employment and social situations comprehensively; calls for the scoreboard to include additional indicators, in particular child poverty levels, access to healthcare, homelessness, and a decent work index, in order to allow for proper assessment of the social situation in the Member States; believes that the indicators should, after consultation of Parliament, be reviewed on a regular basis; points out that arrangements are lacking to ensure that the European Council respects the position of Parliament before its annual adoption of the priorities proposed by the Commission in the AGS;

5.

Highlights the importance of holding, whenever necessary, a Eurogroup employment and social affairs ministers’ meeting prior to euro summits: believes that joint meetings to achieve a coherent position between the EPSCO and ECOFIN Councils are equally crucial, so as to ensure that social and employment concerns are addressed more fully in the discussions and decisions of the eurozone authorities and with a view to contributing to the meetings of heads of state and government of the eurozone;

6.

Points out that, while structural reforms may bear fruit in the medium to long term, the need to stimulate the EU’s internal demand requires the Commission and the Council to enhance investment in order to sustain growth and quality jobs in the short term and enhance potential in the medium term; notes that the main objectives have already been defined in the Europe 2020 strategy and in the Compact for Growth and Jobs agreed in June 2012, but that financing must be stepped up; encourages Member States, therefore, to set up an investment package in order to bring about a significant improvement in the short-term economic situation and in the state of affairs on the labour markets of the Member States, as advocated in Parliament’s resolution of 11 September 2013 on ‘Tackling youth unemployment: possible ways out’ (10);

7.

Stresses that the EU’s competitiveness will be boosted primarily through productivity-enhancing investments in education, R&D, continuous innovation, further digitalisation and cloud services; considers that these are the drivers that would make the EU a preferred destination for global enterprises, an exporter of high-value-added products and services and a provider of high-quality jobs;

8.

Is concerned that more than 20 Member States have reduced education expenditure in relative terms (as a percentage of GDP), thereby jeopardising their growth and competitiveness, which also suffer from the mismatch between labour needs and the actual qualifications of the workforce; points out that reducing such investment will increase the EU’s structural weakness, given the growing need for highly skilled workers and the fact that in many Member States a high proportion of the workforce is currently low-skilled; warns that, according to Eurostat, almost half of all children whose parents had a low education level were at risk of poverty in the EU27 in 2011, compared with 22 % of those with parents with a medium education level and 7 % of those with parents with a high education level, with the largest differences found by Eurostat being in Romania (78 % of children in low education level households compared with 2 % in high education level households), the Czech Republic (76 % and 5 %), Slovakia (77 % and 7 %), Bulgaria (71 % and 2 %) and Hungary (68 % and 3 %);

9.

Welcomes the fact that in the AGS 2014 the Commission calls on the Member States to protect or promote longer-term investment in education, research and innovation, energy and climate action; considers this insufficient, however, to allow Member States with already constrained budgets to accomplish that goal; calls on the Commission to put in place a plan that helps those Member States make the necessary productive investments, for instance in education and R&D given the potential of those sectors to generate growth and jobs;

10.

Points out that, at a time of severe fiscal constraint and reduced lending capacity in the private sector, the European funds represent an essential leverage at the Member States’ disposal for stimulating the economy and helping to deliver on the Europe 2020 growth and employment objectives;

11.

Considers that cohesion policy is essential in helping to reduce internal competitive disparities and structural imbalances; calls on the Commission, as a matter of urgency, to reprogramme unspent structural funding in favour of youth employment programmes and SMEs; calls on the Commission to find special solutions for those Member States with very high unemployment rates which will be forced to return EU funds on account of cofinancing problems;

12.

Calls on the Commission to apply the frontloading principle to those funds essential for crisis recovery, such as the European Social Fund, for the 2014-2020 period while monitoring carefully for undesired effects of frontloading, such as the risk of automatic decommitment and the impact on the payment profiles for those Member States which have the highest levels of unemployment and are going through processes of deep fiscal consolidation, especially as regards programmes to boost economic growth, employment and strategic investment;

13.

Considers that at least 25 % of national cohesion funds should be used for specific programmes under the European Social Fund in those Member States with the highest levels of unemployment and poverty;

14.

Calls for more adaptive and dynamic labour markets that are able to adjust to disruptions in the economic situation without causing redundancies and excessive adjustments in wages; recalls that the purchasing power of many EU workers has been sharply eroded, household incomes have fallen and internal demand has been depressed, further fuelling unemployment and social exclusion, particularly in those Member States hit hardest by the crisis; points out that reducing labour costs which translate directly into wages/salaries cannot be the only strategy for regaining competitiveness; notes that the communication on the AGS 2014 stresses that core countries with the necessary room for manoeuvre could increase wages as one way of increasing spending; calls for the recommendations to show ambition in order to promote more balanced growth and job creation in the eurozone;

15.

Notes that the Commission, in its 2014 draft Joint Employment Report, points out that unit labour cost reductions and wage moderation have fed into price developments, in part because of simultaneous hikes in indirect taxes and administered prices;

16.

Notes that decent jobs and wages are important not only for social cohesion and fairness in society, but also for maintaining a strong economy; calls on the Commission and the Member States, in accordance with their respective competences, to propose measures that tackle inequality and guarantee decent pay; calls on the Member States to combat in-work poverty by pursuing labour market policies aimed at ensuring a living wage for those in work;

17.

Notes that women are driving job growth in Europe and that more therefore needs to be done to make full use of the productive potential of the female workforce, through better implementation of gender equality policies and more effective use of EU funding for this purpose;

18.

Stresses the importance of exploring the possibility of reducing pressure on wages through minimum wage schemes according to national practices;

19.

Stresses that job quality is essential in a knowledge-intensive economy, in order to promote high labour productivity and rapid innovation on the basis of a skilled, adaptable and committed workforce, with decent health and safety standards, a sense of security and reasonable working hours;

20.

Calls on the Member States to present national general and youth employment plans in their 2014 National Reform Programmes; considers it regrettable that, despite Parliament’s repeated requests, a significant number of Member States did not present such plans in 2013;

21.

Regrets that the Council failed to take account of Parliament’s call for a focus on job quality in its guidance for 2013; calls on the Commission to include job quality, training, dual learning schemes, access to lifelong learning, core workers’ rights, and support for labour market mobility and self-employment through increased security for workers in the CSRs based on the AGS 2014;

22.

Stresses that labour market reforms should focus on increasing labour productivity and efficiency in order to boost the EU’s economic competitiveness and allow sustainable growth and job creation, while strictly respecting both the letter and the spirit of the European social acquis and its principles; believes that labour market reforms should be implemented in such a way as to promote internal flexibility and job quality;

23.

Believes that structural labour market reforms should introduce internal flexibility in order to maintain employment in times of economic disruption, and should ensure job quality, security in employment transitions, the provision of unemployment benefit schemes that are based on activation requirements and linked to reintegration policies which maintain work incentives while ensuring a decent income, and the establishment of contractual arrangements which combat labour market segmentation, anticipate economic restructuring and ensure access to lifelong learning; believes that only a balance based on flexicurity can assure a competitive labour market;

24.

Stresses the importance of active, comprehensive and inclusive labour policies in the current context; is deeply concerned that several Member States, despite rising unemployment rates, have reduced budget allocations financing such labour policies; calls on the Member States to increase the coverage and effectiveness of active labour market policies, in close cooperation with the social partners;

25.

Calls on the Member States to design — in collaboration with the private sector and the social partners according to national practices — and present job plans including specific job creation measures, in particular for the sectors identified by the Commission as having high potential such as the health and social care sectors, the low-carbon, resource-efficient economy and the ICT sector; calls on the Member States to support, through those job plans, the creation of employment opportunities, particularly for the long-term unemployed, unemployed senior citizens, women, and other priority groups hit especially hard by the crisis, such as immigrants and people with disabilities;

26.

Stresses the importance of Erasmus+, as well as the significant contribution that the European Programme for Education, Training, Youth, Sport and Languages can make to improving the labour market situation, especially that of young people;

27.

Stresses the importance of enhanced cooperation between Public Employment Services (PES) for developing and implementing Europe-wide evidence-based benchlearning systems and implementing European labour market initiatives;

28.

Is deeply concerned that, once again, youth unemployment rates are still very high; notes that the situation of unemployed young people is particularly worrying; calls, therefore, on the Commission and the Member States to take urgent action to bring young people into the labour market; calls on the Member States to implement long-agreed or new measures with a view to tackling youth unemployment and reducing the number of young people not in employment, education or training (NEETs), taking into account the qualitative aspect of decent work that fully respects core labour standards;

29.

Welcomes the adoption of the Youth Guarantee by the Council and the earmarking of EUR 6 billion for the Youth Employment Initiative under the next MFF; calls on the Member States to implement youth guarantee schemes as a matter of urgency, and to use the available resources efficiently, concentrating on those in the most difficult situations; is concerned, however, that some of the governments have not made available the financing necessary for this to happen; calls on the Member States to introduce an adequate system of monitoring the efficiency of implemented measures and committed financial resources;

30.

Notes with satisfaction that the above funds can be used during the first two years of the next financial framework; recalls, however, that this amount is wholly insufficient to combat youth unemployment in a lasting manner and should form an initial tranche with which to tackle the problem; emphasises that the ILO has calculated that a total of EUR 21 billion is needed to implement an effective programme to combat youth unemployment in the eurozone alone, in comparison to the loss to the economy due to the disengagement of young people from the labour market, which is estimated at EUR 153 billion in the Member States in 2011, or 1,2 % of EU GDP; calls on the Commission to make the Youth Guarantee a priority and to increase the available budget in the promised mid-term review of the MFF;

31.

Calls on the Commission and Council to ensure that Member States subject to the excessive deficit procedure also have the fiscal space to implement the Youth Guarantee schemes;

32.

Welcomes the Commission’s proposal for a quality framework for traineeships, in order to boost employability and improve working conditions for young people; notes, however, the failure to demand adequate pay levels; calls on the Commission, the Member States and the European social partners to implement the Alliance for Apprenticeships in an ambitious manner;

33.

