TESTI ADOTTATI
P6_TA(2005)0128
Sole stocks *
European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a Council regulation establishing measures for the recovery of the sole stocks in the Western Channel and the Bay of Biscay (COM(2003)0819 — C5-0047/2004 — 2003/0327(CNS))
(Consultation procedure)
The European Parliament,
|
— |
having regard to the Commission proposal to the Council (COM(2003)0819) (1), |
|
— |
having regard to Article 37 of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C5-0047/2004), |
|
— |
having regard to Rule 51 of its Rules of Procedure, |
|
— |
having regard to the report of the Committee on Fisheries (A6-0050/2005), |
|
1. |
Approves the Commission proposal as amended; |
|
2. |
Calls on the Commission to alter its proposal accordingly, pursuant to Article 250(2) of the EC Treaty; |
|
3. |
Calls on the Council to notify Parliament if it intends to depart from the text approved by Parliament; |
|
4. |
Asks the Council to consult Parliament again if it intends to amend the Commission proposal substantially; |
|
5. |
Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and the Commission. |
|
TEXT PROPOSED BY THE COMMISSION |
AMENDMENTS BY PARLIAMENT |
||||||||
|
Amendment 1 |
|||||||||
|
Title |
|||||||||
|
Proposal for a Council regulation establishing measures for the recovery of the sole stocks in the Western Channel and the Bay of Biscay |
Proposal for a Council regulation establishing a management plan for sole stocks in the Western Channel and the Bay of Biscay (This amendment entails replacing “recovery” by “management” throughout the text with the exception of the last line of Article 3(3)). |
||||||||
|
Amendment 2 |
|||||||||
|
Recital 1 |
|||||||||
|
(1) Recent scientific advice from the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) has indicated that the sole stocks in ICES Divisions VIIe and VIIIa, b have been subjected to levels of mortality by fishing which have eroded the quantities of mature fish in the sea to the point at which the stocks may not be able to replenish themselves by reproduction and that the stocks are therefore threatened with collapse. |
Deleted |
||||||||
|
Amendment 3 |
|||||||||
|
Recital 2 |
|||||||||
|
(2) Measures need to be taken to establish multi-annual plans for the recovery of these stocks in conformity with Article 5 of Council Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002 of 20 December 2002 on the conservation and sustainable exploitation of fisheries resources under the Common Fisheries Policy. |
(2) Management measures should be taken for these stocks in conformity with Article 6 of Council Regulation (EC) No 2371/ 2002 of 20 December 2002 on the conservation and sustainable exploitation of fisheries resources under the Common Fisheries Policy. |
||||||||
|
Amendment 4 |
|||||||||
|
Recital 3 |
|||||||||
|
(3) The objectives of the plans should be to rebuild these stocks to safe biological limits within five to ten years . |
(3) The objectives of the plans should be to ensure that these stocks remain within safe biological limits. |
||||||||
|
Amendment 5 |
|||||||||
|
Recital 3a (new) |
|||||||||
|
|
(3a) The objective of the new common fisheries policy is to provide for the sustainable exploitation of living aquatic resources, taking account of the environmental, social and economic aspects in a balanced manner. |
||||||||
|
Amendment 6 |
|||||||||
|
Recital 3b (new) |
|||||||||
|
|
(3b) In implementing the plan, the Commission and the Member States should ensure the full participation of the Regional Advisory Councils and other stakeholders. |
||||||||
|
Amendment 7 |
|||||||||
|
Recital 5 |
|||||||||
|
(5) The absolute sizes of the stocks concerned as estimated by STECF and ICES are too uncertain to be used as targets for the recovery and the targets should be expressed in terms of fishing mortality rates. |
Deleted |
||||||||
|
Amendment 8 |
|||||||||
|
Recital 6 |
|||||||||
|
(6) In order to achieve that objective, the levels of fishing mortality rates need to be controlled so that it is highly likely that those rates are reduced from year to year. |
Deleted |
||||||||
|
Amendment 9 |
|||||||||
|
Recital 8 |
|||||||||
|
(8) Once recovery has been achieved the Council should decide on a proposal from the Commission on follow-up measures in accordance with Article 6 of Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002. |
Deleted |
||||||||
|
Amendment 10 |
|||||||||
|
Article 2 |
|||||||||
|
The recovery plan shall aim to rebuild the sole stocks concerned to within safe biological limits. |
The management plan shall aim to maintain the sole stocks concerned within safe biological limits. |
||||||||
|
Amendment 12 |
|||||||||
|
Article 3, paragraph 2 |
|||||||||
|
2. Where the Commission finds, on the basis of the annual evaluation, that any of the sole stocks concerned has reached the objective set out in Article 2, the Council shall decide by qualified majority on a proposal from the Commission to replace, for that stock, the recovery plan provided for in this Regulation by a management plan in accordance with Article 6 of Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002. |
Deleted |
||||||||
|
Amendment 13 |
|||||||||
|
Article 3, paragraph 3 |
|||||||||
|
3. Where the Commission finds, on the basis of the annual evaluation, that any of the sole stocks concerned do not show proper sign of recovery , the Council shall decide by qualified majority on a proposal from the Commission on additional and/or alternative measures to ensure recovery of the stock concerned. |
3. Where the Commission finds, on the basis of the annual evaluation, that any of the sole stocks concerned are at risk of collapse , the Council shall decide by qualified majority on a proposal from the Commission on additional and/or alternative measures to ensure recovery of the stock concerned. |
||||||||
|
Amendment 14 |
|||||||||
|
Article 5, paragraph 1 |
|||||||||
|
1. Where the fishing mortality rate for one of the sole stocks concerned has been estimated by the STECF in the light of the most recent report of ICES to be above 0,14 per year, the TAC for that stock shall not exceed a level of catches which, according to a scientific evaluation carried out by the STECF in the light of the most recent report of ICES, will result in a reduction of:
|
1. The TAC shall not exceed a level of catches for which a scientific evaluation by the STECF, carried out in the light of the most recent report of ICES, has shown that it will result in a 15 % increase in the quantities of adult fish in the sea, at the end of its year of application, by comparison with the quantities estimated to be present in the sea at the start of the year in question. |
||||||||
|
Amendment 15 |
|||||||||
|
Article 5, paragraph 2 |
|||||||||
|
2. Where the fishing mortality rate for one of the sole stocks concerned has been estimated by the STECF, in the light of the most recent report of ICES, to be equal to or below 0,14 per year, the TAC for that stock shall be set at a level of catches which, according to a scientific evaluation carried out by the STECF in the light of the most recent report of ICES will result in a fishing mortality rate of:
|
2. The Council shall not adopt a TAC which the STEFC, in the light of the most recent report of ICES, expects would result, in the year of its application, in a fishing mortality rate in excess of the following values: Bay of Biscay sole: 0,36; Western Channel sole: rate to be defined in view of subsequent ICES advice, following the inclusion of data series from certain countries which are currently not taken into account. |
||||||||
|
Amendment 16 |
|||||||||
|
Article 6, paragraphs 1 and 2 |
|||||||||
|
1. In the first year of application of this Regulation, the following rules shall apply:
|
|
||||||||
|
2. Starting with the second year of application of this Regulation, the following rules shall apply:
|
2. Starting with the first year of application of this Regulation, the following rules shall apply:
|
||||||||
|
Amendment 17 |
|||||||||
|
Chapter III |
|||||||||
|
|
This chapter is deleted. |
||||||||
|
Amendment 18 |
|||||||||
|
Article 16 |
|||||||||
|
By way of derogation from Article 5(2) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2807/83 of 22 September 1983 laying down detailed rules for recording information on Member States' catches of fish, the permitted margin of tolerance, in estimation of quantities, in kilograms retained on board of vessels shall be 5 % of the logbook figure. |
By way of derogation from Article 5(2) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2807/83 of 22 September 1983 laying down detailed rules for recording information on Member States' catches of fish, the permitted margin of tolerance, in estimation of quantities, in kilograms of live weight retained on board of vessels, shall be 8 % of the logbook figure. In the event that no conversion factor is laid down in Community legislation, the conversion factor adopted by the Member State whose flag the vessel is flying shall apply. |
||||||||
|
Amendment 19 |
|||||||||
|
Article 17 |
|||||||||
|
The competent authorities of a Member State shall ensure that any quantity of common sole exceeding 50 kg caught in any of the areas referred to in Article 1 shall be weighed using auction room scales before sale. |
The competent authorities of a Member State shall ensure that any quantity of common sole exceeding 100 kg caught in any of the areas referred to in Article 1 shall be weighed using auction room scales before sale. |
||||||||
|
Amendment 20 |
|||||||||
|
Article 19, paragraph 1 |
|||||||||
|
1. The competent authorities of a Member State may require that any quantity of common sole exceeding 50 kg caught in any of the geographical areas referred to in Article 1 and first landed in that Member State is weighed before being transported elsewhere from the port of first landing. |
1. The competent authorities of a Member State may require that any quantity of common sole exceeding 100 kg caught in any of the geographical areas referred to in Article 1 and first landed in that Member State is weighed before being transported elsewhere from the port of first landing. |
||||||||
|
Amendment 21 |
|||||||||
|
Article 19, paragraph 2 |
|||||||||
|
2. By way of derogation from Article 13 of Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93, quantities bigger than 50 kg of common sole which are transported to a place other than that of landing or import shall be accompanied by a copy of one of the declarations provided for in Article 8(1) of Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93 pertaining to the quantities of the sole transported. The exemption provided for in Article 13(4)(b) of Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93 shall not apply. |
2. By way of derogation from Article 13 of Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93, quantities bigger than 100 kg of common sole which are transported to a place other than that of landing or import shall be accompanied by a copy of one of the declarations provided for in Article 8(1) of Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93 pertaining to the quantities of the sole transported. The exemption provided for in Article 13(4)(b) of Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93 shall not apply. |
||||||||
|
Amendment 22 |
|||||||||
|
Annex |
|||||||||
|
|
This annex is deleted. |
||||||||
(1) Not yet published in OJ.
P6_TA(2005)0129
Re-usability, recyclability and recoverability of motor vehicles ***I
European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the type-approval of motor vehicles with regard to their re-usability, recyclability and recoverability and amending Council Directive 70/156/EEC (COM(2004)0162 — C5-0126/2004 — 2004/0053(COD))
(Codecision procedure: first reading)
The European Parliament,
|
— |
having regard to the Commission proposal to the European Parliament and the Council (COM(2004) 0162) (1), |
|
— |
having regard to Article 251 (2) and Article 95 of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C5-0126/2004), |
|
— |
having regard to Rule 51 of its Rules of Procedure, |
|
— |
having regard to the report of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (A6-0004/2005), |
|
1. |
Approves the Commission proposal as amended; |
|
2. |
Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend the proposal substantially or replace it with another text; |
|
3. |
Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and Commission. |
(1) Not yet published in OJ.
P6_TC1-COD(2004)0053
Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 14 April 2005 with a view to the adoption of Directive 2005/.../EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the typeapproval of motor vehicles with regard to their re-usability, recyclability and recoverability and amending Council Directive 70/156/EEC
THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 95 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,
Having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee (1),
After consulting the Committee of the Regions,
Acting in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 251 of the Treaty (2),
Whereas:
|
(1) |
Pursuant to Article 7(4) of Directive 2000/53/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 September 2000 on end-of-life vehicles (3), appropriate provisions should be laid down to ensure that type-approved vehicles belonging to category M1, and those belonging to category N1, may be put on the market only if they are re-usable and/or recyclable to a minimum of 85 % by mass and are reusable and/or recoverable to a minimum of 95 % by mass. |
|
(2) |
Re-usability of component parts, recyclability and recoverability of materials constitute a substantial part of the Community strategy for waste management. Therefore vehicle manufacturers and their suppliers should be requested to include those aspects at the earliest stages of the development of new vehicles, in order to facilitate the treatment of vehicles at the time where they reach the end of their life. |
|
(3) |
This Directive constitutes one of the separate directives within the framework of the Community whole vehicle type-approval established by Council Directive 70/156/EEC of 6 February 1970 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the type-approval of motor vehicles and their trailers (4). |
|
(4) |
That whole vehicle type-approval is currently compulsory for vehicles belonging to category M1 and will be extended, in the near future, to all categories of vehicle. It is therefore necessary to include in the whole vehicle type-approval these measures concerning the re-usability, recyclability and recoverability of vehicles. |
|
(5) |
Accordingly, it is necessary to lay down provisions to take into account the fact that N1 vehicles are not yet covered by the whole vehicle type-approval system. |
|
(6) |
The manufacturer should make available to the approval authority all relevant technical information as regards constituent materials and their respective masses in order to permit verification of the manufacturer's calculations in accordance with the standard ISO 22628: 2002. |
|
(7) |
The manufacturer's calculations can be properly validated at the time of the vehicle type-approval only if the manufacturer has put in place satisfactory arrangements and procedures to manage all information he receives from his suppliers. Before any type-approval can be granted, the competent body should carry out a preliminary assessment of those arrangements and procedures and should issue a certificate indicating that they are satisfactory. |
|
(8) |
The relevance of the different inputs in the calculations of the recyclability and recoverability rates has to be assessed in accordance with the processes for treatment of end-of-life vehicles. The manufacturer should therefore recommend a strategy for the treatment of end-of-life vehicles and should provide with details thereof to the competent body. This strategy should be based on proven technologies, which are available or in development at the time of applying for the vehicle approval. |
|
(9) |
Special-purpose vehicles are designed to perform a specific function and require special bodywork arrangements which are not entirely under the control of the manufacturer. Consequently, the recyclability and recoverability rates cannot properly be calculated. Those vehicles should therefore be excluded from the requirements concerning calculation. |
|
(10) |
Incomplete vehicles constitute a significant proportion of N1 vehicles. The manufacturer of the base vehicle is not in a position to calculate the recyclability and recoverability rates for completed vehicles because the data concerning the later stages of construction are not available at the design stage of the base vehicles. It is therefore appropriate to require only the base vehicle to comply with this Directive. |
|
(11) |
The market shares of vehicles produced in small series are very limited, so that there will be little benefit to the environment if they have to comply with this Directive. It is therefore appropriate to exclude them from certain provisions of this Directive. |
|
(12) |
In accordance with Article 7(5) of Directive 2000/53/EC, appropriate measures should be taken, in the interests of road safety and protection of the environment, to prevent the re-use of certain component parts which have been removed from end-of-life vehicles. Such measures should be restricted to the reuse of parts in the construction of new vehicles. |
|
(13) |
The provisions set out in this Directive will impose on manufacturers the supply of new data relating to type-approval and therefore these particulars should be reflected in Directive 70/156/EEC, which establishes the exhaustive list of data to be submitted for type-approval. It is therefore necessary to amend that Directive accordingly. |
|
(14) |
The measures necessary for the adaptation to scientific and technical progress of this Directive should be adopted in accordance with the regulatory procedure provided for in Article 13 (3) of Directive 70/156/EEC. |
|
(15) |
Since the objectives of the proposed action, namely to minimise the impact of end-of-life vehicles on the environment by requiring that vehicles be designed from the conception phase with a view to facilitating re-use, recycling and recovery, cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States acting alone and can, therefore, by reason of the scale of the action, be better achieved at Community level, the Community may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Directive does not go beyond what is necessary for that purpose. |
|
(16) |
In accordance with paragraph 34 of the Interinstitutional Agreement on better law-making, Member States are encouraged to draw up, for themselves and in the interest of the Community, their own tables which will, as far as possible, illustrate the correlation between the Directive and the transposition measures and to make them public, |
HAVE ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE:
Article 1
Subject-matter
This Directive lays down the administrative and technical provisions for the type-approval of vehicles covered by Article 2, with a view to ensuring that their component parts and materials can be re-used, recycled and recovered in the minimum percentages set out in Annex I.
It lays down specific provisions to ensure that the re-use of component parts does not give rise to safety or environmental hazards.
Article 2
Scope
This Directive shall apply to vehicles belonging to category M1 and N1, as defined in Part A of Annex II to Directive 70/156/EEC, and to new or re-used component parts of such vehicles.