Believes that given the number of workers, particularly young people, who are now leaving their countries of origin for other Member States in search of employment opportunities, there is an urgent need to develop appropriate measures; notes that in order to guarantee the portability of pension rights and the continuation of employment benefits for at least three months while the recipient is looking for work in another Member State, the EU legislation is currently being amended; notes that an agreement has been reached between the Council and Parliament on the cross-border portability of supplementary pensions rights;

34.

Stresses the importance of the dual education system as practised in some Member States; believes that dual education can be implemented in many more Member States, while taking account of national characteristics;

35.

Welcomes the Commission’s intention to build on the European Job Mobility Portal (EURES) by intensifying and broadening its activities and, in particular, by promoting youth mobility; calls for a specific strategy to be drafted to this end, in conjunction with the Member States; also observes, however, that mobility must remain voluntary and must not limit efforts to create jobs and training places on the spot in order not to increase the problem of ‘brain drain’, which has already occurred in the Member States most hit by the crisis;

36.

Notes that income inequality is growing across and within the Member States, particularly in the south of the EU and on its periphery; further notes that in many countries the crisis has intensified the long-term trends of wage polarisation and labour market segmentation;

37.

Notes that the IMF has recently pointed out that there is scope to tax better and more progressively, which could help in reducing inequalities in the EU; stresses the need to shift the tax burden away from labour towards other forms of sustainable tax so as to promote growth and job creation and bring in additional revenue along the way, in order to enhance the legitimacy of the consolidation effort;

38.

Calls on the Member States to adopt measures favourable to job creation, such as employment tax reforms that provide employment incentives, support voluntary self-employment and promote business in strategic sectors;

39.

Notes the importance of reducing taxation on labour, especially through well-targeted temporary reductions in social security contributions or job subsidy schemes for new recruits, especially young people, low-paid and low-skilled workers, the long-term unemployed and other vulnerable groups, while ensuring the long-range sustainability of public pension systems;

40.

Stresses the importance of taking effective steps to fight undeclared work, false self-employment, tax fraud and tax evasion, particularly in the current context of fiscal consolidation, in order to protect workers and revenues and maintain public confidence in the fairness and effectiveness of tax systems;

41.

Is concerned at the increase in poverty among all age groups; notes that poverty and social exclusion among 18- to 64-year-olds have increased significantly in two thirds of the Member States in recent years, mainly because of rising levels of jobless or low-work-intensity households and in-work poverty; notes that the risk of poverty and social exclusion in 2012 was much higher (48,8 %) for third-country nationals (aged 18 to 64) than for EU nationals; calls on the Commission and the Member States to take urgent action to deliver on the EU 2020 goal on poverty and social exclusion; urges the Commission and the Member States to take immediate action to fight child poverty, given that in 2011 27 % of children aged under 18 were at risk of poverty or social exclusion; calls on the Commission to issue recommendations, especially to the Member States with the highest proportions of under-18s at risk of poverty or social exclusion;

42.

Welcomes the recognition in the AGS 2014 of the need to tackle the social consequences of the crisis and ensure the financial sustainability of social protection; calls on the Member States to reinforce safety nets, ensure the effectiveness of welfare systems and invest in preventive measures;

43.

Welcomes the Fund for European Aid to the Most Deprived, which will help those most affected by poverty to meet their basic needs; calls on the Member States to use the funds concerned properly and target them on the most deprived;

44.

Takes note of the CSR proposal, relating to numerous Member States, regarding pension reforms; deplores the fact that the Commission’s recommendations were made without reference to Parliament’s recommendations in the Green and White Papers on pensions; stresses that pension reforms require national political and social cohesion and must be negotiated with the social partners to be successful;

45.

Stresses that the necessary thoroughgoing reforms of the pension systems in Member States should be designed, conceived and adopted with a view to ensuring their sustainability, while at the same time not jeopardising adequate pension levels and being fully in line with the economic and social priorities of the Europe 2020 strategy;

46.

Stresses the need to carry out the necessary reforms to guarantee the sustainability of pension systems; believes that if effective retirement ages are to be raised successfully, pension reforms need to be accompanied by policies that limit access to early retirement schemes and other early exit pathways, develop employment opportunities for older workers, guarantee access to lifelong learning, introduce favourable tax policies offering incentives to stay in work longer, and support active healthy ageing; emphasises the acceleration of the pressure placed by demographic developments on national budgets and pension systems now that the first cohorts of the ‘baby boom generation’ are retiring; notes the uneven progress and levels of ambition across Member States in formulating and implementing structural reforms aimed at increasing employment, phasing out early retirement schemes and evaluating, at Member State level and together with social partners, the need to put both statutory and effective retirement ages on a sustainable footing in line with rising life expectancy; stresses that Member States that fail to implement gradual reforms now may at a later stage find themselves in a scenario where they have to implement reforms shock-wise, with significant social consequences;

47.

Is concerned at the risk of inadequate pensions for a generation of young Europeans who are currently unemployed or in precarious jobs and who will face an ever-higher retirement age and longer pension calculation periods;

48.

Notes that social protection policy, in particular unemployment benefits, minimum income support and progressive taxation, initially helped to reduce the depth of the recession and stabilised labour markets and consumption; stresses, however, that the capacity of these crucial economic and social stabilisers has been worryingly reduced in those Member States in which such stabilisers are most needed; notes that household incomes and domestic demand have consequently been less well protected;

49.

Believes that introducing Bonus-Malus systems creates a ‘win-win’ situation for all parties involved;

50.

Stresses that social policies and social standards have been used in some cases as adjustment factors on account of the fiscal consolidation requirements; calls on the Commission to assess the consequences that these processes have had for national welfare states and for citizens; calls on the Member States to improve the adequacy and effectiveness of social protection systems, and to make sure that these continue to act as buffers against poverty and social exclusion;

51.

Stresses the need for the Commission to recognise the importance of carers, in terms of both care provision and the economy and society as a whole, recalling that the interests of carers are rarely taken into account in policies that nonetheless impact on them in a consistent and across-the-board fashion;

52.

Believes that EU funding could contribute to capacity-building for carers in relation to the provision of support (e.g. emotional support, exchanges, and information) and advocacy, and that it could also support exchange of information, research and networking; also believes that legislative measures could be explored, on a basis of respect for national competence and the principle of solidarity, and that this could take the form of, for example, a directive on leave for carers;

53.

Underlines the upcoming need for qualified carers due to demographic changes, and the importance of ensuring training and education for future carers in order to prevent a collapse of the entire care and social security system; also considers it important to provide maximum support for carers (especially informal carers), whose contribution needs to be recognised;

54.

Stresses the importance of hospice and palliative services within long-term care; points out that carers and users of mobile palliative teams, given their multi-professional composition, flexibility, and cooperation with other professional sectors, have the potential to bridge crucial gaps in long-term care systems;

55.

Stresses that all labour market reforms should be based on reinforced coordination of social dialogue;

56.

Stresses that the Troika has confirmed that high-quality participation by the social partners and strong social dialogue, including at national level, are essential for the success of any reforms, and that in reforms of the EMU in particular, the role of the social partners in the new economic governance process, especially the European Semester, should be reinforced; welcomes the Commission’s proposal to involve the social partners more fully in the European Semester process, inter alia in the framework of the Social Dialogue Committee prior to the annual adoption of the AGS;

57.

Calls on the European Council and the Member States to ensure that national and regional parliaments, social partners, public authorities and civil society are closely involved in the implementation and monitoring of policy guidance under the Europe 2020 strategy and its economic governance process, in order to ensure ownership; calls on the European Council and the Commission to incorporate the monitoring and evaluation of the Europe 2020 employment, social and education goals more effectively into the 2014 European Semester;

58.

Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission.

29.8.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 285/40

—

having regard to the Commission Communication of 13 November 2013 entitled ‘Annual Growth Survey 2014’ (COM(2013)0800) and the Commission Report entitled ‘A Single Market for growth and jobs: An analysis of progress made and remaining obstacles in the Member States — Contribution to the Annual Growth Survey 2014’ (COM(2013)0785) and to the background analysis for that report, entitled ‘International Value Chains Intra- and Extra-EU’,

—

having regard to the first Commission report of 28 November 2012 on ‘State of the Single Market Integration 2013 — Contribution to the Annual Growth Survey 2013’ (COM(2012)0752),

—

having regard to the Commission Communication of 3 October 2012 entitled ‘Single Market Act II — Together for new growth’ (COM(2012)0573),

—

having regard to the Commission Communication of 8 June 2012 entitled ‘Better Governance for the Single Market’ (COM(2012)0259),

—

having regard to the Commission staff working document of 24 February 2012 entitled ‘Making the Single Market deliver — Annual governance check-up 2011’ (SWD(2012)0025),

—

having regard to the Commission Communication of 13 April 2011 entitled ‘Single Market Act — Twelve levers to boost growth and strengthen confidence — “Working together to create new growth”’ (COM(2011)0206),

—

having regard to the Commission Communication of 3 March 2010 entitled ‘Europe 2020 — A strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth’ (COM(2010)2020),

—

having regard to the Online Single Market Scoreboard made public on 4 July 2013,

—

having regard to the Internal Market Scoreboard No 26 (February 2013),

—

having regard to the Conclusions of the European Council of 27-28 June 2013,

—

having regard to the Conclusions of the Competitiveness Council of 29-30 May 2013 on smart regulation,

—

having regard to the Conclusions of the European Council of 14-15 March 2013,

—

having regard to the deliberations of the Competitiveness Council of 18-19 February 2013 on the Annual Growth Survey 2013 and the Single Market Act,

—

having regard to its resolution of 7 February 2013 with recommendations to the Commission on the governance of the Single Market (1), and to the Commission’s follow-up adopted on 8 May 2013,

—

having regard to the Conclusions of the European Council of 24-25 October 2013,

—

having regard to its resolution of 14 June 2012 entitled ‘Single Market Act — The Next Steps to Growth’ (2), and the Commission’s follow-up adopted on 26 September 2012,

—

having regard to its resolution of 6 April 2011 on governance and partnership in the single market (3),

—

having regard to Rule 48 of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection (A7-0066/2014),

A.

whereas the Annual Growth Survey 2013 launched the third European Semester cycle, including — for the first time — an annual report on the state of the Single Market integration;

B.

whereas an effective and well-functioning Single Market based on a highly competitive social market economy is essential for sustainable and inclusive growth;

C.

whereas Parliament asked for full inclusion of a Single Market pillar in the cycle of the European Semester;

D.

whereas a better governance of the Single Market should be aimed at ensuring better and faster transposition and implementation of directives and regulations related to it, especially if connected to the key sectors identified;

E.

whereas quality of the national reform programmes under the European Semester varies widely in terms of substance, transparency and feasibility;

F.

whereas the Single Market should be seen as closely connected to other horizontal policy areas, such as consumer and worker protection, social rights, the environment and sustainable development;

G.

whereas the Single Market Acts I and II represent a well-built horizontal strategy that has determined concrete legislative and non-legislative measures with the capacity to unleash the unexploited growth potential of, and remove obstacles to, the Single Market;

H.

whereas the Commission has identified services, financial services, transport, energy and the digital market as key areas for improving the functioning and deepening of the Single Market; whereas the methodology for defining these areas should be assessed and revised on a regular basis, taking account of growth targets and outlook as well as the criteria for providing necessary protection for citizens, in particular consumers, professionals and workers;

I.

whereas we have not yet achieved a fully functioning digital single market for online and communications services in Europe; whereas the free movement of digital services and cross-border e-commerce is today hindered by fragmented rules at national level; whereas European companies and public services will gain economic and social benefits from the use of advanced ICT services and applications;

J.

whereas an accessible and efficient European transport infrastructure, an ambitious European industrial policy and the creation of a single energy market — aiming both at supporting EU business competitiveness and ensuring universal and affordable access to energy for households and consumers — are vital for the EU Single Market; whereas it is therefore necessary to define priority actions in these fields;

1.

Reiterates its call on the Commission to strengthen Single Market governance by establishing, as a specific pillar of the European Semester, an annual Single Market governance cycle that includes the Internal Market Scoreboard, an annual report on the integration of the Single Market as part of the Annual Growth Survey, European Council guidance to Member States, national action plans aimed at implementing the Single Market guidelines, and dedicated country-specific recommendations; calls on the Commission, furthermore, to take full account of the key growth areas — identified as the services sector, the energy sector, the transport sector and the digital single market — and of the measures included in the Single Market Acts I and II;

2.

Stresses the need to define the Single Market as the third pillar of the European Semester in order to cover a clear set of priorities related to the real economy; believes that the definition and achievement of these priorities is essential to stimulate growth and bridge the present gap from reaching the objectives of the Europe 2020 strategy, while ensuring economic convergence between Member States inside and outside the euro area and in core and peripheral areas of the EU;

3.

Recalls its opinion that the first report on the state of the Single Market integration was insufficient and incomplete; believes, therefore, that future reports should be clearer on current deficiencies in specific Member States, provide more concrete guidance on possible remedies and expected benefits, and indicate efficient levers for boosting growth and competitiveness and, thus, for creating jobs that would together provide a concrete response to the current social and economic crisis;

4.

Welcomes the Commission’s Single Market integration report 2014 (COM(2013)0785)) and strongly supports the Commission’s efforts to integrate the Single Market further in the considerations of the European Semester; appreciates the fact that the report on the state of the Single Market in 2014 contains a number of elements specifically relating to actions taken by individual Member States; considers nevertheless that the report still lacks any qualitative assessment of the effectiveness of measures taken, progress made and policy results actually achieved; calls for the development of an analytical tool to measure Single Market integration within the framework of the Single Market pillar of the European Semester in relation to the country-specific recommendations; believes that this analytical tool could further complement the Internal Market Scoreboard;

5.

Believes that more horizontal coordination and coherence in the preparation of legislative proposals with relevance for the Single Market is needed; believes that the governance of the Single Market should take due account of the needs of all stakeholders and that a stronger and earlier involvement of the social partners, civil society and other stakeholders in designing, adopting, implementing and monitoring the measures is needed in order to boost growth and enforce citizens’ rights in the Single Market;

6.

Stresses the need for comprehensive consultations and thorough impact assessments before the Commission adopts a proposal; stresses that Commission proposals must be in line with the principles of smart regulation and regulatory fitness, include an assessment of the impact on SMEs, and meet with the approval of the Commission’s own Impact Assessment Board; stresses, furthermore, that impact assessments must evaluate the effects of new legislation on prospects for growth and on Europe’s competitiveness;

7.

Considers that the European Semester exercise should be anchored in a deeper democratic process with greater involvement of national parliaments while enhancing the prerogatives of the European Parliament;

8.

Believes that country-specific recommendations issued in this process should take into account the progress made by each Member State and that the national arrangements for implementing Single Market legislation do not necessarily have to follow a one-size-fits-all approach, but should instead seek to enhance the effectiveness of measures taken and actual policy results achieved;

9.

Requests that the forthcoming country-specific recommendations in the European Semester cycle 2014 reflect the findings of the Single Market integration report in a much stronger and stringent way than the country-specific recommendations for 2013;

10.

Takes the view that the third pillar of the European Semester, dedicated to Single Market integration, should be aimed at identifying priority policies and measures for stimulating and revitalising the real economy; considers that this aim will only be achieved effectively if all EU institutions consistently share and support it; encourages, for this reason, a focused organisation of the work of the Competitiveness Council so that it is explicitly devoted to feeding those priorities of relevance to the real economy into the European Semester;

11.

Considers that the key sectors identified by the Commission — services, financial services, transport, energy and the digital market — remain decisive for the full integration of the Single Market; considers, furthermore, that in order to achieve renewed growth, the relaunch of a consistent and integrated industrial policy focusing on these sectors should also include efforts to strengthen the protection of citizens’ rights — including those of consumers and workers — and a competitiveness model based on knowledge and innovation through EU incentives to drive investment and access to finance, R&D, and support for higher education;

12.

Urges the Commission to develop a genuine European industrial policy; believes that re-industrialisation should be a cross-sectorial priority for the Union; considers that this new industrial policy should include the enforcement of Single Market rules, a holistic strategy for the external dimension of the Single Market with a particular emphasis on coherent consumer protection policies and improved access to capital and infrastructures in order to increase companies’ competitiveness and enable them to access worldwide markets;

13.

Stresses that, by removing barriers to the free movement of persons, goods, services and capital, the Single Market makes it possible for businesses to operate on a larger scale, thereby enhancing their ability to innovate, invest, increase productivity and create jobs;

14.

Calls on the Commission to present a detailed action plan of measures designed to achieve a fully integrated and interconnected Single Market in energy; highlights the need to provide consumers with transparent and comparable energy prices while at the same time ensuring that consumers are protected, including vulnerable consumers; stresses the need for considerable investment in energy infrastructure and takes the view that all utilities sectors must keep pace with progress in the energy sector;

15.

Emphasises that it is essential to improve infrastructure — in particular cross-border connections and interoperability — to ensure that the Single Market can function effectively; believes that a single, interconnected and efficient European transport system is crucial for the free movement of goods, people and services within the Single Market; believes that further investment is essential in order to attain these objectives and reiterates that a wide range of financial instruments should be put in place for such projects;

16.

Stresses that the consistent implementation of current legislation and of further Commission proposals on digital services can help Europe make full use of the internal market; calls for a policy for a digital single market that makes online services in Europe more competitive, more effective across borders and more transparent, providing a high level of accessibility and consumer protection; stresses the importance of targeted investments and notes that work on the Connected Continent proposal will help to reduce price differences between Member States by encouraging competition in the telecoms sector;

17.

Calls for an ambitious implementation of the Consumer Agenda, including legislative and programming measures, in order to strengthen consumer protection and confidence in the Single Market, empower consumers, encourage the average consumer to behave responsibly and increase protection of vulnerable consumers;

18.

Takes the view that easier access to funding for SMEs would help loosen liquidity constraints and increase SME working capital; welcomes the fact that, among the priorities set by the Commission in the Annual Growth Survey 2014 and the Single Market integration report, the development of forms of alternative financing for SMEs ranks highly; strongly supports the objective of developing specific bonds and a dedicated stock exchange market for SMEs and calls on the Commission and Member States to take practical action in pursuit of this goal; furthermore, supports initiatives taken at EU level to complement national efforts in increasing micro-credit and boosting social entrepreneurship, including the support of development banks providing loans at lower rates than commercial banks; notes the particular importance of supporting SMEs through the COSME and Horizon 2020 programmes;

19.

Emphasises the relevance of obstacles to the functioning of the Single Market caused by the fragmentation of retail financial market services, as highlighted by the Commission in the Single Market integration report, in particular in relation to highly diverging interest rates for bank loans which have a strong impact on consumers, households and SMEs; is convinced that these differences hamper effective access to finance and have an adverse impact on the real economy; is concerned about the negative impression that consumers have of the fragmentation and underperformance of retail financial services, notably with regard to bank accounts, mortgages, private pensions and securities;

20.

Believes that the regulation of financial services should provide for better information, enhanced protection and effective redress for consumers; stresses the need for a quick and positive conclusion of the work on legislative proposals on the consumer and retail financial services market, in particular the comparability of fees related to payment accounts, payment account switching and access to payment accounts with basic features; takes the view that further proposals, such as a specific consumer insolvency regime to improve on the current fragmented and inadequate arrangements, should be brought forward in order to encourage the safe investment of private savings in the real economy;

21.

Regrets that, despite the strong evidence for the importance of the Single Market in overcoming the crisis, the free movement of citizens, in particular workers and professionals, across Europe is not complete and that stronger measures are needed in order to remove the remaining obstacles and to stimulate growth while guaranteeing citizens’ and workers’ rights; stresses the need for a balanced development of the internal market, based on the full implementation of economic freedoms in line with the social market economy;

22.