Article 3
Exemptions
Without prejudice to the application of the provisions of Article 7, this Directive shall not apply to:
|
(a) |
special purpose vehicles as defined in section A, paragraph 5, of Annex II to Directive 70/156/EEC; |
|
(b) |
multi-stage built vehicles belonging to category N1, provided that the base vehicle complies with this Directive; |
|
(c) |
vehicles produced in small series, referred to in Article 8(2)(a) of Directive 70/156/EEC. |
Article 4
Definitions
For the purposes of this Directive, the following definitions shall apply:
|
1) |
“vehicle” means a motor vehicle; |
|
2) |
“component part” means any part or any assembly of parts which is included in a vehicle at the time of its production. It covers also components and separate technical units as defined in Article 2 of Directive 70/156/EEC; |
|
3) |
“vehicle type” means the type of a vehicle as defined in section B, paragraphs 1 and 3, of Annex II to Directive 70/156/EEC; |
|
4) |
“end-of-life vehicle” means a vehicle as defined in point (2) of Article 2 of Directive 2000/53/EC; |
|
5) |
“reference vehicle” means the version within a type of vehicle, which is identified by the approval authority, in consultation with the manufacturer and in accordance with the criteria laid down in Annex I, as being the most problematic in terms of re-usability, recyclability and recoverability; |
|
6) |
“multi-stage built vehicle” means a vehicle resulting from a multi-stage construction process; |
|
7) |
“base vehicle” means a vehicle as defined in Article 2, 4th indent to Directive 70/156/CEE, which is used at the starting stage of a multi-stage construction; |
|
8) |
“multi-stage construction” means the process by which a vehicle is produced in several stages by adding component parts to a base vehicle or by modifying those component parts; |
|
9) |
“re-use” means re-use as defined in point (6) of Article 2 of Directive 2000/53/EC; |
|
10) |
“recycling” means recycling as defined in the first sentence of point (7) of Article 2 of Directive 2000/53/EC; |
|
11) |
“energy recovery” means energy recovery as defined in the second sentence of point (7) of Article 2 of Directive 2000/53/EC; |
|
12) |
“recovery” means recovery as defined in point (8) of Article 2 of Directive 2000/53/EC; |
|
13) |
“re-usability” means the potential for re-use of component parts diverted from an end-of-life vehicle; |
|
14) |
“recyclability” means the potential for recycling of component parts or materials diverted from an end-of-life vehicle; |
|
15) |
“recoverability” means the potential for recovery of component parts or materials diverted from an end-of-life vehicle; |
|
16) |
“recyclability rate of a vehicle (Rcyc)” means the percentage by mass of a new vehicle, potentially able to be re-used and recycled; |
|
17) |
“recoverability rate of a vehicle (Rcov)” means the percentage by mass of a new vehicle, potentially able to be re-used and recovered; |
|
18) |
“strategy” means a large-scale plan consisting of co-ordinated actions and technical measures to be taken as regards dismantling, shredding or similar processes, recycling and recovery of materials to ensure that the targeted recyclability and recoverability rates are attainable at the time a vehicle is in its development phase; |
|
19) |
“mass” means the mass of the vehicle in running order as defined in point 2.6 of Annex I to Directive 70/156/EEC, but excluding the driver, whose mass is assessed to 75 kg; |
|
20) |
“competent body” means an entity, e.g. a technical service or another existing body, notified by a Member State to carry out preliminary assessment and to issue a certificate of compliance, in accordance with the prescriptions of this Directive. The competent body may be the type-approval authority, provided its competence in this field is properly documented. |
Article 5
Type-approval provisions
1. Member States shall grant, as appropriate, EC type-approval or national type-approval, with regard to re-usability, recyclability and recoverability, only to such vehicle types that satisfy the requirements of this Directive.
2. For the application of paragraph 1, the manufacturer shall make available to the approval authority the detailed technical information necessary for the purposes of the calculations and checks referred to in Annex I to this Directive, relating to the nature of the materials used in the construction of the vehicle and its component parts. In cases where such information is shown to be covered by intellectual property rights or to constitute specific know-how of the manufacturer or of his suppliers, the manufacturer or his suppliers shall supply sufficient information to enable those calculations to be properly made.
3. In so far as concerns re-usability, recyclability and recoverability, the Member States shall ensure that, the manufacturer uses the model of the information document set out in Annex II to this Directive, when submitting an application for EC type-approval, pursuant to Article 3(1) of Directive 70/156/EEC.
4. When granting an EC type-approval pursuant to Article 4(3) of Directive 70/156/EEC, the type-approval authority shall use the model of the EC type-approval certificate set out in Annex III to this Directive.
Article 6
Preliminary assessment
1. Member States shall not grant any type approval without first ensuring that the manufacturer has put in place satisfactory arrangements and procedures, in accordance with paragraph 3 of Annex IV to this Directive, to manage properly the re-usability, recyclability and recoverability aspects covered by this Directive. When this preliminary assessment has been carried out, a certificate named “Certificate of Compliance with Annex IV” (hereinafter “the certificate of compliance”) shall be granted to the manufacturer.
2. In the framework of the preliminary assessment, Member States shall ensure that the materials used for the construction of a vehicle type comply with the provisions of Article 4(2)(a) of Directive 2000/53/EC.
The Commission shall, in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 9, establish the detailed rules necessary to verify compliance with this provision.
3. For the purpose of paragraph 1 the manufacturer shall recommend a strategy to ensure dismantling, re-use of component parts, recycling and recovery of materials. The strategy shall take into account the proven technologies available or in development at the time of the application for a vehicle type-approval.
4. Member States shall appoint a competent body, in accordance with point 2 of Annex IV, to carry out the preliminary assessment and to issue the certificate of compliance.
5. The certificate of compliance shall include the appropriate documentation and describe the strategy recommended by the manufacturer. The competent body shall use the model set out in Appendix 1 to Annex IV.
6. The certificate of compliance shall remain valid for no less than two years from the date of deliverance of the certificate before new checks shall be conducted.
7. The manufacturer shall inform the competent body of any significant change that could affect the relevance of the certificate of compliance. After consultation with the manufacturer, the competent body shall decide whether new checks are necessary.
8. At the end of the period of validity of the certificate of compliance, the competent body shall issue, as appropriate, a new certificate of compliance or shall extend its validity for a further period of two years. The competent body shall issue a new certificate in cases where significant changes have been brought to the attention of the competent body .
Article 7
Re-use of component parts
The component parts listed in Annex V shall:
|
(a) |
be deemed to be non-re-usable for the purposes of calculating the recyclability and recoverability rates; |
|
(b) |
not be re-used in the construction of vehicles covered by Directive 70/156/EEC. |
Article 8
Amendments to Directive 70/156/EEC
Directive 70/156/EEC is amended in accordance with Annex VI to this Directive.
Article 9
Amendments
Amendments to this Directive which are necessary to adapt it to scientific and technical progress shall be adopted by the Commission in accordance with the regulatory procedure referred to in Article 13 (3) of Directive 70/156/EEC.
Article 10
Implementation dates for type-approval
1. With effect from ... (5), Member States shall not, in respect of a type of vehicle which complies with the requirements of this Directive:
|
(a) |
refuse to grant EC or national type-approval; |
|
(b) |
prohibit the registration, sale or entry into service of new vehicles. |
2. With effect from ... (6), Member States shall, in respect of a type of vehicle which does not comply with the requirements of this Directive:
|
(a) |
refuse to grant EC type-approval; |
|
(b) |
refuse to grant national type-approval. |
3. With effect from ... (7) Member States shall, if the requirements of this Directive are not met:
|
(a) |
consider certificates of conformity which accompany new vehicles as no longer valid for the purposes of Article 7(1) of Directive 70/156/EEC; |
|
(b) |
refuse the registration, sale or entry into service of new vehicles, save where Article 8(2)(b) of Directive 70/156/EEC applies. |
4. Article 7 shall apply with effect from ... (5).
Article 11
Transposition
1. Member States shall adopt and publish, not later than ... (5), the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive. They shall forthwith communicate to the Commission the text of those measures.
They shall apply those measures from ... (5).
When Member States adopt these measures, they shall contain a reference to this Directive or be accompanied by such a reference on the occasion of their official publication. The methods of making such reference shall be laid down by Member States.
2. Member States shall communicate to the Commission the text of the main provisions of national law, which they adopt in the field covered by this Directive.
Article 12
Entry into force
This Directive shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
Article 13
Addressees
This Directive is addressed to the Member States.
Done at ..., on ...
For the European Parliament
The President
For the Council
The President
(1) OJ C ...
(2) Position of the European Parliament of 14 April 2005.
(3) OJ L 269, 21.10.2000, p. 34. Directive as amended by Commission Decision 2005/63/EC (OJ L 25, 28.1.2005, p. 73 ).
(4) OJ L 42, 23.2.1970, p. 1. Directive as last amended by Commission Directive 2004/104/EC (OJ L 337, 13.11.2004, p. 13 ).
(5) 12 months from the date of entry into force of this Directive.
(6) 36 months from the date of entry into force of this Directive.
(7) 54 months from the date of entry into force of this Directive.
ANNEX
LIST OF ANNEXES
|
Annex I |
Requirements |
|
Annex II |
Information document for EC vehicle type-approval |
|
Annex III |
Model of the EC type-approval certificate |
|
Annex IV |
Preliminary assessment of the manufacturer Appendix 1: model of the certificate of compliance |
|
Annex V |
Component parts deemed to be not re-usable |
|
Annex VI |
Amendments to Directive 70/156/EEC |
ANNEX I
REQUIREMENTS
1. Vehicles belonging to category M1 and those belonging to category N1 shall be so constructed as to be:
|
— |
re-usable and/or recyclable to a minimum of 85 % by mass and, |
|
— |
re-usable and/or recoverable to a minimum of 95 % by mass, |
as determined by the procedures laid down in this Annex.
2. For the purposes of type-approval, the manufacturer shall submit a data presentation form duly completed, established in accordance with Annex A to the standard ISO 22628: 2002. It shall include the materials breakdown.
It shall be accompanied by a listing of the dismantled component parts, declared by the manufacturer with respect to the dismantling stage, and the process he recommends for their treatment.
3. For the application of paragraph 1 and paragraph 2, the manufacturer shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the approval authority that the reference vehicles meet the requirements. The calculation method prescribed in Annex B to the ISO standard 22628: 2002 shall apply.
However, the manufacturer must be in a position to demonstrate that any version within the vehicle type complies with the requirements of this Directive.
4. For the purposes of the selection of the reference vehicles, account shall be taken of the following criteria:
|
— |
the type of bodywork; |
|
— |
the available trim levels (1) ; |
|
— |
the available optional equipment (1) which can be fitted under the manufacturer's responsibility. |
5. Should the type-approval authority and the manufacturer fail jointly to identify the most problematic version within a type of vehicle, in terms of re-usability, recyclability and recoverability, one reference vehicle shall be selected, within:
|
(a) |
each “type of bodywork”, as defined in section C point 1 of Annex II to Directive 70/156/EEC in the case of M1 vehicles; |
|
(b) |
each “type of bodywork”, i.e. van, chassis-cab, pick-up etc., in the case of N1 vehicles. |
6. For the purposes of calculations, tyres shall be considered as recyclable.
7. Masses shall be expressed in kg with one decimal place. The rates shall be calculated in percent with one decimal place, then rounded as follows:
|
(a) |
if the figure following the decimal point is between 0 and 4, the total is rounded down; |
|
(b) |
if the figure following the decimal point is between 5 and 9, the total is rounded up. |
8. For the purposes of checking the calculations referred to in this Annex, the approval authority shall ensure that the data presentation form referred to in point 2 of this Annex is coherent with the recommended strategy annexed to the certificate of compliance referred to in Article 6(1).
9. For the purposes of checks of the materials and masses of component parts, the manufacturer shall make available vehicles and component parts as deemed necessary by the type-approval authority.
(1) i.e. leather upholstery, in-car radio equipment, air-conditioning, alloy wheels, etc.
ANNEX II
INFORMATION DOCUMENT FOR EC VEHICLE TYPE-APPROVAL
ANNEX III
MODEL OF EC TYPE-APPROVAL CERTIFICATE
Maximum format: A4 (210 × 297 mm)
EC TYPE-APPROVAL CERTIFICATE
ANNEX IV
PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT
1. Purpose of this Annex
This Annex describes the preliminary assessment that must be carried out by the competent body to ensure that the manufacturer has put in place the necessary arrangements and procedures.
2. Competent body
The competent body shall comply with standard EN 45012: 1989 or ISO/IEC Guide 62:1996 on the general criteria for certification bodies operating quality system certification as regards the management systems implemented by the manufacturer.
3. Checks to be performed by the competent body
3.1. The competent body shall ensure that the manufacturer has taken the necessary measures to:
|
(a) |
collect appropriate data through the full chain of supply, in particular the nature and the mass of all materials used in the construction of the vehicles in order to perform the calculations required under this Directive; |
|
(b) |
keep at his disposal all the other appropriate vehicle data required by the calculation process such as the volume of the fluids, etc.; |
|
(c) |
check adequately the information received from suppliers; |
|
(d) |
manage the breakdown of the materials; |
|
(e) |
be able to perform the calculation of the recyclability and recoverability rates in accordance with the standard ISO 22628: 2002; |
|
(f) |
mark the component parts made of polymers and elastomers in accordance with Commission Decision 2003/138/EC of 27 February 2003 establishing component and material coding standards for vehicles pursuant to Directive 2000/53/EC (1) ; |
|
(g) |
verify that no component part listed in Annex V is re-used in the construction of new vehicle types. |
3.2. The manufacturer shall provide the competent body with all relevant information, in documentary form. In particular, recycling and recovery of materials shall be properly documented.
(1) OJ L 53, 28.2.2003, p. 58.
Appendix 1 to Annex IV
MODEL OF CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE
ANNEX V
COMPONENT PARTS DEEMED TO BE NON RE-USABLE
1. Introduction
This Annex addresses the component parts of vehicles belonging to categories M1 and those belonging to category N1 which must not be re-used in the construction of new vehicles.
2. List of component parts
|
— |
All airbags (1), including cushions, pyrotechnic actuators, electronic control units and sensors; |
|
— |
Automatic or non-automatic seat belts assemblies, including webbing, buckles, retractors, pyrotechnic actuators; |
|
— |
Seats (only in cases where safety belts anchorages and/or airbags are incorporated to the seat); |
|
— |
Steering lock assemblies acting on the steering column; |
|
— |
Immobilisers including transponders and electronic control units; |
|
— |
Emission after-treatment systems (e.g. catalytic converters , particulate filters) ; |
|
— |
Exhaust silencers. |
(1) When the airbag is inserted inside the steering wheel, the steering wheel itself.
ANNEX VI
AMENDMENTS TO DIRECTIVE 70/156/EEC
Directive 70/156/EEC is amended as follows:
|
(1) |
In Annex I the following items are inserted:
|
|
(2) |
In part I of Annex IV, the following item is added:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
(3) |
Annex XI is amended as follows:
|
(1) These terms are defined in ISO standard 22628: 2002.”
P6_TA(2005)0130
Establishing meaures for the recovery of the Southern hake and Norway lobster *
European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a Council regulation establishing measures for the recovery of the Southern hake and Norway lobster stocks in the Cantabrian Sea and Western Iberian peninsula and amending Regulation (EC) No 850/98 (COM(2003)0818 — C5-0042/2004 — 2003/0318(CNS))
(Consultation procedure)
The European Parliament,
|
— |
having regard to the Commission proposal to the Council (COM(2003)0818) (1), |
|
— |
having regard to Article 37 of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C5-0042/2004), |
|
— |
having regard to Rule 51 of its Rules of Procedure, |
|
— |
having regard to the report of the Committee on Fisheries (A6-0051/2005), |
|
1. |
Approves the Commission proposal as amended; |
|
2. |
Calls on the Commission to alter its proposal accordingly, pursuant to Article 250(2) of the EC Treaty; |
|
3. |
Calls on the Council to notify Parliament if it intends to depart from the text approved by Parliament; |
|
4. |
Asks the Council to consult Parliament again if it intends to amend the Commission proposal substantially; |
|
5. |
Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and Commission. |
|
TEXT PROPOSED BY THE COMMISSION |
AMENDMENTS BY PARLIAMENT |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Amendment 1 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
RECITAL 1 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
(1) Recent scientific advice from the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) has indicated that the Southern hake and Norway lobster stocks in ICES Divisions VIIIc and IXa have been subjected to levels of mortality by fishing which have eroded the quantities of mature individuals in the sea to the point at which the stocks may not be able to replenish themselves by reproduction and that the stocks are therefore threatened with collapse. |
(1) Recent scientific advice from the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) has indicated that the Southern hake and Norway lobster stocks in ICES Divisions VIIIc and IXa , excluding the Gulf of Cadiz, have been subjected to levels of mortality by fishing which have eroded the quantities of mature individuals in the sea to the point at which the stocks may not be able to replenish themselves by reproduction and that the stocks are therefore threatened with collapse. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Amendment 2 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
RECITAL 3 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
(3) The objectives of the plans should be to rebuild these stocks to safe biological limits within five to ten years. |
(3) The objectives of the plans should be to rebuild these stocks to safe biological limits within ten years. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Amendment 3 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
RECITAL 4a (new) |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
(4a) The adoption of the measures needed for the recovery of these stocks makes it necessary to adopt socio-economic measures to mitigate the impact on those affected by measures to restrict fishing capacity. It is therefore necessary to make provision for sufficient appropriations in the Community budget to deal with this situation. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Amendment 4 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
RECITAL 5 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
(5) The absolute sizes of the stocks concerned as estimated by STECF and ICES are too uncertain to be used as targets for recovery and the targets should be expressed in terms of fishing mortality rates. |
Deleted |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Amendment 5 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
RECITAL 6 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
(6) In order to achieve that objective, the levels of the fishing mortality rates need to be controlled so that it is highly likely that those rates are reduced from year to year. |
(6) In order to achieve that objective, the fishing mortality rates need to be controlled so that it is highly likely that the quantities of mature individuals in the sea increase from year to year. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Amendment 6 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
RECITAL 7 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
(7) Such control of the fishing mortality rates can be achieved by establishing an appropriate method for the establishment of the level of Total Allowable Catches (TACs) of the stocks concerned, and a system including closed areas and limitations on kilowatt-days whereby fishing efforts on those stocks are restricted to levels at which the TACs are unlikely to be exceeded. |
(7) Such control of the fishing mortality rates can be achieved by establishing an appropriate method for the establishment of the level of Total Allowable Catches (TACs) of the stocks concerned, and limitations on fishing effort on those stocks so that it is restricted to levels at which the TACs are unlikely to be exceeded. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Amendment 7 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
RECITAL 10 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
(10) The recovery of Norway lobster stocks requires certain areas of reproduction of the species to be protected from fishing. Therefore Council Regulation (EC) No 850/98 of 30 March 1998 for the conservation of fishery resources through technical conservation measures for the protection of juveniles of marine organisms should be amended accordingly, |
Deleted |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Amendment 8 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ARTICLE 1, POINT A |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Amendment 9 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ARTICLE 1, POINT C |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Amendment 10 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ARTICLE 2 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The recovery plan shall aim to rebuild the stocks concerned to within safe biological limits. |
The recovery plan shall aim to rebuild the stocks concerned to within safe biological limits , in a sufficient period of time, in keeping with ICES information. This will mean:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Amendment 11 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ARTICLE 5, PARAGRAPH 1 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
1. Where the fishing mortality rate for the Southern hake stock has been estimated by the STECF in the light of the most recent report of ICES to be above 0,17 per year, the TAC shall not exceed a level of catches which, according to a scientific evaluation carried out by the STECF in the light of the most recent report of ICES, will result in a reduction of 10 % in the fishing mortality rate in the year of its application as compared with the fishing mortality rate estimated for the preceding year. |
1. Where the fishing mortality rate for the Southern hake stock has been estimated by the STECF in the light of the most recent report of ICES to be above 0,27 per year, the TAC shall not exceed a level of catches which, according to a scientific evaluation carried out by the STECF in the light of the most recent report of ICES, will result in a reduction of 10 % in the fishing mortality rate in the year of its application as compared with the fishing mortality rate estimated for the preceding year. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Amendment 12 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ARTICLE 5, PARAGRAPH 2 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
2. Where the fishing mortality rate for the Southern hake stock has been estimated by the STECF in the light of the most recent report of ICES to be equal to or below 0,17 per year, the TAC shall be set at a level of catches which, according to a scientific evaluation carried out by the STECF in the light of the most recent report of ICES, will result in a fishing mortality rate of 0,15 per year in the year of its application. |
2. Where the fishing mortality rate for the Southern hake stock has been estimated by the STECF in the light of the most recent report of ICES to be equal to or below 0,27 per year, the TAC shall be set at a level of catches which, according to a scientific evaluation carried out by the STECF in the light of the most recent report of ICES, will result in a fishing mortality rate of 0,27 per year in the year of its application. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Amendment 13 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ARTICLE 7, PARAGRAPH 1 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
1. In the first year of application of this Regulation, the following rules shall apply:
|
Deleted |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Amendment 14 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ARTICLE 7, PARAGRAPH 2, INTRODUCTORY PART |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
2. Starting with the second year of application of this Regulation, the following rules shall apply: |
2. As from the first year of application of this Regulation, the following rules shall apply: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Amendment 15 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ARTICLE 7, PARAGRAPH 2, POINT A |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Amendment 16 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ARTICLE 7, PARAGRAPH 2, POINT B |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Amendment 27 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ARTICLE 7A (new) |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Article 7a Reduction of fishing effort The Member States shall have flexibility in applying the fishing effort reduction scheme through the implementation of national plans geared to the specific situation in the various Member States. Those plans should be sent by the Member States and approved by the Commission. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Amendment 18 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
CHAPTER III |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
This chapter is deleted. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Amendment 19 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ARTICLE 16 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Article 16 Effort messages Notwithstanding Article 19a of Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93, Articles 19b, 19c, 19d and 19e and 19j of that Regulation shall apply to vessels included in the database provided for in Article 9 operating in the geographical areas referred to in Article 1. |
Deleted |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Amendment 20 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ARTICLE 17 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By way of derogation from Article 5(2) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2807/83 of 22 September 1983 laying down detailed rules for recording information on Member States' catches of fish, the permitted margin of tolerance, in estimation of quantities, in kilograms retained on board of vessels shall be 5 % of the logbook figure. |
By way of derogation from Article 5(2) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2807/83 of 22 September 1983 laying down detailed rules for recording information on Member States' catches of fish, the permitted margin of tolerance, in estimation of quantities of hake , in kilograms retained on board of vessels shall be 8% of the logbook figure. In the event that no conversion factor is laid down in Community legislation, the conversion factor adopted by the Member State whose flag the vessel is flying shall apply. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Amendment 21 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ARTICLE 18 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The competent authorities of a Member State shall ensure that any quantity of southern hake exceeding 50 kg and/or 50 kg of Norway lobster caught in any of the areas referred to in Article 1 shall be weighed using auction room scales before sale. |
The competent authorities of a Member State shall ensure that any quantity of southern hake exceeding 300 kg and/or 150 kg of Norway lobster caught in any of the geographical areas referred to in Article 1 shall be weighed using auction room scales before sale. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Amendment 22 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ARTICLE 20, PARAGRAPH 1 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
1. The competent authorities of a Member State may require that any quantity of Southern hake exceeding 50 kg or Norway lobster exceeding 50 kg caught in any of the geographical areas referred to in Article 1 and first landed in that Member State is weighed before being transported elsewhere from the port of first landing. |
1. The competent authorities of a Member State may require that any quantity of Southern hake exceeding 300 kg or Norway lobster exceeding 150 kg caught in any of the geographical areas referred to in Article 1 and first landed in that Member State is weighed before being transported elsewhere from the port of first landing. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Amendment 23 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ARTICLE 20, PARAGRAPH 2 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
2. By way of derogation from Article 13 of Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93, quantities bigger than 50 kg of southern hake or Norway lobster which are transported to a place other than that of landing or import shall be accompanied by a copy of one of the declarations provided for in Article 8(1) of Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93 pertaining to the quantities of these species transported. The exemption provided for in Article 13 (4)(b) of Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93 shall not apply. |
2. By way of derogation from Article 13 of Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93, quantities of Southern hake exceeding 300 kg or Norway lobster exceeding 150 kg which are transported to a place other than that of landing or import shall be accompanied by a copy of one of the declarations provided for in Article 8(1) of Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93 pertaining to the quantities of these species transported. The exemption provided for in Article 13(4)(b) of Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93 shall not apply. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Amendment 24 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
CHAPTER V, ARTICLE 22 Article 29b (Regulation (EC) No 850/98) |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
CHAPTER V Amendments to Regulation (EC) No 850/98 Article 22 Restrictions on fishing for Norway lobster Regulation (EC) No 850/98 is amended as follows: The following article shall be inserted after Article 29a: Article 29b Restrictions on fishing for Norway lobster Fishing with bottom trawls and creels shall be prohibited in the geographical areas bounded by a line joining the following co-ordinates: Box 1:
Box 2:
Box 3:
Box 4:
Box 5:
|
Deleted |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Amendment 25 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ARTICLE 22A (new) |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Article 22a Report on the recovery plan The Commission shall submit a report to the European Parliament and the Council setting out the conclusions relating to the application of the recovery plan for the Southern hake and Norway lobster stocks, including socio-economic data linked to the plan. This report shall be submitted two years after the entry into force of this Regulation. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Amendment 26 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ANNEX |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
This annex is deleted. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
(1) Not yet published in OJ.
P6_TA(2005)0131
Regional integration in the western Balkans
European Parliament resolution on the state of regional integration in the western Balkans
The European Parliament,
|
— |
having regard to the European Commission's Annual Reports on the Stabilisation and Association Process (SAP) for South-East Europe, |
|
— |
having regard to its previous resolutions on south-east European countries and the SAP, in particular that of 20 November 2003 (1), |
|
— |
having regard to the historic visit of the Prime Minister of Croatia to Serbia and Montenegro on 15 November 2004, and to the signing of a Joint Declaration on that occasion stressing both countries' commitment to joining the European Union and their desire to settle outstanding issues, including protection of minorities, the return of Serb refugees to Croatia and the whereabouts of Croats who went missing in the war, |
|
— |
having regard to its resolution of 17 November 2004 on the European Agency for Reconstruction (2), and to the oral questions put to the Council (B6-0026/2004) and the Commission (B6-0025/2004), |
|
— |
having regard to Rule 103(2) of its Rules of Procedure, |
|
A. |
whereas, in 1999, the EU initiated the Stabilisation and Association Process (SAP) for the countries of the western Balkans (Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Serbia and Montenegro, and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia) as its main contribution to the Stability Pact establishing strategic frameworks for these countries' relations with the EU and combining new contractual relationships (Stability and Association Agreements) and an assistance programme (CARDS), |
|
B. |
whereas bilateral relations complement a multilateral framework in which to develop regional cooperation and good neighbourly relations as pre-conditions for a concrete membership perspective, |
|
C. |
whereas the European Council in Thessaloniki in 2003 explicitly recognised the European vocation of the countries included in the SAP process and their potential as candidates for EU membership, |
|
D. |
whereas progress has been made by the countries in question, but whereas many challenges still lie ahead before they complete their transition to fully functioning democracies and market economies and before they are able to sustain a closer relationship with the EU; and whereas, ultimately, while their European vocation is indisputable, further progress along these lines will depend on the ability of the individual countries themselves to make marked improvements, |
|
E. |
whereas the state union of Serbia and Montenegro, created at the initiative of the EU to promote the process of democratic and economic reforms and to speed up its integration into the EU, is currently not meeting expectations, and its parliament has effectively ceased to function as of 3 March 2005, |
|
F. |
whereas the establishment of a democratic Kosovo not only for the ethnic majority but for all ethnic groups living there must be the objective of EU action, and whereas present and future assistance must be based on such principles; whereas the results of this endeavour are not satisfactory; whereas the situation in Kosovo and the lack of security for the remaining members of the Serbian and other non-Albanian communities, particularly after the eruption of ethnic violence in March 2004, is also having a negative impact on the situation in Serbia, |
|
G. |
whereas the provisions of UN Security Council resolution 1244 (1999) on the return of Serb and other refugees to their homes in Kosovo are still not being complied with, |
|
H. |
whereas the large numbers of internally displaced persons in Serbia and Croatia represent an additional financial burden for both countries, |
|
I. |
whereas the presence of state-like entities and their persisting undefined status contribute to the instability of the region, |
|
J. |
whereas the present institutional framework stemming from the Dayton accords undermines the viability of Bosnia and Herzegovina and represents an obstacle to European integration, |
|
K. |
whereas the failure in the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia of the referendum of 7 November 2004 has cleared the way for the full implementation of the Ohrid agreement and accelerated the pace of European integration, |
|
L. |
whereas the forthcoming opening of accession negotiations with Croatia once the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) commitments are fulfilled, should be regarded as a positive signal sent to all the countries in the region as regards their European prospects, |
|
M. |
whereas the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia has also submitted its membership application and expects to receive an opinion from the Commission in due course, |
|
1. |
Stresses that, in line with the European Security Strategy adopted in December 2003, the western Balkans constitutes a region of the highest priority for the EU, and that the future of the region is certainly one of European integration, but that this future depends to a very large extent on the countries in the region themselves; |
|
2. |
Notes that political ownership and knowledge of the technical mechanisms for European integration are important elements, but that the relevant institutions, in particular elected bodies (in the countries of the region), need to be strengthened, and recognises that this will require considerable additional financial resources; |
|
3. |
Expresses its serious concern at the economic and social situation in the region; stresses that the solution to this crucial question is one of the main keys to the stable development of those countries; calls on governments and the EU to make social and economic development one of the top priorities; |
|
4. |
Recalls that, at a summit held in July 2002 between the Heads of State of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia and Serbia and Montenegro, a joint declaration was agreed on implementing the Dayton agreement, maintaining the inalterability of borders, promoting the return of refugees, and cooperation on European integration; |
|
5. |
Welcomes the bilateral Agreement on the Protection of Minorities concluded on 15 November 2004 between Croatia and the state union of Serbia and Montenegro indicating the Parties' willingness to recognise national minorities as an asset enriching society; |
Bosnia and Herzegovina
|
6. |
Notes that, ten years after the signing of the Dayton agreement, crucial political problems remain unresolved, the country is deeply divided and political stability is vulnerable; takes the view that new political initiatives based on a bottom-up participation of the three peoples living there and living in a sustainable peace as neighbours are urgently needed; underlines therefore the need for a revision of the Dayton accords; |
|
7. |