Recalls that the cyclical method of submitting Single Market Acts provided opportunities to identify and discuss on a regular basis the priorities for the development of the Single Market; considers that this method should be enhanced and developed further;

23.

Welcomes the package of legislative proposals for a consumer product safety regulation and a market surveillance regulation, and on disclosures of non-financial and diversity information by certain large companies and groups; believes that these initiatives can improve consumers’ rights, better guarantee consumer health and safety, facilitate trade in goods and services, and encourage a new model of competitiveness; asks, therefore, the Commission to work closely with Parliament and the Council to reach a conclusion within a reasonable timeframe;

24.

Underlines the importance of the political agreements reached on the reforms of the Mutual Recognition of Professional Qualifications Directive, the Public Procurement and Concessions package and the Alternative Dispute Resolution Directive and Online Dispute Resolution Regulation; urges, therefore, the Commission and the Member States to begin a speedy and comprehensive implementation of all new provisions;

25.

Stresses the need for proper transposition of legislation on public procurement and concessions; highlights the importance of public procurement as a key driver of growth, particularly for SMEs; takes the view that the implementation of this reform provides a major opportunity to modernise public administration by making strategic use of public procurement in terms of innovation and sustainability and enhancing the quality and efficiency of public spending in response to specific local and national government requirements; considers these to be the key factors in successfully implementing the rules concerning public procurement and concessions;

26.

Believes that, especially in order to combat youth unemployment, the new rules regarding professional qualifications (adopted in November 2013 and amending Directive 2005/36/EC and the IMI Regulation) are an important step towards enhancing the free movement of workers and professionals, foreseeing a high common standard of training and fostering the use of the European professional card; stresses that full and correct implementation of the Directive on the Recognition of Professional Qualifications (and of the Services Directive) is a key driver of EU economic growth; believes at the same time that a reform of the regulated professions is necessary to give young people better access to those professions and create a more dynamic market that gives adequate guarantees to consumers;

27.

Takes note of the Commission’s response to Parliament’s resolution of 7 February 2013 with regard to the legal basis for the requested legislative proposal that would contain the elements listed in that resolution; believes that the content of specific recommendations made therein still holds valuable ideas for the improved governance of the Single Market;

28.

Takes note of the adjusted structure of the second edition of the Single Market integration report (COM(2013)0785); welcomes the fact that the Commission has thereby also responded to requests made by Parliament in its resolution of 7 February 2013; notes that a number of the measures outlined in that resolution have already led to improved implementation and enforcement of EU law, including more stringent use of the EU Pilot;

29.

Welcomes the Online Single Market Scoreboard, and especially its visual and informative way of presenting the performance of Member States with regard to EU legislation relevant for the functioning of the internal market; believes that the Online Scoreboard should be available in all Union languages if it is to facilitate all European citizens’ understanding of the Single Market cycle and their potentially active role in it;

30.

Believes that efforts should be made to make the implementation and uniform application of Union law in the Member States more transparent; notes that transposition deadlines are exceeded by an average of nine months, and that there is a rising number of directives for which transposition is overdue by two years or more; considers that every directive should be transposed in a consistent manner and that all transposition measures should be adopted in order to reflect the compromises reached at Union level;

31.

Believes, however, that purely quantitative statistics on the implementation of Single Market legislation are not sufficient and that it is necessary to focus on the quality of how the legislation is implemented within the Member States based on specific key indicators for sectors of the Single Market developed at European level;

32.

Welcomes the report entitled ‘International Value Chains Intra- and Extra-EU’ as a positive example of the use of specific indicators to assess Single Market integration with specific attention being paid to the spread of production systems across the EU; considers that supporting further initiatives for cross-border supply chains to be developed will drive the removal of long-standing barriers to completing the Single Market and can help to improve the productivity and competitiveness of European firms in the world economy;

33.

Applauds the improved level of average transposition deficit, now down to 0,6 %; stresses that even a very small deficit in an important policy area can have a hugely detrimental effect on consumers’ and businesses’ opportunities, and thus on the European economy as a whole;

34.

Deplores the average duration of infringement proceedings, in particular the fact that cases dealing with services take longest (49,8 months on average); considers that infringement proceedings have revealed a number of limitations in terms of addressing and correcting implementation and application deficiencies of Single Market provisions in a swift manner; calls on Member States to work more effectively with the Commission in resolving cases more swiftly and calls on the Commission to carry out further ‘sweeps’ of national measures which are detrimental to the Single Market;

35.

Takes the view that infringement proceedings should be considered to be a last resort, to be pursued only after attempts have been made to coordinate and correct the situation, and that the Commission should therefore promote the use of the EU Pilot and other proceedings before taking a Member State to the Court of Justice; insists, furthermore, that every effort should be made towards ensuring more effective use of infringement proceedings for breaches of Union law provisions in the field of the Single Market, and that the Member States and the European Council should continue the further development of infringement proceedings in the framework of future revisions of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;

36.

Supports the Commission’s actions to improve the cooperation of national authorities with regard to the functioning of the Single Market; agrees that a permanent IT mechanism facilitating the exchange of relevant information could significantly improve the situation, as a group of national experts meeting a few times per year is hardly the proper way to deal with such a priority matter;

37.

Reiterates the importance of the proper functioning of the Internal Market Information (IMI) system, recently given a proper regulatory basis and currently being expanded to encompass new policy areas and sectors; invites the Commission to inform Parliament about the operation of the machine translation tool introduced to facilitate communication between national, regional and local authorities;

38.

Calls on the Member States to implement in full the measures provided for under the digital agenda and step up efforts to modernise public administration — not least through the swift implementation of measures related to e-government, e-health, e-invoicing and e-procurement — with a view to providing more and better digital services for citizens and businesses across Europe, reducing costs and enhancing the efficiency of the public sector;

39.

Notes that the problem-solving network SOLVIT remains underused; calls on the Member States to ensure that adequate resources are provided for the SOLVIT network and the Points of Single Contact, as required by the Services Directive; calls on the Commission and the Member States alike to take further steps to disseminate information about the availability of these instruments among businesses and entrepreneurs; considers, in addition, that Member States should initiate a more intensive and broader exchange of best practices;

40.

Takes note of the continuous increase of the use of the Your Europe and Your Europe Advice portals, which should be able to provide the necessary information to anyone moving around the European Union;

41.

Welcomes the Single Market Month which, between 23 September and 23 October 2013, brought together citizens from across Europe, policy-makers, experts and EU leaders in an online debate and in related national events to discuss the progress made so far, the challenges remaining and ideas for the future of the Single Market, and calls on the Commission to take good stock of the concerns and suggestions put forward by the participants; calls on the Commission to evaluate the format and the effectiveness of the 2013 exercise, including its ability to reach out to citizens, businesses and consumers, and provide them with a real opportunity to help shape the Single Market;

42.

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

29.8.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 285/47

—

having regard to the 2009 report of the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) entitled ‘How to feed the world in 2050’,

—

having regard to the International Convention for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV Convention),

—

having regard to the FAO International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture,

—

having regard to the April 2013 report entitled ‘Headed for 9 billion — Can Europe afford to miss the potential of GM crops’ by Ivar Virgin/Stockholm Environment Institute, Timbro,

—

having regard to the 1993 FAO report entitled ‘Harvesting nature’s diversity’,

—

having regard to the website on the Svalbard Global Seed Vault (1),

—

having regard to the Commission Communication of 27 March 2001 entitled ‘Biodiversity action plan for the conservation of natural resources’ (COM(2001)0162),

—

having regard to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 2003 on genetically modified food and feed (2),

—

having regard to Council Directives 2002/53/EC of 13 June 2002 on the common catalogue of varieties of agricultural plant species (3) and 2002/55/EC of 13 June 2002 on the marketing of vegetable seed (4),

—

having regard to Regulation (EC) No 1830/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 2003 concerning the traceability and labelling of genetically modified organisms and the traceability of food and feed products produced from genetically modified organisms and amending Directive 2001/18/EC (5),

—

having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 2100/94 of 27 July 1994 on Community plant variety rights (6),

—

having regard to the note by the UN Secretary-General entitled ‘The right to food — Seed policies and the right to food: enhancing agrobiodiversity and encouraging innovation’ (A/64/170, 2009, UN General Assembly),

—

having regard to the conclusions of the International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD), an intergovernmental process supported by the FAO, the Global Environment Facility, the United Nations Development Programme, the United Nations Environment Programme, UNESCO, the World Bank and the WHO,

—

having regard to Rule 48 of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development (A7-0044/2014),

A.

whereas its Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development aims, by means of this report, to launch a thorough debate and inquiry concerning the whole situation with regard to plant-breeding in European and global agriculture;

B.

whereas the plant-breeding industry is of fundamental importance as regards the productivity, diversity, health and quality of agriculture, horticulture, food and feed production and the environment;

C.

whereas, according to reports primarily from UN bodies the FAO and the WHO, as well as from the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the world population is expected to increase from the current figure of 7 billion to around 9 billion between 2040 and 2050, and could, moreover, reach as high as 10-11 billion;

D.

whereas this population growth will place extreme demands on agriculture, in particular the increased productivity that will be needed to meet the substantial rise in demand for food, and whereas the FAO estimates that the food supply will need to increase by 70 % over the next 30-40 years;

E.

whereas because between 30 % and 50 % of food produced in the EU is wasted, with the global average being around 30 %, a substantial part of the increased food supply needed could be met by better, more efficient and sustainable food production practices in developed nations in conjunction with enlarged storage and distribution systems in developing nations;

F.

whereas the main problem remains of how populations in different parts of the world will be able to feed themselves, as the cultivable land area declines due to inappropriate land use, including poor agricultural practices, a problem which has been exacerbated by climate change, and whereas opportunities to increase the area under cultivation are extremely limited, given that in many parts of the world it is thought to be quite unrealistic to bring new agricultural land into use;