Draws attention to the priorities which have not yet been met: full cooperation with the ICTY, security issues, institution-building, infrastructure, energy; welcomes the decision by the EU to take over peace-keeping operations from the SFOR led by NATO, whose mandate expired on 2 December 2004, and in this regard stresses the enormous importance of the EU's largest military mission so far, which will give the EU significant visibility in Bosnia; takes note that this will make the EU the main international player in Bosnia, with not only military instruments at its disposal but also civilian instruments, including aid, trade, and political dialogue; points out the contradiction inherent in some political forces in Bosnia and Herzegovina, which openly support European integration but obstruct the indispensable reforms needed for a functioning state; |
|
8. |
Welcomes the fact that the EU is ready to assume more responsibilities with regard to the stability of Bosnia and Herzegovina than in the past; notes that the EU's largest military mission, EUFOR, is a complementary element to the EU Police Mission in Bosnia and Herzegovina; stresses, therefore, that the take-over of the NATO-led peace-keeping operation SFOR in December 2004 is a major opportunity for further progress ten years after Dayton; takes note of the inclusion of military as well as police components; calls on the Council to ensure maximum coordination between the multiplicity of actors and to ensure that the European Parliament is well informed and given specific information on EUFOR; |
|
9. |
Welcomes the work of the newly instituted Directorate for European Integration in the government of Bosnia and Herzegovina; recognises the positive developments which have taken place; reiterates the importance for the authorities of further pursuing the reform process and turning their attention to priorities such as tackling corruption and organised crime, tracking down war criminals still at large and dealing with a severely depressed economy, the prohibitive costs of keeping the administration functioning and the general lack of administrative capacity; |
|
10. |
Regrets the decision taken by the United States — which came into force in June 2003 — granting US citizens in Bosnia immunity from prosecution by the International Criminal Court in The Hague, following ratification by Bosnia and Herzegovina's Parliament; |
|
11. |
Calls on the Bosnian authorities, in particular the government of the Republika Srpska, to cooperate fully with the ICTY in its pursuit of persons indicted for war crimes and, if this proves to be the case, supports a future invitation to Bosnia to participate in the Partnership for Peace programme; stresses that the most serious issue remains the continued impunity of indicted war criminals and the problem with their extradition, which represents an obstacle to reconciliation and the development of mutual trust between the peoples; calls on the authorities of Bosnia and Herzegovina at all levels of the administration, civil society, the Orthodox church, and all other responsible actors, to do their utmost to bring Karadzic and Mladic before the ICTY; welcomes, in this respect, the recent arrests by the Republika Srpska police of 8 persons on local war crimes warrants and the decision of the Council to freeze the assets of an increased number of indicted war criminals; |
|
12. |
Is deeply alarmed at the discovery by United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) scientists of depleted uranium contamination of water and ground samples taken from some parts of Bosnia and Herzegovina; expresses its concern at the lack of action in response to UNEP's recommendations that the polluted areas be decontaminated; |
|
13. |
Welcomes the reconnection of electric generators in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, and Serbia and Montenegro to western Europe's UCTE system, which was interrupted in 1991; believes that the reunification of the Bosnian market, formerly divided into the Federation and Republika Srpska entities, will boost Bosnia's economic recovery; |
|
14. |
Recognises that the Office of the High Representative is still needed in Bosnia and Herzegovina; demands greater transparency and (European) parliamentary oversight regarding its activities and decisions, especially in the light of the planned gradual transfer of its activities to Bosnia and Herzegovina's own authorities; in this context, asks the High Representative to refrain from making too extensive use of the so-called “Bonn Powers”, given that these means of government are an obstacle to the establishment of the rule of law in Bosnia and Herzegovina; |
|
15. |
Urges the Commission to support the country's political forces in finding a consensus to reform the political framework as set out in the Dayton agreement, in order to establish effectively functioning administrative structures in Bosnia and Herzegovina; |
Serbia and Montenegro
|
16. |
Points out that the next two years will be critical for the state union in Serbia and Montenegro, as finding a mutually satisfactory solution will be a key factor for the stability of the region as a whole; reiterates that the EU should be ready to assist Serbia and Montenegro to work out a lasting arrangement, while adopting a neutral stance on which form that relationship should take; |
|
17. |
Regrets that there is still a lack of cooperation from Serbia with the ICTY and calls on the authorities to make further progress with military and police reform, with a special focus on the secret police; welcomes the recent surrender to the ICTY of indicted, high-ranking war criminals, and expects the Serb authorities to speed up their cooperation with the ICTY; |
|
18. |
Reminds the government of Serbia and Montenegro that respect for fundamental rights and freedoms, including those of ethnic and national minorities, is one of the Copenhagen criteria, and a prerequisite for further involvement in the SAP that might eventually lead to EU membership; |
|
19. |
Takes note of the findings of the European Parliament's ad hoc mission to Voyvodina and its report concerning ethnic and social tension in the province; reminds the Serb authorities of their responsibility to secure law and order throughout the country and for all inhabitants; recognises the potential of Voyvodina to become a model for the rest of Serbia in securing peaceful coexistence among all the different ethnic groups and to fully benefit from EU initiated/assisted regional and trans-border programmes; |
Kosovo
|
20. |
Calls on the Commission to expedite and complete work on its feasibility study with a view to starting negotiations as soon as possible on the conclusion of a stabilisation and association agreement with the European Union; |
|
21. |
Recognises that future decisions taken on the status of Kosovo will have political implications for Serbia, and therefore invites Belgrade and Pristina to engage in a cooperative dialogue and find a constructive solution for the future of Kosovo; |
|
22. |
Welcomes the decision of former Kosovo Prime Minister Ramush Haradinaj to resign and surrender himself to the ICTY; hopes that his voluntary surrender will act as an example for other indicted war criminals in the region and increase respect for, and the standing of, the ICTY; |
|
23. |
Notes the outcome of the recent (23 October 2004) elections, but regrets the low turnout and in particular the mass boycott by Kosovo's minority Serbs and the fact that this highlights the deep divisions still plaguing the territory; |
|
24. |
Is aware that a review on the implementation of the standards will take place in mid-2005 with a view to deciding on the possibility of opening discussions on the future status of Kosovo; |
|
25. |
Expects the Council, in particular the High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy, and the Commission to play their full part, together with the UN, the US, NATO and all other relevant actors, in preparing the ground for the forthcoming talks on the future of Kosovo; stresses, in this respect, that all parties must be fully aware of the shared European future of the whole region; |
|
26. |
Calls on the Council and the Commission to take the leading role in preparing the negotiations on final status and to exclude in advance, in order to speed up the process, the following options:
|
|
27. |
Insists, however, on the need for the authorities in Kosovo to take decisive steps to increase security for all citizens of Kosovo; |
|
28. |
Recognises the importance of the SAP Tracking Mechanism (STM) as a way of supporting Kosovo in its EU-compatible structural reforms and preparing for Kosovo's future inside the European Union; |
|
29. |
Points out that, more than five years after the conflict, the fate of almost 3 500 Kosovars has not been resolved; calls on the Serbian government to cooperate actively in providing all information concerning the missing persons; likewise calls on the Kosovo authorities to provide all information concerning the 500 Kosovo Serbs still missing; |
|
30. |
Calls on the authorities of Kosovo to respect the rights of the Serb community, to facilitate the return of Serb and other non-Albanian refugees, to comply with UN Security Council Resolution 1244 (1999) and to tackle organised crime and drug trafficking more vigorously; |
Albania
|
31. |
Is concerned that the political climate in Albania is problematic, with tensions within the ruling party having led to a split within the party; condemns the Albanian government's inability to act effectively; expects all political parties to take practical steps to improve the political climate; |
|
32. |
Stresses the necessity of improving Albania's administrative capacity and the fight against arbitrary actions by the authorities; recommends that enhanced actions be taken to provide the means needed in the fight against corruption, organised crime, trafficking in human beings, arms and drugs; and calls for improvements aimed at achieving an independent and efficient judicial system, especially the development of a functioning jurisdiction for the administrative sector; |
|
33. |
Recognises that, with the role it has to play in the fight against organised crime, Albania is a key player in the stabilisation of the region; |
|
34. |
Is aware that much still has to be done to develop the economic sector (e.g. a quarter of the population is living below the poverty line), tackle corruption and increase transparency; draws attention to the difficult situation in the education sector with regard, in particular, to the urgency of guaranteeing equal education opportunities for children all over the country; |
|
35. |
Calls on the Albanian government and authorities to respect the rights of the ethnic Greek minority, and points out that progress in the negotiation of the Stabilisation and Association Agreement and Albania's European future are closely linked to respect for human and minority rights; |
Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia
|
36. |
Is of the view that the full participation of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia in the European integration process will be beneficial not only for the country itself but also for the entire region; |
|
37. |
Welcomes the answers of the government of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia to the Commission questionnaire on the political and economic issues and the EU “acquis”; expects the Commission to deliver its opinion on the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia's application for EU membership as soon as possible; stresses that obtaining candidate status at the December 2005 European Council will encourage the country to achieve further results in the reform process, and will strengthen stability in the region; |
|
38. |
Welcomes the efforts made by the government in the implementation of the decentralisation reforms as part of the Framework Agreement signed in Ohrid in 2001; welcomes the outcome of the referendum of November 2004, which demonstrated the support for the European course of the country and creates conditions for further reforms; points out that the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia's efforts to decentralise should be adequately backed up by EU support programmes, which should be further “deconcentrated” to bring in the expertise of national and local authorities; |
|
39. |
Regrets that the March 2005 local elections were, according to OSCE monitors, marred by irregularities, and calls on the authorities of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia immediately to take the necessary measures so as to bring the electoral standards into line with the requirements of the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights; |
|
40. |
Is of the opinion that the failure of the referendum regarding the feasibility of the territorial division ensures a continuing reconciliation between the two main ethnic groups along the lines of the Ohrid agreement, with a view to making the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia a model of peaceful coexistence and contributing to the stabilisation of the whole region; |
|
41. |
Takes the view that the various EU bodies acting in the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia should improve their coordination; is of the opinion, in this regard, that the Commission should play a pivotal role in the implementation of EU policies in the country; |
|
42. |
Takes the view that full support for the ICC is a basic element of cooperation between the EU and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia; points out, in this respect, that in view of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia's application for membership the so-called “exemption treaty” between the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and the USA, signed in 2003, should be annulled; |
|
43. |
Regrets that, according to the OCSE reports on the local elections, irregularities were observed in a number of municipalities; calls, therefore, for further efforts to be directed towards strengthening the election procedures in the future, particularly at local level; |
Croatia
|
44. |
Welcomes the decision taken on 18 June 2004 (3) to grant Croatia candidate status; |
|
45. |
Takes note of the Council's decision to postpone the opening of accession talks with Croatia due to the absence of a common agreement about this country's full cooperation with the ICTY; |
|
46. |
Welcomes, in this respect, the decision of the Council to adopt the negotiating framework with Croatia and calls on the Croatian government to do its utmost to prove it is fully cooperating with the ICTY; takes the view that this is a basic test for all the countries in the region and expresses its full support for the difficult work carried out by the ICTY; |
|
47. |
Calls on Croatia to settle the remaining border disputes through dialogue with Slovenia and to avoid unilateral acts which intend to prejudice the determination of the Slovenian-Croatian border and affect the demarcation of the border without consent; |
|
48. |
Takes note of the November 2004 visit by Croatian Prime Minister Sanader to Belgrade, the first such official visit since the collapse of the former Yugoslavia; notes the fact that Prime Minister Sanader and Serbia and Montenegro President Marovic signed agreements regarding national minorities and on technical and scientific cooperation, and that they concurred that the future of both Croatia and Serbia and Montenegro must include European Union membership; |
|
49. |
Calls on the authorities to take significant steps to facilitate the return of refugees and to guarantee fair and effective domestic trials for war crimes; |
|
50. |
Urges the Council and the Commission to send the Monitoring Task Force to Croatia as soon as possible in order to provide the next Council meeting with reliable results on which to base decisions; |
General points
|
51. |
Calls for the international action in the region to be better coordinated; notes that, with numerous actors playing a role in the region, there is a need for a definition/allocation of competences among them; draws particular attention to the need for a clear allocation of responsibilities/competences between the European Agency for Reconstruction and the “deconcentrated” delegations of the European Commission in the region; |
|
52. |
Calls on the Council and the Commission to lay down a clear roadmap and accession strategy for the western Balkan countries over the next few years and, especially in view of the opening of negotiations with Croatia, asks that the EU send out an unambiguous message to the other south-east European states; |
|
53. |
Points out that the SAP in the western Balkans constitutes an essential framework for the countries' journey towards the EU; |
|
54. |
Points out that the roles of the SAP and the Stabilisation and Association Agreements should be strengthened and that the EU should provide a clear, step-by-step integration agenda; |
|
55. |
Calls on the EU to encourage and support all governments in the region to prepare EU-compatible provisional National Development Plans similar to the one Turkey has prepared in order to build institutional absorption capacity for future EU assistance, especially in the areas of rural, infrastructure and human resources development; |
|
56. |
Points out that free trade between south-east European countries and the EU market is hampered by the issue of rules of origin because, in most cases, these countries have not signed the pan-European agreement on rules of origin; calls on the Commission to give top priority to helping these countries conduct any negotiations and necessary procedures; |
|
57. |
Notes that budgetary allocations for relations with the western Balkans have been constantly and significantly reduced every year since 2002; and is determined to provide adequate funding for the region in the next financial perspective taking into account the crucial challenges of the region, the gradual shift from physical reconstruction to institution-building and pre-accession assistance, as well as the region's strategic importance to the European Union; |
|
58. |
Calls on the Council and the Commission, in the light of the need to embrace the whole of society, in particular opinion-formers, within the process of advancing the region's journey towards the EU, to take urgent action to strengthen cooperation on border controls as part of a wider justice and home affairs strategy for the region, which should include a study by the Commission on the effects of a progressive easing of visa requirements for the countries of the region, its conclusions to be presented by the end of 2005; considers that the study should focus in particular on how to facilitate the movement of students, NGO representatives, economic actors and representatives of political institutions and business people; |
|
59. |
Calls on the authorities in the countries of the region to strengthen their efforts to bring before domestic courts all those responsible for war crimes, regardless of the ethnicity of the victims and the perpetrators, and to do this in accordance with internationally recognised fair trial standards, and in cooperation with the ICTY; |
|
60. |
Stresses that the countries of the region can do much to help themselves to achieve further progress on the road to EU integration by fulfilling the following conditions:
|
|
61. |
Welcomes the Sofia declaration on a Decade for Roma Inclusion and asks the Commission to support the efforts of the countries of the region in improving the situation of the Roma population decisively; |
|
62. |
Notes that the key objectives of EU policy should include a systematic and progressive transfer of responsibilities regarding the implementation and management of EU assistance, increasing the role of local and national authorities and a steadily increasing engagement of civil society and democratic forces, as and when the countries in question have the capacity to do so; |
|
63. |
Asks the Commission to now include the countries' institutions directly in the Financial Management System of EU Assistance as envisaged in the CARDS programme; |
|
64. |
Calls on all the countries in the region to work together on the coordination of regional infrastructure, as development in this sector is essential if the region is to integrate economically; |
|
65. |
Regrets that the return of refugees and internally displaced persons in the region has still to be fully implemented; |
|
66. |
Continues to be seriously concerned about the exodus of youth and the brain drain in the region and about the not-unrelated levels of poverty and unemployment; |
|
67. |
Notes that minefields in the Balkans are still a major obstacle to the development and integration of the regions of south-eastern Europe and that, although much work has been successfully undertaken in the past years, the EU's Mine Action activities in countries of the region need to continue in order for the Ottawa Convention's objective of declaring mine-safe areas by 2010 to be achieved; |
|
68. |
Is of the opinion that the development of, and support for, a genuine civil society is an indispensable factor which is bound to strengthen democratic institutions and pave the way for a full reconciliation between the parties; |
|
69. |
Calls on the Commission to make further efforts to assist the countries of the region in having their multi-ethnic heritage fully reflected in their education systems, and to ensure that they can take part in European Union educational exchange programmes; |
|
70. |
Urges the Commission to come up with a concrete project on the creation of areas of facilitated freedom of movement between neighbouring regions, which will thus enhance the development of cross-border and regional cooperation; |
|
71. |
Urges the Commission to promote and support the setting-up of twinning programmes at municipal level and to support all actions facilitating networking among the various actors in the EU and SAP countries; |
|
72. |
Proposes that the EU, acting in cooperation with the UN, play a decisive role in creating the platform for immediate talks between all relevant political stakeholders on the status of Kosovo, and looks forward to a productive outcome to these discussions; |
|
73. |
Urges western Balkan states to adopt and implement the EU Code of Conduct on arms exports; |
|
74. |
Calls on the Commission and the Agency for Reconstruction to further encourage and support a broad-based truth and reconciliation process, complementary to the judicial processes, which should involve civil society, political actors and cultural figures, and lay the ground for lasting peace and stability in the region; considers that this reconciliation process must, in particular, target young people and should include a thorough review of school books and curricula for history studies; |
*
* *
|
75. |
Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the governments and parliaments of the Member States and candidate countries, all the governments and parliaments in the region, the EU Special Coordinator of the Stability Pact for South Eastern Europe, the EU Special Representatives in the region, the UN Special Representative in Kosovo (UNMIK), the OSCE and the Council of Europe. |
(1) OJ C 87 E, 07.04.2004, p. 521.
(2) P6_TA(2004)0056.
(3) See Council Conclusions, 17-18 June 2004 (10679/2/04 REV 2).
P6_TA(2005)0132
Common Foreign and Security Policy (2003)
European Parliament resolution on the annual report from the Council to the European Parliament on the main aspects and basic choices of CFSP, including the financial implications for the general budget of the European Communities — 2003 (8412/2004 — 2004/2172(INI))
The European Parliament,
|
— |
having regard to the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe, signed in Rome on 29 October 2004, |
|
— |
having regard to the European Security Strategy adopted by the European Council on 12 December 2003, |
|
— |
having regard to the 2003 Annual Report from the Council to the European Parliament on the main aspects and basic choices of CFSP, including the financial implications for the general budget of the European Communities (8412/2004), |
|
— |
having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 6 May 1999 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline and improvement of the budgetary procedure (1), point 40, |
|
— |
having regard to Article 21 of the EU Treaty, |
|
— |
having regard to its resolution of 12 January 2005 on the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe (2), |
|
— |
having regard to its resolution of 23 October 2003 on the progress achieved in the implementation of the common foreign and security policy (3), |
|
— |
having regard to its resolution of 29 January 2004 on the relations between the European Union and the United Nations (4), |
|
— |
having regard to its resolution of 20 November 2003 on “Wider Europe — Neighbourhood: A New Framework for Relations with our Eastern and Southern Neighbours” (5), |
|
— |
having regard to its resolution of 10 April 2003 on the new European security and defence architecture — priorities and deficiencies (6), |
|
— |
having regard to its recommendation to the Council of 26 February 2004 on EU-Russia relations (7), |
|
— |
having regard to its resolutions of 22 April 2004 on the state of the Transatlantic Partnership on the eve of the EU-US Summit in Dublin on 25-26 June 2004 (8) and of 13 January 2005 on transatlantic relations (9), |
|
— |
having regard to its resolution of 23 October 2003 on peace and dignity in the Middle East (10), |
|
— |
having regard to its recommendation to the Council of 24 September 2003 on the situation in Iraq (11), |
|
— |
having regard to is resolution of 12 February 2004 on Afghanistan: challenges and prospects for the future (12), |
|
— |
having regard to its resolution of 15 November 2001 on a global partnership and a common strategy for relations between the European Union and Latin America (13), |
|
— |
having regard to its resolution of 13 January 2005 on the recent tsunami disaster in the Indian Ocean (14), |
|
— |
having regard to the Presidency Conclusions of the Brussels European Council of 16-17 December 2004 and in particular to its decisions on terrorism and external affairs, |
|
— |
having regard to Rule 112(1) of its Rules of Procedure, |
|
— |
having regard to the report of the Committee on Foreign Affairs and the opinion of the Committee on Budgets (A6-0062/2005), |
|
A. |
whereas Parliament does not consider itself adequately consulted as provided for by Article 21 of the Treaty on European Union through the Council's current practice of simply transmitting a descriptive list of actions for the preceding year rather than consulting Parliament on the main aspects and basic choices for the following year, |
|
B. |
whereas the existing practice should therefore be discontinued and replaced by another one providing for real consultation of the Parliament as referred to above, leading to its deeper involvement, |
|
C. |
whereas the spirit and the substance of the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe signed in Rome on 29 October 2004, even pending ratification, should already have important implications as regards implementation of the EU's CFSP policy for 2005 and afterwards, |
|
D. |
whereas Parliament has repeatedly expressed its views concerning the way in which the relationship with certain regions and countries should be organised and given better balance in order to enhance the global character of the external action of the Union, |
|
E. |
whereas the existing financing of CFSP and ESDP policies is totally inadequate, both in quantitative and qualitative terms and as far as its democratic accountability is concerned, |
|
1. |
Although satisfied with the manner in which the High Representative/Secretary General of the Council has indeed kept Parliament fully informed of progress regarding the main CFSP issues, emphatically rejects the “a posteriori” approach followed by the Council so far of merely submitting a descriptive list of CFSP activities carried out in the previous year, and considers such a practice as clearly infringing Article 21 of the Treaty on European Union and the Interinstitutional Agreement of 6 May 1999 as far as prior consultation of the European Parliament is concerned; |
|
2. |
Therefore requests the Council to discontinue the existing practice and to replace it with an “a priori” approach whereby Parliament is consulted at the beginning of each year on the main aspects and basic choices envisaged by the Council for that year both on global and horizontal issues, as well as on the priorities planned for the different geographical areas; further asks the Council to subsequently report on whether and, if so, how Parliament's contribution has been taken into account; |
|
3. |
Intends to contribute to efforts to increase democratic accountability as regards CFSP issues by holding regular discussions with national parliaments within the framework of the quarterly exchange of views with the High Representative/Secretary General of the Council and the Commissioner for External Relations, including discussion concerning amendments proposed by national parliaments to Parliament's Annual Report on CFSP; |
|
4. |
Invites the Council and the High Representative/Secretary General of the Council to actively participate in an annual debate on the European Security Strategy with the European Parliament and the national parliaments; |
|
5. |
Encourages both the Council and the Member States to further increase parliamentary scrutiny of the ESDP, at national level, by enhancing the role played by national parliaments in the authorisation of ESDP operations, and, at European level, by giving Parliament a major role in the scrutiny of the entire CFSP budget; |
|
6. |
Urges the Council to ensure that its policy instruments, such as sanctions policy, are implemented with greater rigour and political commitment; |
Main aspects and basic choices of CFSP for 2005 in the aftermath of the signing of the Constitutional Treaty
|
7. |
Expresses the view that the spirit (and substance) of the provisions of the new Treaty regarding CFSP should be applied as of now, as has already been done with the setting-up of the European Defence Agency, the “Battle Group” concept, the establishment of the developed EU Neighbourhood Policy, which should be far more significant than the present Neighbourhood Policy, and the application of the Solidarity Clause to counter terrorist threats or attacks; the consequences thereof should be dealt with by effectively coordinating relevant actions, including both present and future means of civil protection, as well as the mutual solidarity obligation to provide aid and assistance in the event of an armed aggression against any Member State of the European Union; |
|
8. |
Consequently asks to be informed on a par with the Council about, and more deeply involved in, any future proposal presented by the Vice-President of the Commission/EU Minister for Foreign Affairs regarding the preparation of the Common Foreign and Security Policy for 2005; |
|
9. |
Expresses the desire that the future European External Action Service should play a key role in the field of external action, assisting the EU Minister for Foreign Affairs/Vice-President of the Commission; in any event, recalls the need to preserve Parliament's competencies and to maintain the accountability of the new Service as a whole vis-à-vis Parliament, in particular as regards the integration of parts of the Commission into the new Service (DG Relex, EC Delegations, etc.); asks for a perspective of further developments in the intergovernmental elements (to be provided, in particular, by Member States), so that the future Service can follow an integrated Community model as part of the Commission whilst remaining wholeheartedly loyal to the Council in intergovernmental issues; |
|
10. |
Asks the Council to make every effort to give real substance to the Solidarity Clause for Defence provided for in the Constitutional Treaty as soon as that Treaty enters into force and a genuine and effective common foreign and security policy is in place; |
|
11. |
Considers it necessary that the Commissioner for External Relations and the High Representative for CFSP, now that the Constitutional Treaty has been signed, should apply new standards by fully informing, consulting and further involving Parliament on all CFSP and ESDP issues; stresses the need to ensure, in particular, the democratic accountability and transparency of all activities undertaken by the European Defence Agency; |
|
12. |
Welcomes the creation of the European Defence Agency and the Commission's preparatory measures on security research; considers that an appropriate amount per year should be allocated to security research in the medium-term financial plan, including the civilian aspects; |
|
13. |
Asks the Council to also regularly consult and involve Parliament on the main aspects and basic choices made on ESDP and to keep Parliament informed of the way in which it develops, in line with Article I-41, paragraph 8 of the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe; such consultation should take place in the same way as requested above for CFSP; |
Specific proposals on global and horizontal issues for 2005
|
14. |
Welcomes the European Union Security Strategy adopted by the European Council on 12 December 2003; fully adheres to its civil-military holistic approach and to its crucial concepts of preventive engagement and effective multilateralism, which must also characterise both the CFSP and ESDP, and refers to the report currently being drawn up by its Committee on Foreign Affairs on the strategy; emphasises the need to develop capabilities for rapid response in the event of humanitarian disasters and catastrophes; |
|
15. |
Emphasises, in this context, as set out in the Security Strategy, the need to develop a corresponding security culture and therefore supports unreservedly the work now under way on implementing the EU training concept in the ESDP sphere; the development and setting-up of a European Security and Defence College must in future provide the institutions of the European Union and the Member States with welltrained staff who are capable of operating effectively in the ESDP sphere; to this end, the College must be organised on a viable basis and appropriately funded; |
|
16. |
Fully supports the joint efforts currently being made to implement the EU Strategy against the Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction, bearing in mind the revision in 2005 of the United Nations Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT Treaty) and the active role that the EU should play in this context and in the implementation of UN Security Council Resolution 1540 (2004); refers to its previous positions on small arms and to its resolution of 22 April 2004 on the review of the Ottawa Convention on anti-personnel mines (15); reiterates its support for strengthening the EU Code of Conduct on arms exports with a view to making it binding and for EU advocacy in favour of an International Arms Trade Treaty; |
|
17. |
Stresses its strong belief that nuclear disarmament will contribute significantly to international security and strategic stability and reduce the risk of nuclear proliferation; calls on those Member States which have an arsenal of nuclear weapons to implement their obligations under Article 6 of the NPT Treaty; urges the Member States at the forthcoming NPT Review Conference to support the fresh initiative at international level on new nuclear dangers as proposed by Kofi Annan, UN Secretary-General, and by Mohammed El Baradei, Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency, on nuclear disarmament and the revitalisation of the UN Conference on Disarmament; |
|
18. |
Shares the view of the European Council that the fight against terrorism will continue to be a priority of the EU and a key element of its external relations policy while stressing once more that this cannot be pursued at the expense of human rights and civil liberties, and proposes greater coherence and decisiveness in the Union's counter-terrorism policy vis-à-vis third countries by:
|
|
19. |
Attaches the utmost importance to its own contribution to the fight against terrorism; therefore urges its Committees on Foreign Affairs and on Civil Liberties to find an appropriate procedure for preparing recommendations on the matter to be addressed to both the Council and the Commission; calls, in this respect, on the Council to fully inform and consult the Committee on Foreign Affairs and the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs on the question of the EU list of terrorist organisations; welcomes, in this regard, the positive reaction of the Luxembourg Presidency; |
|
20. |
Considers it essential that in the event of natural disasters recourse should be had to the capabilities developed by the Council and Commission in the civil/military sphere, including the civil/military planning unit and facilities such as Galileo and GMES; |
Parliament's priorities in the different geographical areas for 2005
|
21. |
Asks the Council to take immediate steps to correct the existing imbalance in geographical terms among the CFSP acts adopted in the last ten years, so that a fairer balance between the different regions can be achieved in accordance with the global ambitions of the Union; asks the Council in particular to strike a geographical balance between the efforts made so far eastwards due to enlargement and renewed efforts towards the south of the Mediterranean; stresses, nevertheless, that it should avoid any cool gesture of diminished interest on the part of the EU for progress in the western Balkans, Ukraine and the southern Caucasus, at least; |
|
22. |
Recommends, therefore, that the necessary steps be taken by the Council to enable the EU to take advantage of the privileged relationships existing with certain geographical areas (via bi-regional, multilateral or bilateral association agreements, etc.), in order to reinforce its multilateral strength when dealing with other emerging countries and regions with which no such privileged relationships have yet been established; furthermore stresses that increased priority must not be given to the EU's neighbourhood at the expense of crucial relations and solidarity between the EU and developing countries in the world; |
|
23. |
Attaches, however, the utmost importance, first of all, to the successive enlargements of the Union as decided by the European Council on 16-17 December 2004, and second, to the development of the European Neighbourhood Policy, as the Union's highest priorities in the political agenda for 2005, including a European Economic Area for European countries; insists on the crucial importance of making every effort to achieve a solution through peace and dignity to the Middle East conflict on the basis of the Quartet Road Map and the implementation of the Strategic Partnership with the Mediterranean and the Middle East decided by the European Council in June 2004; welcomes, to that end, the recent summit at Sharm el-Sheik between Ariel Sharon and Abu Mazen; insists equally on the utmost effort being made to contribute to the resolution of other existing or foreseeable conflicts and crises, such as those in Kosovo, Chechnya, Darfur, Somalia, the Great Lakes region, Iran and North Korea (DPRK), and to the pursuit of social progress in the world in line with the UN Millennium Development Goals; |
|
24. |
Also attaches the utmost importance to the continuation and further development of the European Strategy for the western Balkans with a view to the gradual integration of the countries in the region into the European institutions, particularly in the light of the crucial decisions to be taken in the second half of 2005 on the final status of Kosovo; |
|
25. |
Is prepared to work with the Council and Commission on a long-term strategic reorganisation of Serbia and Montenegro, including Kosovo, with the objective of facilitating a common peaceful future in the European Union for all people of this region; |
|
26. |
Expects close cooperation with the Council and Commission to underpin, politically and economically, the ongoing Middle East peace process; |
|
27. |
Considers it important for the EU and the USA to have a constructive relationship and for NATO to become once again more of a forum for political debate on an equal footing, in which a sensible balance must be struck between the instruments of prevention, crisis management and military capability; considers it vital to adopt common positions (EP-US Congress) on certain global issues of common interest (the fight against terrorism, regional conflicts, proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, disarmament, international law, effective multilateralism, energy cooperation, climate change, etc) and considers that, especially in 2005, the tenth anniversary of the Madrid Declaration, new impetus should be given to transatlantic relations — completion of the transatlantic market by 2015, updating of the New Transatlantic Agenda with a Transatlantic Partnership Agreement to enter into force as soon as possible and in any case within two years; |
|
28. |
Stresses the need for close cooperation between the EU and the USA in addressing global economic, political and security problems; calls for the drafting of a new transatlantic programme to structure dialogue on global issues; |
|
29. |
Urges the Council to discuss with the European Parliament the concept of “strategic partnerships” with third countries which must be based on the sharing and promotion of common values; calls, in this regard, for an overall assessment of the strategic partnerships with the Russian Federation and China; |
|
30. |
Asks both the Council and the Commission to make every effort to ensure a close relationship with Russia, reflecting our common interests and values and on the basis of full respect for human rights, the rule of law and democracy; |
|
31. |
Supports, in this regard, the proposal of the Council for joint EU/Russia crisis management of the conflicts in Transnistria and South Caucasus; points out that the war in Chechnya complicates the development of a genuine partnership and reiterates its call for a political solution of the conflict with the involvement of all the democratic components of Chechnyan society; |
|
32. |
Regrets that relations with China have made progress only in the trade and economic fields, without any substantial achievement as regards human rights and democracy issues; reiterates its demand for a binding EU code governing arms exports and calls, in this respect, on the Council not to lift the arms embargo and to find ways to facilitate dialogue, defuse tension and encourage disarmament in cross-strait relations, supporting Taiwan as a model of democracy for the whole of China; |
|
33. |
Expresses its deepest concern at the large number of missiles in southern China aimed across the Taiwan Straits and at the so-called “anti-secession law” of the People's Republic of China that in an unjustified way aggravates the situation across the Straits; calls on the People's Republic of China and on the R.O.C. in Taiwan to resume political talks on the basis of mutual understanding and recognition in order to promote stability, democracy, human rights and the rule of law in east Asia; |
|
34. |
Supports the efforts made by Britain, France and Germany and by the Council and the Commission to encourage Iran to become an active and benign partner in the region, showing full respect for human rights issues, and to ensure that it does not develop nuclear weapons; and emphasises that evidence of continued development of such weapons would have the most serious consequences for any relationship between the EU and Iran; |
|
35. |
Supports further consolidation of the European commitment in Afghanistan and advocates reliable and viable medium-term financing of this task; is in favour of increased efforts to rebuild the international community; in this context attaches particular importance to development of the education system, improving the position of women, girls and children, disarmament and reintegration measures and the development and implementation of economic alternatives to opium cultivation; |
|
36. |
Calls on the Council to start as soon as possible a procedure in order to adopt a CFSP common position on Iraq; |
|
37. |
Expresses, in that context, its deep concern regarding the statement of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, dated 10 February 2005, declaring its intention to suspend for an indefinite period of time its participation in the multilateral talks on its nuclear programme; |
|
38. |
Refers to its numerous resolutions and reports concerning the different geographical areas, which contain valuable contributions to the debate on the way in which the Union's policy vis-à-vis those geographical areas should evolve with a view to achieving the fair balance referred to above; |
|
39. |
Underlines once more the active role that the Union must play in its relations with third countries in promoting human rights and ensuring the fulfilment of the Millennium Development Goals, as important and integral elements of both CFSP and ESDP; |
|
40. |
Points to the concerted action taken by the EU during the recent Ukrainian elections as a good example of the way in which the different European institutions, acting in tandem with the Member States, should react and take a leading role when common European interests and values are at stake; undertakes to support further steps as far as Ukraine is concerned, since the recent developments clearly represent major challenges also for the Union; |
|
41. |
Calls on the Council, the Commission and the Member States to consider, besides the measures envisaged by the Action Plan within the framework of the European Neighbourhood Policy, other forms of association with Ukraine, giving a clear European perspective for the country and responding to the demonstrated aspirations of the vast majority of the Ukrainian people, possibly leading ultimately to the country's accession to the EU; |
Parliament's view on the Union's role in certain multilateral organisations
|
42. |
Pending the entry into force of the new Constitutional Treaty, which expressly confers legal personality on the Union, recommends that the necessary steps be taken in order to increase the representation of the Union as a whole in the different international multilateral organisations, including in particular the United Nations, the International Criminal Court (ICC), the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), the Council of Europe and all other relevant fora; calls on the Council and the Commission to involve Members of the European Parliament, where appropriate, in achieving this aim; emphasises in particular the need to enhance EU relations with the OSCE and the Council of Europe as well as with the United Nations; asks that Parliament be assigned a role in line with the high level of parliamentary diplomacy with which it contributes to the development of CFSP; |
|
43. |
Expresses the view that the Union as a whole should, in particular, play a major role within the United Nations system, that the EU should in the future be guaranteed a seat in the UN's Security Council, as the most genuine expression of a true and effective common foreign policy, and that the Union should support United Nations reform alongside the proposals included in the report from the High-level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change; |
|
44. |
Welcomes the historic decision of the UN Security Council to refer the crimes committed in Darfur to the Prosecutor of the ICC on the initiative of certain EU Member States; takes the view that this is a decisive step toward bringing impartial justice to victims of war crimes and crimes against humanity; regrets nevertheless the exemption granted to nationals from states that are not party to the Rome Statute from the jurisdiction of the ICC and calls on the Council to continue its firm support for the ICC; |
Parliament's view on the financing of CFSP for 2005
|
45. |
Reiterates that responding to the five main threats to European security, as set out in the European Security Strategy (terrorism, WMD proliferation, regional conflicts, State failure, organised crime), will require long-term external commitment using all available instruments, including a serious investment in security research and conflict prevention, involving the identification of concrete, sustained budgetary compromises to be explicitly made in the future Financial Perspectives for 2007-2013; |
|
46. |
Insists it is no longer possible to distinguish between the financing of civil or military expenses in the context, in particular, of ESDP operations, and more specifically those undertaken solely by the Union and planned and conducted through its Civil/Military Cell; |
|
47. |
Stresses once again, therefore, that joint costs for military operations within the framework of ESDP should be funded from the Community budget (as already occurs in the civil sphere in the case of police operations) and not from a subsidiary budget or a start-up fund of the Member States, as currently provided for; |
|
48. |
To that end, recalls the new possibilities offered by the financing of future interventions by the planned “Humanitarian Battle Groups” in cases of natural disasters in which a mixture of military and civil means of assistance are necessary, as was recently the case with the tsunami disaster in South Asia; calls, in this regard, on the Council and the Commission to draw up a new proposal which also takes into account the proposal of the European Parliament for a European Civil Peace Corps and the setting-up of a European Voluntary Aid Corps as provided for in Article III-321 of the Constitution; |
|
49. |
Asks the Council to consider, in the event of any future ESDP operation in the fight against terrorism, and in opposition to existing rules such as the principle that “costs lie where they fall” or any other ad hoc arrangements such as the so-called “Athena mechanism”, the possibility of funding the joint cost of such operations from the Community budget; |
*
* *
|
50. |
Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the parliaments of the Member States, the Secretary-General of the UN, the Secretary General of NATO and the Secretary General of the Council of Europe. |
(1) OJ C 172, 18.6.1999, p. 1.