G.

whereas the FAO estimates that it will be possible to achieve approximately 10 % of an increase in agricultural production by cultivating new farmland, which means that around 90 % will have to be achieved by increasing the yields from existing farmland, and whereas products must also continue to be of a high quality;

H.

whereas over-exploitation of farmland could impoverish the soil and, in the worst case scenario, lead to erosion and desertification; whereas the same applies to woodland, because converting woodland to farmland would have such a serious impact on the climate, water management and on biodiversity that it is an inconceivable option for increasing food production;

I.

whereas, in addition to a reduction in the area of farmland, agricultural productivity has levelled off, and worrying trends, including falling productivity, have been noted, and will have a seriously adverse impact on agriculture in the future and on human food needs;

J.

whereas food production depends not only on having sufficient land mass but also on factors such as the climate, water, energy, and access to nutrients; whereas in the future these basic resources will be more limited, and this lack of resources is likely to have an adverse effect on the increased demands on agricultural land use, production and viability;

K.

whereas major changes in the climate are likely to occur in the future; whereas for Europe this means a significantly drier climate in the southern regions, which are areas of great importance for the production of fruit and vegetables; whereas in central and northern latitudes within Europe, meanwhile, winters are expected to be milder and summers are expected to have considerably more rainfall than at present; whereas the consequences are very likely to include an increase in animal and plant diseases and a need for new farming techniques;

L.

whereas it is undoubtedly the case that European agriculture faces enormous challenges, and with more extreme weather conditions, such as droughts, floods and other natural disasters, farming will need to adapt in order to safeguard production; whereas the crops seen in the fields today cannot remain the same in the future if we are to meet the increased need for food;

M.

whereas the length of the protection of variety rights in respect of those plants that require an extended development period prior to the commercialisation stage is not sufficient to encourage commercial investment in their research and development;

1.

Stresses that, in order to respond to forthcoming challenges, such as future food supply needs and climate change, it is exceptionally important to have an effective and competitive plant-breeding sector;

2.

Notwithstanding the primary importance of healthy soil and diversity as regards agro-ecosystem resilience, stresses the importance of developing varieties that can cope with the conditions we expect to encounter in the future, for example increased precipitation and an estimated increased occurrence of plant diseases; notes that it is also important to preserve and develop existing diversity in Europe, both within the agro-ecosystem as a whole and as regards genetic diversity within strains and the absolute number of different breeds and landraces, as all these are needed to ensure that we can adapt to the challenges of climate change;

3.

Notes the need for crops that, for example, absorb nitrogen and phosphorus effectively, are more tolerant of drought and heavier precipitation, are resistant to pests and can withstand changes in temperature; underlines the fact that it is also necessary to develop perennial crops, i.e. multiannual crops; notes that, with multiannual crops, the land need not be tilled every year, making farming more environmentally sound;

4.

Stresses that, as it takes on average 10 years to develop a new variety, from the research stage to the finished seed, and additional time to trial and commercially propagate that variety, even now there is a need to encourage substantially more research investment in order to meet future food needs and cope with climate change;

5.

Stresses that, as opportunities to bring new land into use for farming are very limited, it is vital to facilitate the process of developing new crops that are characterised by their adaptability to the environmental conditions, suitability as regards the need for them to cope with scarce resources, support for sustainability goals, sufficient productivity and high-quality, and underlines the fact that it is also important to develop crops which are already widely used, in order to inject flexibility into future technical and scientific developments in the crop sector;

6.

Notes that the continuing loss of specific plant protection products for minor uses is having a very significant impact on the quality and yields of fruit and vegetables and is jeopardising the production of some speciality crops; stresses the need to find both short- and long-term solutions as regards the cultivation of these crops;

7.

Notes that it can take on average 10 years to develop a new variety of wheat, rape or any other crop, and that it is therefore important to develop and use new plant-breeding techniques which respond to societal and agricultural demands and to be open to the technologies available in order to meet those needs and enhance the competitiveness of the agriculture and horticulture sectors; expresses concern at the Commission’s delay in assessing new breeding techniques, and calls on the Commission, as a matter of urgency, to clarify their regulatory status;

8.

Calls on the Commission to use the Horizon 2020 Framework Programme for Research and Innovation to fund applied research that supports the development of new, innovative planting-breeding techniques such as accelerated breeding;

9.

Notes the estimates put forward by the FAO that the diversity of cultivated crops declined by 75 % during the 20th century and that a third of today’s diversity could disappear by 2050; stresses that, in order to ensure long-term food security for a growing world population and resilience in food production systems, it is of crucial importance that we protect and preserve European biological and genetic diversity; believes that it is vital, therefore, to preserve the vast majority of local and regional varieties in situ and on-farm, in order to maintain and increase genetic and cultural diversity both within strains and breeds and in terms of their absolute number;

10.

Stresses that, to make it possible to develop new varieties, it is vital to have many genetic variations available; believes, therefore, that the rapid decline is cause for serious concern;

11.

Welcomes both the development of partnerships between government, industry and research organisations, for example in the area of participatory breeding, aimed at stimulating research in pre-breeding and breeding, and the characterisation and maintenance of genetic resources; draws attention to the benefits of strengthening and extending such partnerships as well as transnational initiatives in this field, and stresses the need to ensure that support schemes are structured in a way that maximises the impact and coherence of investments overall;

12.

Believes that it is vital, with a view to Europe’s future, to work seriously to preserve our genetic heritage, and that it is particularly important to cultivate and preserve local and regional varieties in order to conserve both genetic and cultural diversity;

13.

Notes that, in an attempt to preserve and maintain genetic variety in agriculture and plant-breeding, collections of seed and plant material are being gathered at various gene banks around the world; notes in particular that there is a gene bank on Svalbard containing genetic material from all over the world, and stresses the fact that this is a very important and ambitious project aimed at safeguarding genetic diversity for the future;

14.

Believes that it is important to preserve the vast majority of varieties and plant genetic resources in situ and on-farm; draws attention to the fact that public institutions are currently not making enough effort or providing enough support to facilitate this goal;

15.

Stresses that this and other similar projects are vital to the future of plant breeding, agricultural production and the food supply;

16.

Underlines the fact that plant-breeding research and practice is key to the future of agricultural production, in particular work on the development of existing and new varieties, with a view to safeguarding future food supply;

17.

Acknowledges the importance of guaranteeing access to genetic resources as the basis for plant breeding; upholds in particular the fundamental principle of the international system of plant breeders’ rights enshrined in the UPOV Convention, and stresses that the use of a protected variety for further breeding and the exploitation of a newly bred variety cannot be prevented by the holders of such rights; notes that this fundamental principle is also recognised in Article 13.2(d)(ii) of the FAO International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture;

18.

Understands that it is both costly and time-consuming to develop new improved varieties, but stresses that this is needed in order to maintain Europe’s competitiveness in this area; suggests that such costs could be compensated for by extending the length of plant variety protection rights after a proper impact assessment;

19.

Expresses its concern at the fact that the global plant-breeding market is dominated by just a few large multinational undertakings that invest in only a limited number of varieties, while in Europe the plant-breeding market remains more diversified in comparison with the situation globally, with small and medium-sized enterprises accounting for a substantial part of the sector; stresses that the European plant-breeding market must be further improved in the interest of healthy competition;

20.

Believes that large global plant-breeding undertakings have acquired a worrying degree of influence over global agriculture and agricultural policy; emphasises the role of publicly-funded independent scientific research carried out in the long-term public interest as regards long-term food security;

21.

Believes furthermore that the larger undertakings should better exploit and share their plant-breeding techniques, which, if used correctly, could help to solve problems relating to the environment, the climate and the food supply;

22.

Notes the fact that SMEs have an important role to play in the seed market and plant-breeding sector in the EU, in view of their significant contribution to commercial plant breeding, and draws attention to their ability to turn research and knowledge into new commercial products; as plant breeding becomes an increasingly research-intensive and high-tech sector, however, draws attention to the fact that the cost and tools required to develop and then market a new variety could constitute a barrier to smaller companies; believes that an adequate length of protection of their plant variety rights and full access to research results could contribute significantly to levelling the playing field, and stresses that it is of vital importance that investment in these companies in the EU be maintained going forward;

23.

Stresses that it is important for Europe to win back and further develop European plant-breeding research and practice;

24.

Stresses the importance of diversity of species in Europe, and of European plant-breeding research that focuses on European needs, including plants, cereals and fruits which are appropriate for local and regional conditions; notes that any developments in this area will help European farmers improve the quantity and quality of their food and feed production;

25.

Stresses that Europe needs a range of diverse actors in the plant-breeding sector and that it should become possible for more undertakings and research centres to carry out research projects and to operate in the plant-breeding sector;

26.

Believes that plant-breeding research, if it is to continue, requires long-term financial support, and that it is untenable to grant financial support to a plant-breeding research project for only a relatively short period, as it takes on average 10 years to develop a new variety;

27.

Stresses that the EU, under the Common Agricultural Policy, has a duty to shoulder its responsibility to meet future challenges in the area of agriculture and plant-breeding in Europe; believes that the EU should play a leading role in the development of sustainable plant-breeding techniques and in promoting agricultural and plant-breeding research and practice;

28.

Stresses that fundamental plant-breeding research in the EU should be funded by the EU and its Member States; does not believe it possible for small and medium-sized plant-breeding undertakings in the EU to fund much of the research themselves and at the same time be competitive;

29.

Calls on the Commission to allocate financial resources to and create a coherent structure for plant-breeding research and practice within research programmes and other suitable policy instruments, so that European diversity can be preserved and developed; believes it important, in particular, that research projects be given enough time and funding to achieve results; stresses that it is also very important that plant-breeding undertakings have unrestricted access to research results, and that there should be a range of different research projects, so that failure would have a lesser impact;

30.

Underlines the fact that there will be a continuous need for highly skilled workers to meet future demands in plant-breeding research, and that plant science and plant breeding should be further promoted in schools, universities and among the general public; points in particular to the success of the ‘Fascination of Plants Day’ on 18 May 2013;

31.

Stresses that the ultimate aim of legislation on plant-breeding should be to facilitate both the application of plant-breeding techniques and research into agriculture and plant-breeding; believes that it should result in products being better adapted to the local climate and geographical conditions, which would ultimately lead to large yields that are safe for people’s health and the environment;

32.

Notes that, with today’s technique-based plant-breeding legislation, it has proven difficult, after the event, to define what technique was used at the time of plant-breeding, which serves to confirm the difficulties posed by technique-based laws;

33.

Calls on the Commission, in view of the challenges and the current state of the European and global plant-breeding sector, as described above, to examine and analyse the situation carefully and to propose effective and practical measures in order to meet the enormous challenges facing Europe’s breeders and farmers;

34.

Encourages the Commission to elaborate an overall strategy on agricultural inputs, especially in relation to plant breeding; urges the Commission to provide a policy framework that supports the agricultural input sector as one of the key areas for the development of agricultural productivity and sustainability;

35.

Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission.

29.8.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 285/52

—

having regard to the Commission’s ‘Seventh progress report on economic, social and territorial cohesion’, of 24 November 2011 (COM(2011)0776), and its accompanying staff working paper (SEC(2011)1372),

—

having regard to the Commission’s ‘Eighth progress report on economic, social and territorial cohesion — The regional and urban dimension of the crisis’, of 26 June 2013 (COM(2013)0463), and its accompanying staff working document (SWD(2013)0232),

—

having regard to the Commission’s ‘Cohesion policy strategic report 2013 on programme implementation 2007-2013’, of 18 April 2013 (COM(2013)0210), and its accompanying staff working document (SWD(2013)0129),

—

having regard to the Commission proposal of 6 October 2011 for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down common provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund, the Cohesion Fund, the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund covered by the Common Strategic Framework and laying down general provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund and the Cohesion Fund and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 (COM(2011)0615),

—

having regard to its resolution of 11 March 2009 on Cohesion Policy: investing in the real economy (1),

—

having regard to its resolution of 7 October 2010 on EU cohesion and regional policy after 2013 (2),

—

having regard to its resolution of 20 May 2010 on the contribution of the cohesion policy to the achievement of Lisbon and the EU2020 Objectives (3),

—

having regard to the Commission proposal of 6 October 2011 for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on specific provisions concerning the European Regional Development Fund and the Investment for growth and jobs goal and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1080/2006 (COM(2011)0614),

—

having regard to the 4th CoR Monitoring Report on Europe 2020, Committee of the Regions, October 2013,

—

having regard to the joint paper from the Commission’s Directorates-General for Regional & Urban Policy and Employment, Social Affairs & Inclusion, entitled ‘EU Cohesion Policy Contributing to Employment and Growth in Europe’, July 2013,

—

having regard to the study published by Parliament entitled ‘Cohesion policy after 2013: a critical assessment of the legislative proposals’, June 2012,

—

having regard to Rule 48 of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on Regional Development and the opinions of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs and the Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality (A7-0081/2014),

A.

whereas empirical evidence shows that the economic, financial and social crisis has brought the convergence process to a halt or has even reversed it, thus aggravating disparities between regions and bringing to an end a long period during which regional disparities in GDP per head, and unemployment within the EU, had been consistently decreasing, while at the same time affecting more severely the weaker regions in the Union;

B.

whereas public resources both at Member State and EU level have become scarcer and subject to increasing pressure, while the crisis and the ensuing recession, as well as the sovereign debt crisis in several Member States, have pushed Member States to finally implement the needed important structural reforms to contribute to the restoration of economic growth and job creation, sometimes leading to cuts in the co-financing of the Structural Funds and the Cohesion Fund;

C.

whereas the policies of fiscal consolidation have increased the role and importance of cohesion policy as a source of public investment, in particular at sub-national level, as this policy funding represents more than half of all public investment in a significant number of Member States and regions;

D.

whereas the crisis is adversely affecting all European regions and cities, thus increasing the importance of cohesion policy funding also in transition regions and in more developed regions;

E.

whereas the contribution to the aims of the Europe 2020 Strategy has a very strong regional dimension that should be taken into account in the preparation and implementation of the next generation of programmes under cohesion and other investment policies of the EU;

F.

whereas the emphasis of cohesion policy has up until now rather been on absorption than on defining and monitoring — and evaluating the achievement of — objectives, while the monitoring and evaluation systems fail to fully achieve their purpose of improving the definition of differentiated targets according to the local, regional and interregional features, specificities and needs;

G.

whereas the cohesion policy continues to be the main source of EU public funding in the context of the multiannual financial framework 2014-2020, and whereas within the new framework for the cohesion policy all the emphasis is placed on the need to concentrate investment at regional and local level in important areas such as job creation, SMEs, employment (in particular youth employment), labour mobility, training and education, research and innovation, ICT, sustainable transport and the removal of bottlenecks, sustainable energy, the environment, promotion of the institutional capacity of public authorities and efficient public administration, urban development and cities;

H.

whereas the need to achieve more with fewer resources has led to the inclusion of smart specialisation in the new cohesion policy framework (the Common Provisions Regulation (4)), in order for regions to take a strategic and less fragmented approach to economic development through targeted support for research and innovation;

I.

whereas partnership and multi-level governance constitute horizontal general principles in view of delivering the Union strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth, in the context of the next legislative framework of cohesion policy;

J.

whereas the evaluations performed during the 2007-2013 programme did not look at the whole evaluation cycle including efficiency, effectiveness and impact;

K.

whereas the fund absorption rate is around 50 % within the Member States and around 30 % for the last year of the period;

L.

whereas SMEs are experiencing difficulty in accessing financing from the banking sector;

1.

Welcomes the seventh and eighth progress reports, as well as the strategic report 2013, and calls on the Commission — which is now launching the 2007-2013 ex-post evaluation — and the Member States to ensure that the monitoring and evaluation are based on reliable data, to look at the efficiency, effectiveness and impact of operations, and to ensure that the ex-post evaluation is completed by the end of 2015 as stipulated in the former General Regulation, in order for clear lessons to be drawn with a view to the implementation of the new programming period;

2.

Considers that policies of budgetary consolidation are in themselves insufficient to enhance growth and promote investments that generate good-quality, sustainable jobs, which require as well measures that support the economy and encourage the progress — still fragile and timid — made towards recovery;

3.

Calls on the Commission and the Member States to increase investment in the areas of entrepreneurship, business start-ups and self-employment as a means of creating more jobs, in particular since SMEs and microenterprises provide over two thirds of the EU’s private sector jobs; takes the view that special emphasis should be placed on the regional and local levels; in addition, considers that investment in social business and social entrepreneurship provides a good additional option with a view to meeting social needs that are not satisfied by public goods and services;

4.

Expresses its concern over the lack of sufficient public financial resources, in particular at sub-national level, to implement the Europe 2020 Strategy adequately, owing to the impact of the economic crisis, and over the fact that a significant number of less-developed Member States and regions depend to a great extent on cohesion policy funding; considers that before taking any decision related to potential macro-economic sanctions, the huge dependence of certain Member States’ development on cohesion funding should be carefully considered;

5.

Believes that, although the resources allocated to cohesion policy in the current multiannual financial framework are relatively small as compared to the needs on the ground, ensuring greater efficiency as well as synergies between the EU budget and the national budgets may nevertheless constitute important levers for growth-enhancing policies;

6.

Takes the view that in order to contribute to achieving the EU 2020 Strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth in line with the objectives of economic, social and territorial cohesion, notwithstanding the need to focus on sectors with a long-term potential for job creation and innovation, it is important to take account of the significant needs of many less-developed regions regarding investment in infrastructure projects in basic sectors such as transport, telecommunication and sustainable energy;

7.

Believes that — notwithstanding the evidence that local and regional authorities are being involved in the preparation of Partnership Agreements — further action must be taken to reinforce the territorial dimension of the governance system of cohesion policy, the Europe 2020 strategy and the European Semester, by ensuring real dialogue and complementarity among the different levels of governance, on the one hand, and consistency of the priorities established at those levels with the needs and specificities identified at national, regional and local levels, on the other; stresses in this regard the importance of ensuring that municipalities and regions are duly involved in establishing national strategies and defining their specific problems and challenges, while avoiding any increase in the administrative burden;

8.

Considers that cohesion policy is best placed to give the Europe 2020 Strategy the territorial dimension needed to tackle the very relevant growth differentials within the Union and within Member States, to ensure that growth potential is also utilised in the Union's outermost and most sparsely populated areas, and to address the fact that differences in institutional capacity mean that the different regions cannot use the given targets as references in the same way;

9.

Is particularly worried that, owing to the crisis, the percentage of the population at risk of poverty or social exclusion, suffering of material deprivation, environmental degradation and poor housing conditions, or having very low work intensity and threatened by exclusion and energy poverty has increased considerably, with greater prevalence in convergence regions and cities, and in particular in the regions around capital cities which, according to the indicators, are classified as developed, while also affecting more particularly women, single parent families, large families with four or more children, carers (especially carers of disabled family members), members of marginalised communities or older people close to retirement for whom access to equal opportunities is difficult;

10.

Considers it urgent to tackle these issues — which severely undermine cohesion among regions and may put at risk the competitiveness of the Union in the medium and long term — by focusing on policies that ensure access to sustainable, good-quality employment and social inclusion, and in particular by young people, promoting the vital role of SMEs in this regard, reducing fragmentation and facilitating transition between jobs, focusing on professional retraining programmes for the long-term unemployed, drawing on the experience acquired by those at the end of their careers and promoting equal economic independence for women and men; considers it essential also to promote physical accessibility and access to information and communication media, the achievement of which must be assessed using reliable, objective and comparable indicators, and considering the demographic challenges;

11.