(2) P6_TA(2005)0004.
(3) OJ C 82 E, 1.4.2004, p. 599.
(4) OJ C 96 E, 21.4.2004, p. 79.
(5) OJ C 87 E, 7.4.2004, p. 506.
(6) OJ C 64 E, 12.3.2004, p. 599.
(7) OJ C 98 E, 23.4.2004, p. 182.
(8) OJ C 104 E, 30.4.2004, p. 1043.
(9) Texts Adopted of that date, P6_TA(2005)0007.
(10) OJ C 82 E, 1.4.2004, p. 610.
(11) OJ C 77 E, 26.3.2004, p. 226.
(12) OJ C 97 E, 22.4.2004, p. 647.
(13) OJ C 140 E, 13.6.2002, p. 569.
(14) P6_TA(2005)0006.
P6_TA(2005)0133
European Security Strategy
European Parliament resolution on the European Security Strategy (2004/2167(INI))
The European Parliament,
|
— |
having regard to the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe, signed in Rome on 29 October 2004, |
|
— |
having regard to the European Security Strategy adopted by the European Council on 12 December 2003, following an initiative in this connection by the Greek Presidency, the informal Council of Foreign Ministers (Kastellorizon, May 2003) and the conclusions of the Thessaloniki European Council (19-20 June 2003), |
|
— |
having regard to its resolution of 30 November 2000 on the establishment of a common European security and defence policy after Cologne and Helsinki (1), |
|
— |
having regard to its resolution of 10 April 2003 on the new European security and defence architecture — priorities and deficiencies (2), |
|
— |
having regard to its resolution of 10 March 2005 on the Non-Proliferation Treaty 2005 Review Conference — Nuclear arms in North Korea and Iran (3), |
|
— |
having regard to the Proposal for a White Paper on European defence as presented by the EU Institute for Security Studies in May 2004, |
|
— |
having regard to the report on a Human Security Doctrine for Europe as presented to the EU High Representative for Common Foreign and Security Policy on 15 September 2004 (4), |
|
— |
having regard to the various programmes on conflict prevention as made public by all the European Institutions, |
|
— |
having regard to Rule 45 of its Rules of Procedure, |
|
— |
having regard to the report of the Committee on Foreign Affairs (A6-0072/2005), |
|
A. |
considering the milestone reached in the evolutionary development of European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP) as set out in the Franco-British St Malo Declaration of 3-4 December 1998, |
|
B. |
considering the subsequent ESDP development agenda as expressed during the European Council Summits in Cologne (3-4 June 1999), Helsinki (10-11 December 1999) and Göteborg (15-16 June 2001), |
|
C. |
considering the need to strengthen arms exports control in and from the EU and at global level, |
|
D. |
recognising the important role played by various EU assistance programmes and the indispensable contribution they make to economic development, to supporting the growth of democratic institutions, to the implementation of reconstruction measures, to drawing up macro-economic programmes and to promoting human rights, |
|
E. |
acknowledging that the comprehensive approach advocated in the European Security Strategy is already being actively pursued in the Balkans, as demonstrated by the scale of EU instruments currently being applied to bring stability to the region: the CARDS assistance programme; the civilian missions Proxima and EUPM; and the military mission Althea, |
|
F. |
recognising the consistent support levels established over a ten-year period of public opinion surveys, which have shown that more than 60 % of EU citizens are in favour of a common EU foreign policy and more than 70 % in favour of a common defence policy; noting, however, other opinion surveys which do not show support for increased military spending, |
|
G. |
noting and regretting that the level to which the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) is subject to scrutiny by the European Parliament in accordance with Article III-304 of the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe has not significantly been increased and that Parliament is not and has never been consulted on numerous Council decisions and actions; recognising nevertheless the goodwill demonstrated by the High Representative and his services in keeping Parliament informed and engaging in dialogue with Parliament; urging the High Representative and his services to continue to strengthen this transparent dialogue with Parliament, |
|
H. |
observing, without prejudice to the previous point, the continued accountability of actions undertaken within the Union's CFSP framework to the national parliaments, particularly with regard to those Member States where parliamentary approval is required in order to undertake any military action, |
|
I. |
acknowledging that all actions and measures undertaken within the framework of the Union's CFSP are to be exercised in strict adherence to international law and with respect for the principles of the UN Charter, as stated clearly in Articles I-3 and III-292 of the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe, |
|
J. |
whereas many EU Member States (including the United Kingdom, Germany, Spain, Italy and Greece) have had, and in some cases are still having, their own experiences with various forms of terrorism and the philosophies which underlie them, |
|
K. |
whereas, for the foreseeable future, Islamist terrorism represents the greatest challenge to the EU, as to other regions, particularly in the event that terrorists succeed in gaining control of weapons of mass destruction, |
|
L. |
whereas the European Security Strategy forms part of the comprehensive CFSP and ESDP, in which the whole spectrum of political activities available to the EU, including those of a diplomatic, economic or development nature, may come into play, |
The European security environment
|
1. |
Emphasises that only a comprehensive understanding of the concept of “security” can properly take into account both the influence of issues of political democratic concern (e.g. violation of human rights, wilful discrimination against particular groups of citizens, the existence of repressive regimes) and the wide range of social, economic and environmental factors (e.g. poverty, famine, disease, illiteracy, scarcity of natural resources, environmental degradation, inequitable trade relations, etc.) in contributing to existing regional conflicts, the failure of states and the emergence of criminal and terrorist networks, though the actions of the latter may not be seen as being justified in any way, shape or form by the above-mentioned factors; |
|
2. |
Welcomes, therefore, the comprehensive understanding of the concept of “security” as expressed in the European Security Strategy (ESS); shares the view expressed within the ESS that key threats to our global security presently include terrorism, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs), unresolved regional conflicts, failed and failing states and organised crime; emphasises that these threats can neither be primarily addressed nor exclusively resolved by military means; |
|
3. |
Draws, therefore, the same conclusion as that expressed within the ESS that a combination of the various assistance programmes and instruments, including those of development policy, at both EU and Member State level, in conjunction with diplomatic, civilian and military capabilities and expertise can best serve to contribute to a more secure world; |
|
4. |
Consequently stresses the urgent need for the practical transposition of this concept of the security environment within the existing structures of the Union, so as to enable the Union to detect crises sufficiently far in advance to act in a pro-active manner; in that connection, recommends greater efforts to establish an early-warning system for threats using innovative technologies from the civilian IT sector to carry out news analysis and assessment; expresses its view in this regard that the establishment of “tension detection centres” in regions particularly susceptible to crises, centres which may be set up under the auspices both of the future European External Action Service and of services outside the European Union, such as those of the African Union, would be one of many sensible ways of identifying, reporting on and helping to eradicate the roots of conflicts and thus preventing any violent escalations; stresses further in this regard the importance which it attaches to the integration of conflict prevention and the fight against terrorism as components within all EU policy areas; |
Strategic objectives for the EU
|
5. |
Agrees fully with the strategic objectives for the Union as expressed in the ESS: addressing the threats; building security in the Union's neighbourhood; and strengthening the international order via effective action through effective multilateral structures; emphasises that the objectives of the ESS go well beyond the military aspects of the European Security and Defence Policy; |
|
6. |
Notes that, in addressing the threats, it will be necessary to determine those of a regional and/or those of a global nature, so that the Union can effectively mobilise its available instruments and resources in order to address the problem; notes that the establishment of security in the Union's neighbourhood will serve in large measure to counter threats of a regional nature, whereas those of a global nature must be tackled through effective multilateral international structures in which the EU is a driving force; notes, however, that multilateral organisations and structures may also be called upon to address regional threats; |
|
7. |
Shares fully the view expressed in the Union's New Neighbourhood Policy and the ESS that the Union's neighbourhood should be understood in more far-reaching terms, covering not only those eastern European countries sharing borders with the EU but also regions further east and south, such as the Caucasus, the Middle East and northern Africa; notes the congruency of this policy with the continuing activities of the Union in seeking a resolution of the Arab-Israel conflict also through the Barcelona process; stresses that democracy and the rule of law are the most important preconditions for the peaceful coexistence of peoples; |
|
8. |
Emphasises the primacy of the UN within the multilateral institutional framework and the need for the EU to play a leading role in re-invigorating the structures and capabilities of this indispensable institution; takes note in this connection of the report presented by the Secretary-General of the UN entitled “In larger freedom: towards development, security, and human rights for all” on 21 March 2005; welcomes this report — without prejudice to any future detailed assessment by the Parliament — as the starting point for an open discussion on reforming the UN so that it may face the challenges of the 21st century; urges the EU and the Member States to coordinate their position within the framework of these discussions in full awareness of the consistent support demonstrated by public opinion surveys for a stronger representation of CFSP/ESDP through the EU than that which currently exists; |
|
9. |
Underlines, further, the need for the Union to play a leading role in cooperating with other international and regional organisations that foster peace and security in the world; emphasises in particular the need for full cooperation with the OSCE; |
|
10. |
Stresses that it is important for the EU to pursue a firm and fair development policy in order to contribute efficiently to the universally agreed Millennium Development Goals; |
Recent ESDP milestones
|
11. |
Notes the valuable experience gained in civilian and police missions over the course of the last two years, including: the assumption of control by the International Police Task Force (now EUPM) in Bosnia-Herzegovina since 2003; Proxima in The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM) and Eujust Themis in Georgia; welcomes also the forthcoming deployment of a European Union police force in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (EUPOL Kinshasa); |
|
12. |
Recognises the significant progress made in expanding the military capabilities of the Union; at the same time notes the importance of the Berlin Plus Framework agreed with NATO, which made the first EU military mission Concordia in FYROM and the Althea mission to Bosnia-Herzegovina possible; acknowledges the advantageous flexibility of the Union's ESDP framework in further allowing the execution of Operation Artemis in the Democratic Republic of the Congo; |
|
13. |
Emphasises the positive contributions already made by the EU Situation Centre (Sitcen) in combining all available civil, military and diplomatic intelligence to produce cogent background analyses of any given situation; urges the Member States to further intensify their information-sharing with the Sitcen, so as not to unduly hinder the fulfilment of ambitions expressed in the ESS; |
|
14. |
Emphasises that the defining characteristic and the additional value of the ESDP lie in the combination of civilian and military components and notes, in observance of the aforementioned accomplishments, that the EU will in future be increasingly faced with the challenge of striking a good and proper balance between military and civilian components in order to fulfil the objectives and the spirit of the ESS; takes the view that the Althea mission in Bosnia-Herzegovina will provide valuable experience in this regard, in so far as the Union will be able to coordinate its military efforts with the civilian operations and programmes currently under way; |
Progress towards Headline Goal 2010 and towards a Civilian Headline Goal 2008
|
15. |
Agrees with the targets set out in the Headline Goal 2010 as formally adopted by the General Affairs and External Relations Council (GAERC) on 17 May 2004 and the agreement to work out a Civilian Headline Goal 2008 as approved by the GAERC on 13 December 2004 as a means of concentrating efforts to empower the EU with the necessary capabilities to pursue the ESS strategic objectives; considers that these substantive and time-related targets should be given concrete form in a White Paper; |
|
16. |
Recognises in this connection the progress made at the GAERC meeting on 22 November 2004 concerning the further development of the rapid deployment “Battle Groups” concept for high-intensity military operations; notes that these Battle Groups are to be primarily derived from the bi-national and multinational forces already existing within the EU; also notes the agreement to work out a Civilian Headline Goal 2008, as approved by the GAERC, and welcomes the intention expressed therein of making the existing civilian instruments more comprehensive and effective, so that the combination of various integrated contingents can take place on the basis of specific needs on the ground; recognises, therefore, that future civilian crisis management within the framework of the ESDP will in effect go beyond the four priority areas set out in Feira (police, rule of law, civil administration and civil protection); |
|
17. |
Underscores, in particular with respect to achieving the full operational mobility of the Battle Groups by 2007, the importance of the Global Approach on Deployability and, in this context, welcomes the contributions made by the coordinating centres of Athens and Eindhoven in the military transport sector; |
|
18. |
Welcomes further in this regard the formal adoption by the European Council of the proposal for a Civilian/Military Cell (Civ/Mil) within the European Union Military Staff; notes that Civ/Mil will play a particularly crucial role in the strategic planning of all operations (i.e. civil, military and joint civil/military) and — as of 2006 — in setting up an operations centre for autonomous EU missions in cases where no national HQ has been designated; emphasises further the importance of Civ/Mil in developing principles and models for the management of the civilian/military interface; acknowledges, however, that many of these principles and models will be derived as a result of ongoing and future operations; |
|
19. |
Draws attention, as regards the planning for future EU mixed civil/military missions, to the proposals and ideas contained in the report entitled “A Human Security Doctrine for Europe”; welcomes in this regard not only the current developments in the field of ESDP, such as the establishment of Civ/Mil, which are in congruence with the general direction of this report, but also the future creation of a European Voluntary Humanitarian Aid Corps as provided for in Article III-321(5) of the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe; notes, however, that the European Voluntary Humanitarian Aid Corps is primarily envisaged, in that article, as “a framework for joint contributions from young Europeans”; demands therefore that the framework of this be either expanded or complemented by the setting-up of a complementary “Corps” drawing upon the experience and expertise of mid- and post-career professionals, so as to create a functional corps more along the lines of the European Civil Peace Corps — as proposed on several occasions by the Parliament; |
|
20. |
Notes that on 7 January 2005 the GEARC also — partly on the basis of provisional proposals put forward by the Foreign Affairs Commissioner — called on its competent subsidiary bodies and on the Commission to assess the scope for boosting the EU's crisis reaction capabilities as regards disaster aid; |
|
21. |
Urges the Council and the Commission to guarantee the complementarity and cohesion of existing instruments and capabilities as well as those of new proposals, particularly regarding the close link between conflict protection and crisis management; considers that measurable success in this as yet uncompleted task may be regarded as progress with a view to the future establishment of the European Foreign Service; |
|
22. |
Welcomes the initiative by certain Member States to establish a European Gendarmerie Force and their readiness to make it available for ESDP purposes; highlights the particular usefulness of this force in ensuring the transition from an essentially purely military phase of operations to a mixed or purely civilian phase; |
|
23. |
Emphasises the need to develop a European security culture through an effective implementation of the EU Training Concept in ESDP which increases interoperability among all actors involved in EU crisis management; stresses in this context the need for the establishment of a European Security and Defence College (ESDC) which will provide EU bodies and Member States with knowledgeable personnel able to work efficiently on all ESDP matters; considers that this College must be based on sound organisational and financial modalities; |
|
24. |
Notes with satisfaction the rapid action taken in creating the European Defence Agency (EDA) in advance of the formal adoption of the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe; notes that the activities of the EDA should benefit the Union, not only in further developing defence capabilities in crisis management, but also in bringing about a rationalisation of research and development costs within the Member States and, in the long run, helping to contribute to the creation of a European armaments market; considers that the Armaments Agency should pay particular attention to the arming and equipping of Battle Groups and should ensure their compatibility; calls for the Battle Groups to be supplied as a first priority with new, common equipment; cautions, however, that any future achievements of the EDA will, in large measure, be dependent on the (political) goodwill of the Member States; calls for the availability of sufficient budgetary means to permit the realisation of EDA-led armaments initiatives; notes further in this connection that the EDA must not be hindered from pursuing longer term capability goals — goals beyond the Headline Goal 2010 — in order that the Union may benefit from pursuing the ESS objectives; |
|
25. |
Regards a European Space Policy as one of the most important strategic challenges facing the EU in the 21st century; notes that, in the field of telecommunications and intelligence, many projects have been developed in parallel, reducing efficiency and increasing costs; calls for these projects, such as the French Helios satellite system and the German SAR-Lupe system, to be merged within the framework of European security research; |
|
26. |