Insists on the role that the European Social Fund (ESF) plays in reducing the disparities in human capital among regions and in helping to increase employment rates, in parallel and in combination with the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), contributes to the fulfilment of some of the current major priorities of the Union, namely boosting youth employment and the labour market, promoting sustainable economy and growth, reducing the number of early school leavers, and combating poverty, discrimination and social exclusion; insists therefore that there is a need to reinforce the principle of sound financial management, in particular as regards the efficiency and effectiveness of ESF operations, and calls on the Commission to fully analyse the overall effect and real impact of the ESF on the unemployment rate and on job creation;

12.

Acknowledges that a large proportion of ESF expenditure is allocated with a view to promoting more and better jobs, supporting integration and participation of disadvantaged groups, including disabled people, and developing an inclusive society that is accessible to all; stresses, however, that at times of crisis, more emphasis should be placed on the ESF being efficiently targeted to combat local and regional inequalities and social exclusion, to provide access to employment for the most vulnerable groups and young people in particular, and to assist women’s re-integration into the labour market by reducing gender-based segregation;

13.

Notes that the high proportion of early school-leavers in some regions is significantly above the target of 10 % and that early school-leavers must receive an offer of education, training or work that meets their needs; refers, in this context, to the importance of the Youth Guarantee for early school-leavers; stresses that in order to reduce the number of early school-leavers it is important that the education system is inclusive, offering equal chances to all young people; stresses that a solution must therefore be found to the problem of integrating poorly-trained young people into the labour market, by providing barrier-free, accessible and quality vocational and in-work training to help them acquire skills, taking into account the fact that a lack of qualifications can increase the risk of unemployment, which in turn increases the poverty risk and involves a multitude of social challenges linked to exclusion, alienation and failed efforts to build an independent life; points out that, to this end, the ESF’s contribution is crucial in helping more young people to stay at school and acquire the appropriate qualifications needed for a job and career and in ensuring wider access to high-quality education with special projects for children from disadvantaged groups and minorities, including disabled people; calls on Member States to encourage appropriate vocational and on-the-job training for those who will benefit from it;

14.

Stresses that the employment situation of young people is highly dependent on the overall economic situation and that therefore it is very important to support, guide and monitor young people in their move from education to professional life; takes the view that the Commission could therefore align any future policy proposals in this area with the ‘Youth on the Move’ and ‘Youth Opportunities’ initiatives;

15.

Stresses that employment in some regions remains below 60 % and that some regions are missing their national targets by a factor of 20-25 %, which is having a particularly adverse effect on young people, women, older people, carers and people with disabilities; stresses that certain crisis measures have had an adverse effect on cohesion and have fundamentally increased inequalities in the EU; stresses that keeping high-risk groups in employment or creating employment options for them requires targeted measures addressing job creation, training opportunities and job retention; stresses that unemployment has been a feature of certain isolated settlements for generations, and this poses a particular threat to marginalised communities;

16.

Points out that employment rates have remained well below the Europe 2020 target of having at least 75 % of the population aged 20–64 in employment by 2020; notes that while there are no specific employment rate targets at a regional level, Member States have individually set national targets which, in most cases, have not been met as the financial and economic crisis has had a major asymmetrical impact on regional labour markets, predominantly in Southern Europe, with a marked increase in youth unemployment;

17.

Believes that all regions face the challenge of creating sustainable growth and enhancing resource efficiency; emphasises in this regard the need for policies, which include the prioritisation of spending in the areas of education, life-long learning, research, innovation and development, energy efficiency and local entrepreneurship, as well as the creation of new financial instruments for all kinds of businesses, and especially for SMEs;

18.

Recalls the potential that SMEs have for job creation and urges the Member States to develop policies that improve access to financing and financing conditions for SMEs; calls on the Commission to work with the Member States with a view to increasing the transparency and predictability of the system of invitations to tender and reducing the amount of time that elapses between the issuing of an invitation to tender and the award of a contract, in particular for SMEs, which compete in a rapidly changing environment;

19.

Urges that particular attention be given to the cultural and creative sectors, contributing to the achievement of the Europe 2020 Strategy objectives, in particular job creation; stresses the vital contribution of these sectors to the development of regions and cities; calls for sustained measures to promote continuing education for women specifically relating to these sectors in a bid to ensure that their qualifications can be effectively turned to account and new job prospects created;

20.

Recalls that while there is strong evidence that implementation of cohesion policy has accelerated, and that the resulting programmes have made important contributions in many areas where investment is necessary for economic modernisation and competiveness (such as research and development, SME support, re-industrialisation, social inclusion, and education and training), a number of Member States are at risk of failing to implement their programmes before the end of the current programming period; urges the Commission, in this regard, to analyse in depth the causes of the low absorption rates, and urges the Member States to provide co-financing in order to accelerate the implementation of funds;

21.

Encourages the Member States to explore synergies between cohesion policy financing and other sources of EU funding (such as for TEN-T, TEN-E, CEF, Horizon 2020, COSME and other programmes) as well as with financing provided by the European Investment Bank and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development; urges the Member States to accelerate implementation and to simplify and improve access to the funds available in order to encourage SMEs, civil society organisations, local municipalities and other interested beneficiaries to make use of them;

22.

Considers that evaluation has an essential role to play in the policy debate and learning, but is concerned that, although the provision of monitoring data and information on implementation is improving the quality of targets set, the uneven quality of progress reporting in many cases nevertheless makes it difficult to develop a full and accurate picture of progress towards the targets at regional and local level; emphasises that evaluation should also assess and propose measures to relieve unnecessary burdens on beneficiaries, including SMEs, local and regional authorities and NGOs; considers that any additional burdens connected with monitoring must not be imposed;

23.

Believes that the progress reports do not fully provide a clear picture of the progress made in the implementation of cohesion policy and towards the established targets, owing either to the unavailability of data at relevant level or to the insufficiently clear linkage between the statistical data provided and the extent to which the cohesion policy aims that require monitoring have been met;

24.

Asks the Commission and the Member States, in order to strengthen the transparency of reporting and the quality of programming and its implementation, to make full use of the monitoring and evaluation tools available in the context of the current legislative framework (stronger result orientation, use of common output indicators, choice of programme-specific result indicators and a clear performance framework);

25.

Considers that while the evaluations of cohesion policy programmes over the 2007-2013 period co-financed by the ERDF and the Cohesion Fund show good overall awareness in the Member States of the gender equality requirement when setting up such programmes (70 % (5)), they also indicate that gender equality is by no means effectively integrated into the programmes through clear identification of problems or quantified targets (less than 8 %); calls on the Commission to further improve Member States’ reporting systems by introducing and utilising indicators so as to make it possible to assess the support provided under cohesion policy for genuine progress on gender equality and to what extent this is being achieved;

26.

Urges the Commission to check whether Managing Authorities apply the Late Payment Directive in relation with beneficiaries of projects and take adequate measures to decrease the payments’ delays;

27.

Calls on the Commission’s Internal Audit Service and the European Court of Auditors to increase their performance audits on Cohesion and Structural Funds, and in particular on the ESF;

28.

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

29.8.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 285/58

—

having regard to Articles 349 and 355(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), which confer a special status on the outermost regions (ORs) and provide for the adoption of ‘specific measures’ that enable the Treaties and common policies to be fully implemented,

—

having regard to Article 107(3)(a) of the TFEU on rules governing state aid to such regions,

—

having regard to Articles 174 et seq. of the TFEU, which establish the objective of economic, social and territorial cohesion and specify the structural financial instruments to achieve this,

—

having regard to the Commission communications on outermost regions, in particular that of 17 October 2008 entitled ‘The outermost regions: an asset for Europe’ (COM(2008)0642),

—

having regard to its resolutions on the ORs, in particular that of 20 May 2008 on the strategy for the outermost regions: achievements and future prospects (1),

—

having regard to the Commission staff working document entitled ‘Regions 2020 — an assessment of future challenges for EU regions’ (SEC(2008)2868),

—

having regard to the Message from Reunion Island of 7 July 2008 adopted by the participants in the Conference on ‘The European Union and its Overseas Entities: Strategies to Counter Climate Change and Biodiversity Loss’ and to the EU Council conclusions of 25 June 2009 on ‘A mid-term assessment of implementing the EU Biodiversity Action Plan and Towards an EU Strategy on Invasive Alien Species’,

—

having regard to the joint memorandum of the outermost regions of 14 October 2009 on ‘The Outermost Regions in 2020’,

—

having regard to the common platform of 6 July 2010, presented to the President of the Commission, José Manuel Durão Barroso, by the Conference of Members of the European Parliament from the outermost regions,

—

having regard to the Memorandum of Spain, France, Portugal and the Outermost Regions of 7 May 2010 entitled ‘A Renewed Vision of the European Strategy for the Outermost Regions’,

—

having regard to the joint contribution of the outermost regions of 28 January 2011 on the Fifth Report on Economic, Social and Territorial Cohesion,

—

having regard to the report of 12 October 2011 entitled ‘Europe’s outermost regions and the Single Market: The EU’s influence in the world’, submitted to Commissioner Michel Barnier by Pedro Solbes Mira,

—

having regard to its resolution of 18 April 2012 on the role of cohesion policy in the outermost regions of the European Union in the context of EU 2020 (2),

—

having regard to the Commission communication of 20 June 2012 entitled ‘The outermost regions of the European Union: towards a partnership for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth’ (COM(2012)0287),

—

having regard to the report produced by Serge Letchimy, Member of the French National Assembly, for the French Prime Minister on Article 349 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union: a contribution to bringing the derogation provisions to bear in support of a global development project for the outermost regions,

—

having regard to the joint contributions and technical and political documents of the Conference of Presidents of the Outermost Regions of the European Union, in particular the final declaration of the 19th conference of 17 and 18 October 2013,

—

having regard to Rule 48 of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on Regional Development (A7-0121/2014),

A.

whereas the assets, resources and potential of the ORs highlighted by the Commission in its 2008 strategy and 2012 communication, which lie in areas of key importance to EU research, innovation and growth, attract too little support and financing under EU funds and programmes;

B.

whereas the ORs consist of a number of archipelagos and islands and a region bordering on the Amazon forest and share specific constraints that set them apart from other EU geographical areas with special profiles (island, upland and sparsely populated regions);

C.

whereas the ORs are regions of excellence making a significant contribution towards meeting the objectives the EU has set as part of the Europe 2020 growth strategy, the Horizon 2020 strategy, the Energy 2020 strategy, the LIFE+ and Natura 2000 programmes and the trans-European telecommunications, transport and energy networks;

D.

whereas, in this connection, long-term investment needs to be encouraged and innovation promoted in the ORs, in order to provide a firm and sustainable basis for their economic and social development and give the various EU strategies a better chance of success;

E.

whereas, in pursuit of these strategies, the volume of structural and investment funding being provided to the ORs must be adjusted or supplemented in order to enable them to play a role commensurate with their potential and consistent with their aspirations in addressing the major challenges facing the EU;

F.

whereas the current economic and social crisis is having a particularly serious impact on the outermost regions of the European Union, particularly in terms of competitiveness and employment, and both the need for economic growth and the unemployment situation require urgent and appropriate responses in the next financial programming period;

G.

whereas Article 349 of the TFEU should be used as the legal basis enabling the ORs, by means of specific measures, to take their rightful place in the EU programmes that can properly harness the potential they are recognised as having;

H.

whereas the ORs can become pilot regions and regions of excellence, to the benefit of the EU as a whole, in areas such as biodiversity, environment, adapting to climate change, dealing with and observing extreme weather events, research, innovation, space, the aerospace industry, oceans, blue growth, maritime spatial planning and maritime governance, seismology, volcanology, emerging diseases, renewable energy, transport, telecommunications, emergency humanitarian assistance outside the EU and culture;

I.

whereas the ORs are located in the Caribbean, Indian Ocean and Atlantic Ocean maritime basins and make the EU a world maritime power; whereas their geo-strategic location helps the EU to exert influence worldwide; and whereas their exceptional natural, marine and fisheries resources account for 50 % of the world’s biodiversity;

J.

whereas the ORs are a special case, forming a common entity which is both inside and outside the EU at the same time and which the Commission should promote and support, including through the implementation of common policies;

K.

whereas in order to maximise the potential of the ORs, the closest possible synergies need to be created between all EU instruments, funds and programmes;

1.

Views the ORs' potential, assets and resources, together with the experience they have accumulated, as additional tools for the EU and the Member States to use in addressing the challenges facing it in connection with globalisation, innovation capacity, growth, social cohesion, demographic pressures, climate change, major natural disaster risk prevention, energy and sustainable management of natural resources and biodiversity conservation;

2.

Believes that improving the ORs’ access to the various EU programmes and sources of funding will be of both short-term and long-term benefit to the EU as a whole; deplores the approach advocated at European level whereby the cohesion policy alone should be used to finance virtually all OR development projects;

3.

Endorses the Commission approach of implementing policies seeking to make the ORs more self-reliant, economically robust and better able to create sustainable jobs by capitalising on their assets and taking practical, imaginative action on the basis of Article 349 of the TFEU and of ad hoc instruments, notably in the fields of energy, transport and ICT, introduced for each EU fund and programme that can help turn the ORs’ assets into sustainable development;

4.

Stresses, furthermore, that it is important and necessary for European policies to contribute, including by means of specific tax and customs instruments, to promoting and diversifying the economic base in the outermost regions and creating jobs;

5.

Takes the view that Article 349 TFEU provides an appropriate legal basis for the adoption of specific measures for the ORs but regrets the limited and scant use made of this article, which establishes the possibility of special arrangements being introduced on the basis of outermost region status;

6.

Calls on the Commission to set up a contact group made up of the relevant Commissioners, the inter-service working party that coordinates policies involving the ORs and the Members of the European Parliament representing the ORs to review the progress of programmes planned and/or introduced for the ORs;

7.

Stresses that, by virtue of the fact that they lie far away from mainland Europe, the ORs help to spread the influence of an EU that is becoming increasingly aware of its global dimension and the role it has to play in a rapidly changing world;

8.

Stresses that special attention must be paid to the ORs in the event of natural disasters, in the light of their specific characteristics and of Article 349 of the TFEU, which provides for the possibility of adopting specific measures, while also pointing out that it is important to coordinate the Structural Funds with the European Union Solidarity Fund;

9.

Calls for investment in ICT, transport, water and energy through services of general economic interest to be given priority in these regions and recommends a more consistent framework for state aid in the ORs in order to implement the Europe 2020 Strategy;

10.

Believes there to be a close correlation between the EU’s awareness of the global role it can play and the attention it pays to the ORs; believes the fact that the Union and the Member States have failed to take sufficient account of the importance and implications of its strategic investment decisions regarding the ORs and sees this situation as indicative of a more general failure to accord suitable importance to the Union's global dimension; considers improved synergies between instruments and programmes to be essential for the ORs, in order to promote international cooperation on the part of these regions;

11.

Considers it essential, with a view to encouraging synergies between the Structural Funds and the Union's other programmes, to adopt a macroregion approach and draw up strategies for macroregions that include the ORs, taking advantage of those regions’ characteristics and resources;

12.

Calls on the national and regional authorities to draw on a multi-fund approach and establish links between the Structural Funds and the financial instruments provided under the European Union’s other programmes, wherever this is possible and more efficient;

13.

Calls on the Commission to flesh out the EU’s strategy in respect of the ORs in such a way as to enable those region’s assets to be developed while taking into account their permanent structural constraints; calls on the Commission, in this connection, to act on the proposals made by the ORs, including those contained in their action plans;

14.

Believes that the ORs have the potential to be at the forefront of research and technology in the areas covered by the Horizon 2020 objectives, such as space, the aerospace industry, biotechnology, observation of natural hazards, marine research, biodiversity, renewable energy, health, adaptation to climate change and smart transport solutions;

15.

Points out that one of the aims of cohesion policy over the period 2014-2020 is to step up research, technological development and innovation efforts;

16.

Criticises the fact that, owing to the serious difficulties which their projects face in meeting some of the requirements for securing EU funding as a result of their specific characteristics, the ORs have not received sufficient support under the 2007-2013 programme for research and development, which has resulted in low levels of participation and success and a weak OR presence in European research networks; calls therefore on the Commission to take steps to support research in the ORs and help achieve a critical mass;

17.

Believes that ERDF funding alone will not be enough to allow the ORs to meet the Europe 2020 and Horizon 2020 targets; considers, in this connection, that the Commission should make the necessary adjustments and guarantee OR access to the Horizon 2020 programme by setting up dedicated programmes that can help to foster greater OR inclusion in European and international research and innovation networks; points out in this connection that the Horizon 2020 strategy itself, in its ‘Spreading Excellence and Widening Participation’ section, draws attention to significant disparities, as identified in the Innovation Union Scoreboard, between research and innovation performance and the specific measures for spreading excellence and widening participation in Member States and regions that are low-performing in terms of research and innovation;

18.

Calls for OR universities to be expanded and promoted in order to help, in synergy with Horizon 2020, to raise the European and international profile of those universities, their research centres, their researchers and their students; points out that all the programmes promoting inter-university mobility — for students, teachers and administrative staff — are seriously compromised in the ORs owing to the extra costs arising from distance and isolation;

19.

Points out that research and innovation programmes should be sufficiently flexible to adapt to new frontiers and new challenges for knowledge, such as the sea-bed, which has significant potential;

20.

Highlights the growing economic interest in the immense riches of the ocean depths and the enormous biogenetic, mineral and biotechnology potential of the outermost regions, which must be included in the ‘Renewed Strategy for the ORs’ with the aim of developing a knowledge economy based on the sea and creating economic activities with a high added value in areas such as medicine, pharmaceuticals and energy, among others;

21.

Calls on the Commission to draw on the various conclusions set out in the Solbes report with a view to enhancing the ORs’ inclusion and development in the internal market;

22.

Points out in this connection that, in terms of competition, the circumstances are not the same as in the rest of the European area, since in the ORs a free market is not possible in most sectors of activity, the bulk of which cannot attract private investment; notes that the supply of high-quality products at competitive prices in the ORs can only be ensured if the state provides appropriate financial support, and takes the view that the Commission should accordingly conduct an urgent assessment with a view to making the EU legislative framework more flexible and better suited to these specific circumstances;

23.

Calls on the Commission to enforce the competition rules more strictly in order to guard against monopolies and cartels in the ORs;

24.

Calls on the Commission to publish a guide for small and medium-sized enterprises in the ORs and on their contribution to the internal market, taking account of the various European programmes and funds in force in the ORs;

25.

Calls on the Commission to look into the issue of the additional costs and high cost of living in the ORs and to take this issue into account when shaping European policies;

26.

Believes that the ORs’ potential in the areas of biodiversity management, conservation and rehabilitation, adaptation to climate change and renewable energy development can be maximised through the establishment of synergies and cross-funding arrangements between cohesion policy, the LIFE+ programme and the Energy 2020 strategy, and that this will at the same time enable the Union to achieve its own objectives;

27.

Notes that cofinancing is to be provided for innovative environmental conservation and climate change projects under the LIFE+ programme for 2014-2020; considers it vital to create synergies with thematic objectives 5 and 6 of the cohesion policy for 2014-2020, given the need to step up OR participation in the LIFE+ programme;

28.

Deplores the failure to make the BEST preparatory action a fully-fledged programme for the ORs and OCTs, in spite of the views expressed by Parliament and the Council conclusions of 25 June 2009;

29.

Deplores the failure to include the animal and plant species requiring protection in the French ORs in Annex I to Directive 92/43/EEC (habitats, wild flora and fauna), which has, in practice, made it impossible for the directive to be implemented in the French ORs and for those ORs to take part in Natura 2000 networks and programmes;

30.

Calls on the Commission to draw up a specific Natura 2000 programme for the ORs on the basis of Article 349 of the TFEU;

31.