Welcomes the Commission's efforts to promote security research within the EU in the near future; advocates, therefore, the establishment within the next framework programme for research of an independent European security research programme endowed with instruments, rules and funding models tailored to the work of researching security issues, in keeping with the recommendations of the Group of Eminent Persons; points out, however, the risk of duplication with research initiatives of the EDA; calls, therefore, on the Commission, the Council and the Member States to maintain close working relations with a view to avoiding this risk; recommends, in this connection — parallel to technology-driven research — that the emphasis should be placed on the development of joint modelling and simulation capabilities and the ability to analyse threats and security concepts, exploiting the respective comparative benefits they offer; |
Capability deficiencies
|
27. |
Takes note of the following three categories of material deficiencies, which could seriously affect the Union's ability to conduct both civilian crisis management operations and humanitarian intervention operations of high-intensity dimensions using mainly military means, such as halting humanitarian catastrophes of similar dimensions to that in Rwanda:
|
|
28. |
Notes that the continuing development of the Battle Groups will address the first deficiency in large measure; notes that the planned construction of the A400M transport aircraft will not resolve the second deficiency completely and urges that measures be taken to address the deficiency further; urges, nonetheless, that consideration be given to establishing a rotation scheme for the deployment of forces; demands, in view of a rotation scheme of this kind, common standards in training, for instance as regards helicopters; considers that operational capability could be increased and costs reduced by a joint training system; urges strongly, as regards the final deficiency, that measures be taken to enable the EU to conduct missions requiring the assistance of military forces without recourse to NATO or to any single Member State's resources; points out that such measures could realistically entail the pooling of existing resources and capabilities within the Member States with the goal of establishing a dual-use communications base or network at the service of the ESDP; |
|
29. |
Emphasises further that the goals and aims expressed in the Headline Goal 2010 would not be sufficient to allow missions of a more intense nature or of a duration of more than one year; therefore urges the Commission, in close cooperation with the Council, to submit a White Paper on the practical requirements for the development of the ESDP and the ESS, so that a debate concerning the development of a future European Defence Strategy can also be further promoted; |
Arms export control and non-proliferation of WMDs and light weapons
|
30. |
Acknowledges, within the framework of the Union's CFSP, the overall coherence of the European Strategy against the proliferation of WMDs, as formally adopted by the European Council in December 2003, with the strategic objectives of the European Security Strategy; notes with satisfaction the work undertaken by the Personal Representative of the High Representative in pursuing the implementation of Chapter III of this Strategy, particularly as expressed in the priority list endorsed by the European Council in December 2004; |
|
31. |
Agrees with the European Security Strategy that the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction is potentially the greatest threat to our security and urges, in accordance with the provisions of the European Security Strategy, that the EU use the full panoply of instruments at its disposal in defeating the WMD threat, noting in this regard that the possible combination of terrorism and weapons of mass destruction requires prompt and appropriate action; |
|
32. |
Stresses the need for the European Union to take over the initiative of strengthening the international arms control regime, thereby contributing to the reinforcement given to effective multilateralism within the international order; notes further the congruence of efforts to integrate aspects of non-proliferation within the EU Neighbourhood Policy with the overall strategic objective of building security within the Union's neighbourhood; |
|
33. |
Welcomes the intended inclusion of WMD non-proliferation clauses in all future partnership and cooperation agreements between the EU and third countries, as exemplified by the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement with Tajikistan of 11 October 2004 (5) as well as the draft Association Agreement with Syria now awaiting approval; |
|
34. |
Welcomes the fact that the EU's negotiations with Iran as a regional power, aimed at preventing the proliferation of nuclear weapons, were carried out in connection with legitimate economic and regional security interests; notes that this policy is an expression of foreign and security policy based on the principles of international law and multilateralism in the best interests of the international community; welcomes the fact that the EU and US positions on Iran have come significantly closer; |
|
35. |
Takes note of the Peer Review currently being undertaken of the EU export control system; notes that the main finding derived from the first stage of this review, conducted in Spring 2004, was the need for Member States to collectively (i.e. the EU) and individually adopt a more pro-active approach in controlling the export of dual-use items; urges the Member States to follow up without delay the recommendations based on this finding and to make more use of Sitcen in this regard, as well as in general, as a base for exchanging information; welcomes the efforts made by the EU to coordinate and organise as far as possible a common EU position within the various export control regimes and, further, the efforts made by the EU to include the new Member States in the various export control regimes; |
|
36. |
Takes note of the current practical difficulties in implementing the strategy against the proliferation of WMDs, due in particular to the various sources and procedures through which budgetary means are to be mobilised; urges the Council and the Commission to engage, together with Parliament, in a dialogue on streamlining and simplifying these procedures with a view to adopting such changes within the framework of the relevant new financial instrument for the budgetary period 2007-2013; |
|
37. |
Stresses the need to further strengthen the EU Code of Conduct on Arms Exports as well as to maximise the EU's contribution to countering the proliferation of small arms and light weapons, notably by the establishment of an international arms trade treaty; |
|
38. |
Calls on the countries defined in the Non-Proliferation Treaty as nuclear-weapon states, in particular the USA, China and Russia, in view of the uncontrollably spreading danger of terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, to review their own nuclear policies in the spirit of the Non-Proliferation Treaty; regrets, therefore, the efforts made by the US administration over the last four years to promote research into, and the development of, new nuclear weapons and its refusal to ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty; expresses concern at Russia's inadequate efforts to protect its nuclear stocks; is alarmed at China's massive increase in military spending (12,6 %), its comprehensive modernisation of its nuclear armed forces and the increase in its imports of modern weapons technologies; |
Budgetary challenges
|
39. |
Notes that the greatest threat to the coherence and success of the ESS remains the possible lack of sufficient budgetary resources made available across the entire spectrum of EU policies and instruments; notes in this connection the particular importance of EU assistance programmes and their substantial contribution to the pro-active comprehensive approach expressed within the ESS; demands that this point be borne in mind within the framework of the current negotiations concerning the Future Financial Perspective for 2007-2013; |
|
40. |
Notes further that the effectiveness of the ESS, and in particular that of the ESDP, is dependent to a large extent on the expenditure of the Member States outside the framework of the EU; recommends in this connection, first, a more sensible and more effective use of national expenditure in the defence field, which might be achieved in certain Member States, for example by a speedier modernisation and restructuring of their armed forces, and, second, the establishment of a mechanism for assessing the proportion of a Member State's GDP spent on defence; urges the Member States, therefore, to cooperate with the EDA to that end; |
|
41. |
Regrets that Article III-313 of the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe has maintained the status quo of dual budgeting for CFSP operations; notes the Council's efforts to ensure greater transparency of the mechanism (Athena) by which common costs for operations of a military or defence nature are to be administered outside the Union's budget (6); emphasises, none the less, its strongly held view that the continued separation of financing for common costs in civil operations through the budget of the Union from those with military or defence implications outside the Union's budget will prove increasingly untenable given that missions conducted within the framework of CFSP will be increasingly mixed in nature, as evidenced by the establishment of the Civil/Military Cell; |
|
42. |
Points out in this connection the substantial problems that current tendering procedures create regarding organisation of rapid actions within the ESDP; therefore urges the Council and the Commission to conclude as soon as possible their thorough examination regarding special procedures or exemptions for future ESDP measures and operations within the Financial Regulation (7); |
Transatlantic relations
|
43. |
Takes note of the substantive congruity in the global threat assessments presented in both the ESS and the US National Security Strategy; takes the view that this congruity should be seen as a basis upon which both the EU and the United States can re-establish a dialogue of equal partners in attaining a common understanding for the resolution of particular issues of concern, such as the authorisation and use of military force in relation to the relevant provisions of the UN's Founding Charter and its legitimising role, and for the re-invigoration of Transatlantic security cooperation in general; |
|
44. |
Stresses that a major element of the Transatlantic security dialogue must be focused on empowering other international organisations such as the OSCE and, in particular, the African Union to make their own contribution to global security; emphasises in this regard the utility of informal multilateral formations such as the Quartet in achieving a lasting resolution of the Israel-Palestine conflict; |
|
45. |
Expresses its wish for a stronger cooperation with the United States in the fields of non-proliferation and the fight against terrorism; urges the EU and the US none the less to continue with their positive dialogue in these areas and to fully pursue an action plan for further cooperation as reflected in the EUUS Declarations on combating terrorism and on the non-proliferation of WMDs adopted at the EU-US Summit on 26 June 2004; considers that these points should be addressed in the context of all EU-US meetings relevant to security policy; |
NATO
|
46. |
Notes the continued recognition by many Member States of NATO as the cornerstone of their security in the event of an armed aggression; takes the view that cooperation and complementarity should be the key elements upon which EU/NATO relations are based; proposes in this vein discussions — taking into account the different character of each organisation — concerning improved coordination of national contributions to the NATO Response Force and those of the EU Headline Goals in order to avoid any duplication; urges Member States to continue to reform their armed forces with a view to making those forces more deployable, transportable and sustainable; notes in this regard that for the foreseeable future most Member States will continue to commit the same units to both NATO and the EU owing to the lack of units possessing the right skills and capabilities; urges Member States to continue to enlarge their pool of readily available forces so that in the future the operational needs of both the EU and NATO can be readily satisfied; |
|
47. |
Notes that the current problems, which are regrettably hampering the necessary cooperation between the EU Military Committee and NATO, can be very speedily resolved given political goodwill on the part of the decision-makers involved; |
|
48. |
Calls on Turkey, in the context of NATO, to create the conditions to promote better cooperation — which is urgently needed — between the EU Military Committee and the relevant NATO bodies; |
|
49. |
Encourages the new European Defence Agency to examine the possibilities for cooperation with NATO in the area of armaments and to explicitly provide for the possibility of such co-operation within the framework of the Administrative Agreement to be signed in due course between the two as provided for in Article 25 of Council Joint Action 2004/551/CFSP on the establishment of the European Defence Agency (8); |
|
50. |
Takes note of the complementary nature of certain policies and programmes of NATO (Partnership for Peace and the Istanbul Cooperation Initiative and Mediterranean Dialogue) and the EU (Neighbourhood Policy and the Barcelona Process); encourages both parties to examine how these programmes and policies can more effectively serve to mutually reinforce each other; |
Homeland security and combating terrorism
|
51. |
Observes that the ESS draws significant attention to the blurring of previously static boundaries existing in the traditional conceptions of internal and external security; notes, however, the sparsity of content within the ESS on linking the two concepts so as to address threats coherently; is nevertheless aware, in spite of this conceptual omission, of the many and varied efforts made by the Council, the Commission and the Member States in the fields of home and foreign affairs; |
|
52. |
Takes note, in the field of prevention of terrorism, consequence management and protection of critical infrastructures, of the proposals put forward by the Commission for the ARGUS system, which would be capable of circulating information and coordinating action responses, and its possible linkage both with a crisis centre and with an alarm network (CIWIN) for the protection of critical infrastructures within the EU; |
|
53. |
Notes in the same connection the European Council's call, in the “Hague Programme” of 4-5 November 2004, for the Council and the Commission to set up, while fully respecting national competences, integrated and coordinated EU crisis-management arrangements for crises with cross-border effects within the EU, to be implemented at the latest by 1 July 2006; |
|
54. |
Welcomes the work accomplished or initiated so far on the basis of the above-mentioned proposals and calls, as well as a number of other measures and proposals which traditionally form part of national internal policy; also welcomes in this connection the special role which Sitcen will have in producing risk assessments and analyses in connection with potential terrorist targets; calls in this connection for unrestricted cooperation between all intelligence departments attached to national defence ministries so as to create a corresponding capability within Sitcen; |
|
55. |
Welcomes in particular the objective of arranging for the cross-border exchange of intelligence and security service information in accordance with the principle of availability set out in the Hague Programme — where it relates to the future exchange of law-enforcement information — a principle whereby, taking into account the special nature of these services' methods (e.g. the need to protect the information-gathering procedure, information sources and the continued confidentiality of data after exchange), information available to a service in one Member State should be made available to the corresponding services in another Member State; |
|
56. |
As regards internal security policy, is deeply concerned by the inadequate implementation by the Member States of all of the measures and instruments listed within the original anti-terrorism plan adopted in October 2001; |
|
57. |
Takes note of the report submitted by the EU High Representative to the European Council on 16-17 December 2004 on integrating the fight against terrorism into EU External Relations Policy; notes the conclusion in that report that the capabilities in the context of the Headline Goal 2010 and the Civilian Headline Goal 2008 should be adapted to the requirements of the various possible terrorist threats and scenarios — including a possible intervention under the Solidarity Clause (Article I-43 of the Constitution); |
|
58. |
Calls, within the framework of the New Neighbourhood Policy and in the context of EU foreign relations in general, for an enhanced political dialogue with third countries on terrorism, to cover not only the need for their unrestricted cooperation with international and regional organisations but also the strict application of the clause on combating terrorism contained in agreements with third countries where there is evidence of terrorist threats or specific terrorist activities; |
|
59. |
Is however concerned — with all due respect for the work accomplished so far in seeking to draw a line between the two fields of home and foreign affairs — about the coherence and coordination of this work and, in particular, the degree to which democratic freedoms and the rule of law are taken into account; therefore urges its Committees on Foreign Affairs and on Civil Liberties, Jusice and Home Affairs to find an appropriate procedure for the preparation of recommendations on the matter to be addressed to both the Council and the Commission, in order not only to check the coherence and coordination of such work but also to ensure that the civil and political rights of citizens and organisations are not compromised in any way and thus, where appropriate, to make recommendations to Parliament's relevant committees, for forwarding to both the Council and the Commission; |
External Action Service
|
60. |
Salutes the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe as an important basis for pursuing the ESS and its ongoing development; considers that the creation of the new External Action Service will be a vitally important instrument for external action under the CFSP and therefore for the ESS; emphasises that an effective ESS must fully utilise available diplomatic capabilities (i.e. the EU Minister for Foreign Affairs and the European External Action Service (Articles I-28 and III-296(3)) and, if necessary, military capabilities (i.e. permanent structured cooperation between Member States for the fulfilment of high-intensity missions demanding higher military capabilities (Articles I-41(6), III-312 and the Specific Protocol)); |
|
61. |
Urges the Council and the Commission forthwith to take the necessary steps to integrate their activities in a spirit of cooperation prior to the final ratification of the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe; emphasises that Parliament will seek to assess those steps in a positive and constructive manner and will judge all proposed actions and measures during the transitional period on the basis of their quality rather than their origin, with a view to setting up a functioning and effective European External Action Service; stresses that Parliament will also judge these efforts in the light of whether they respect the political will, expressed in the Constitution, to formulate a common policy so that Europe may speak with a single voice in the world; |
*
* *
|
62. |
Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the Parliaments of the Member States and the Secretaries General of the United Nations, NATO, the OSCE and the Council of Europe. |
(1) OJ C 228, 13.8.2001, p. 173.
(2) OJ C 64 E, 12.3.2004, p. 599.
(3) Texts adopted, P6_TA(2005)0075.
(4) The Barcelona Report of the Study Group on Europe's Security Capabilities.
(5) OJ L 340, 16.11.2004, p. 21.
(6) Council Decision 2004/197/CFSP of 23 February 2004 establishing a mechanism to administer the common costs of European Union operations having military or defence implications (OJ L 63, 28.2.2004, p. 68).
(7) Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1).
P6_TA(2005)0134
Doping in sport
European Parliament resolution on combating doping in sport
The European Parliament,
|
— |
having regard to Declaration No 29 on sport, annexed to the Amsterdam Treaty, and to Article III-282 of the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe, |
|
— |
having regard to its resolution of 7 September 2000 (1) on the Commission communication on a Community support plan to combat doping in sport, |
|
— |
having regard to the conclusions of the Council and the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States, meeting within the Council, of 4 December 2000 on combating doping (2), |
|
— |
having regard to its resolution of 7 September 2000 on the Commission report to the European Council with a view to safeguarding current sports structures and maintaining the social function of sport within the Community framework — the Helsinki Report on Sport (3), |
|
— |
having regard to the World Anti-Doping Code adopted in Copenhagen on 5 March 2003, |
|
— |
having regard to the public hearing of its Committee on Culture and Education of 29 November 2004 on “Drug-taking in sport: obstacle to the ideal of athleticism”, |
|
— |
having regard to Rule 108(5) of its Rules of Procedure, |
|
A. |
whereas the number of doping incidents during the 2004 Olympic Games in Athens again demonstrated that doping in sport is, unfortunately, still a reality which must be combated, |
|
B. |
whereas public health and the protection of minors are priorities of the European Union, |
|
C. |
whereas doping is a genuine public health problem and concerns everyone involved in sport, including young people and amateurs who obtain illegal substances in, for example, fitness centres and, increasingly, via the Internet, |
|
D. |
whereas the success of the European Year of Education through Sport should be followed through by the European Union taking action to tackle all aspects of doping in sport, |
|
E. |
whereas the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe provides an appropriate legal basis to draw up and implement Community action in the field of sport, |
|
F. |
whereas there are increasing pressures on athletes who face gruelling demands, media and economic pressures, |
|
1. |
Emphasises that the use of chemical performance-enhancing substances is contrary to the values of sport as a social, cultural and educational activity; |
|
2. |
Notes that, whilst the use of drugs has been evident throughout the history of sport, doping is today taking a new and ever more dangerous turn through the use of substances such as growth hormones and erythropoietin, and through practices such as blood transfusions; |
|
3. |
Is concerned for the physical and psychological health of professional and amateur athletes; |
|
4. |
Stresses the importance of longitudinal independent medical monitoring; |
|
5. |
Calls on the Commission to take action to ensure that the European Union's external borders are effectively controlled and to fight trafficking in illegal substances; |
|
6. |
Calls on the Commission to implement an effective and integrated policy in all related fields, notably public health, prevention, education and pharmaceutical research; |
|
7. |
Calls on the Commission to support a sustained information campaign in order to establish an effective prevention policy; |
|
8. |
Calls on the Member States, together with the Commission, to intensify their collaboration within the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA), the Council of Europe and the World Health Organization in a way which enables the European Union to act effectively with regard to the prevention and control of doping; |
|
9. |
Calls on the Commission to involve all those concerned with sport in the decision-making process with regard to doping, in order to effectively address the problem and to promote a clean image of sports and physical exercise; |
|
10. |
Calls on the Commission to encourage coordination between the Member States in order to develop common effective methods for controlling and certifying the use of chemical substances and compounds in gyms and sports centres frequented by young people in particular; |
|
11. |
Calls on the Commission to propose, in the Seventh Framework Programme, further research into different methods of doping detection and control; |
|
12. |
Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the governments and parliaments of the Member States and of the accession countries, national and international sports federations, the FEI (International Federation for Equestrian Sports), the Council of Europe, the International Olympic Committee and the WADA. |
(1) OJ C 135, 7.5.2001, p. 270.
P6_TA(2005)0135
Cultural diversity
European Parliament resolution on working towards a Convention on the protection of the diversity of cultural content and artistic expression
The European Parliament,
|
— |
having regard to its resolution of 14 January 2004 on preserving and promoting cultural diversity: the role of the European regions and international organisations such as Unesco and the Council of Europe (1), |
|
— |
having regard to the communication from the Commission “Towards an international instrument on cultural diversity” (COM(2003)0520), |
|
— |
having regard to its resolution of 12 March 2003 on the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) within the WTO, including cultural diversity (2), |
|
— |
having regard to the Unesco Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity of 2 November 2001, |
|
— |
having regard to Article 149(1) and Article 151 of the EC Treaty, |
|
— |
having regard to the Preamble to and Article 22 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, |
|
— |
having regard to Article I-3(3), fourth subparagraph, of the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe, affirming that the Union shall respect its rich cultural and linguistic diversity, and shall ensure that Europe's cultural heritage is safeguarded and enhanced, and to Article III-315(4), third subparagraph, affirming the unanimity rule in Council when negotiating and concluding agreements in the field of trade in cultural and audiovisual services, where these risk prejudicing the Union's cultural and linguistic diversity, |
|
— |
having regard to the decision of Unesco's General Conference on 17 October 2003 to launch work towards the elaboration of a draft Convention on cultural diversity for the next session of the General Conference in 2005, |
|
— |
having regard to Rule 108(5) of its Rules of Procedure, |
|
A. |
whereas meetings of independent experts took place between December 2003 and May 2004 with a view to producing a first preliminary draft convention, |
|
B. |
whereas, starting in September 2004, a series of intergovernmental meetings has been taking place in order to finalise the preliminary draft Convention and report, |
|
C. |
whereas the Unesco Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity adopted in November 2001 was a welcome step towards international cooperation but has proved to be an inadequate response to threats to cultural diversity in a globalising world, |
|
D. |
whereas the draft Unesco Convention has as its objective the provision and protection of the diversity of cultural contents and artistic expressions, and whereas it aims to facilitate the development and adoption of cultural policies and appropriate measures for the protection and promotion of the diversity of cultural expressions as well as to encourage wider international cultural exchanges, |
|
E. |
whereas the aim of the Convention relates to cultural matters — an area where, in the light of Article 151 of the Treaty, the Community does not possess harmonisation powers — the measures by which those objectives are pursued may include provisions that affect the “acquis communautaire”; in other words, the draft Unesco Convention is a mixed agreement and includes a number of provisions that fall within Community competences, |
|
F. |
whereas the Council therefore agreed on 16 November 2004 that the Commission be authorised to negotiate on behalf of the Community those parts of the Unesco draft text which fall within Community competence, |
|
G. |
whereas Member States are under an obligation to cooperate closely with the Community to ensure unity in negotiating and concluding any text, |
|
H. |
whereas Article 300 of the Treaty lays down the procedural rules with regard to Community agreements and includes consultation with the European Parliament on the proposal to conclude such an agreement, |
|
I. |
whereas it is important, with regard to a mixed agreement, that there is close cooperation between Member States and all Community institutions, |
|
1. |
Points out that the Convention must be a tool of international cooperation in favour of cultural development, believes that the draft Convention represents a serious attempt to address the challenges posed to cultural diversity through globalisation and international trade policy and welcomes the process of establishing a binding standard-setting instrument for the protection of cultural diversity; |
|
2. |
Believes that Member States must make every effort to coordinate their positions, among themselves and with the Community; |
|
3. |
Expresses its concern that any lack of unity will undermine the Community's position and credibility in the negotiations and stresses the importance of EU unity and the need for Parliament to be fully involved in defining a clear mandate, as well as taking into account the views expressed by civil society; |
|
4. |
Insists that the Commission should not only provide the Council with updates on the negotiations within Unesco, but must also ensure that Parliament is kept fully informed; |
|
5. |
Believes that the proposed Unesco Convention must very clearly underline the right of States Parties to develop, maintain and implement policies and laws designed to promote and protect cultural diversity and media pluralism; considers that it is essential to strengthen the rights enshrined in the Convention and that any attempts to dilute or weaken these rights in any way through the Convention must be resisted; |
|
6. |
Believes that the Convention must recognise the very important role played by public services, notably public service broadcasters, in safeguarding, supporting and developing cultural diversity and identity and access for all citizens to quality content and knowledge; |
|
7. |
Stresses that, while cultural services and products have a dual nature as economic and cultural goods, they cannot be equated with ordinary merchandise; |
|
8. |
Stresses also that access to a diversified supply of cultural contents, both national and from all regions of the world, is a fundamental right; |
|
9. |
Insists that the European Union and its Member States should do nothing in the process of the negotiation and conclusion of this Convention to compromise cultural diversity or undermine the ability of governments to support cultural diversity and identity; |
|
10. |
Calls on the Unesco General Conference and the negotiating parties to ensure that the Convention relates to all forms of cultural expression; |
|
11. |
Calls on all negotiating parties to make every effort to finalise the draft in order to enable the next Unesco General Conference meeting in October 2005 in Paris to accept it; |
|
12. |
Believes that media pluralism must be a fundamental principle of the Convention; |
|
13. |
Insists that the Convention must guarantee transparency, the principle of proportionality and democratic principles; |
|
14. |
Insists that the Convention must be based upon the principles of individual human rights as laid down in international instruments, including the right to freedom of information and opinion, and to intellectual property; |
|
15. |
Believes that the issue of the relationship between international trade law and the future Unesco Convention is a key aspect, which should best be approached in such a way that the protection of cultural diversity is given at least the same priority as other policies, and on no account a lesser priority; |
|
16. |
Believes that the Convention must provide for a simple, single, binding mechanism for settling disputes, in order to develop, in international law, case-law relating to cultural diversity; |
|
17. |
Believes that any definition of cultural industries in the Convention should include not only the production but also the creation, publication, promotion, distribution, exhibition, provision, sale, collection, storage and preservation of cultural goods and services; |
|
18. |
Believes that the Convention should recognise the importance of both direct and indirect public financial aid and that States Parties may determine the nature, amount and beneficiaries of such aid; |
|
19. |
Believes that States should retain the right to organise, fund and define the remit of public service institutions devoted to safeguarding cultural diversity and media pluralism, notably that of public service broadcasters, in order to ensure their democratic and social relevance for their societies, and that this must also apply in the digital knowledge age; |
|
20. |
Believes, therefore, that the Convention must protect the rights of States Parties to extend their cultural policies to new media content and new means of distribution and that the principle of technological neutrality must be explicitly mentioned in the Convention; |
|
21. |
Welcomes the proposal for a Cultural Diversity Observatory within Unesco, which must operate in collaboration with the professional organisations; |
|
22. |
Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the governments of the Member States and of the accession countries, the Committee of the Regions, the European Economic and Social Committee, the Council of Europe and Unesco. |
P6_TA(2005)0136
Bangladesh
European Parliament resolution on Bangladesh
The European Parliament,
|
— |
having regard to the Cooperation Agreement between the European Community and the People's Republic of Bangladesh on partnership and development (1), |
|
— |
having regard to the mounting criticism of numerous and worsening abuses of human rights by official forces and fundamentalist religious organisations expressed by the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations in February 2005 (E/CN.4/2005/NGO/32), the US Department of State also in February 2005 (Country Report on Human Rights Practices in Bangladesh 2004) and Amnesty International (for example, Urgent Action 061/2005), |
|
— |
having regard to the Declaration by the Presidency on behalf of the EU on the attack in Habiganj, Bangladesh, on 29 January 2005, |
|
— |
having regard to Rule 115 of its Rules of Procedure, |
|
A. |
concerned about repeated bomb attacks on key opposition politicians, minority religious groups, journalists and NGO representatives, in particular about the two recent grenade attacks where two prominent opposition politicians were targeted — Sheikh Hasina, Head of the Awami League and former Prime Minister, on 21 August 2004, and Shah Mohammad Kibria, former Finance Minister, on 27 January 2005, who was assassinated, |
|
B. |
concerned about recent political developments in Bangladesh, where the risk of fundamentalism seems to be growing and where poor governance, corruption and nepotism have severely undermined the rule of law, including safeguards in the constitution to protect fundamental rights in Bangladesh, |
|
C. |
concerned that the Government of Bangladesh had limited success in curtailing outbreaks of violence and that threats from extremist groups are continuing; noting that paramilitary groups are continuing to operate in the countryside with the support — in some cases — of local authorities, |
|
D. |
concerned to note that religious minorities, including Hindus, but also moderate Muslim groups as well as women's rights organisations, have fallen victim to a number of violent attacks and intimidation in recent years, |
|
E. |
recognising that the ensuing climate of fear has been created by the misuse of power on the part of Muslim fundamentalist parties in government, |
|
F. |
whereas, while Bangladesh has made some progress in socio-economic sectors including health, sanitation, education, empowerment of women, family planning and self-sufficiency of food, it has lagged behind in improving the overall governance issues and promotion of human rights, which, if implemented, could further boost socio-economic progress for its people, |
|
G. |
concerned about the failure of the Government of Bangladesh so far to bring to justice those who perpetrate these attacks and about the general deterioration in law and order in Bangladesh over the last year; noting, however, that on 22 February 2005 the Government of Bangladesh banned the activities and froze the assets of two Muslim criminal organisations, |
|
H. |
emphasising that the EC-Bangladesh Cooperation Agreement is based on respect for human rights and democratic principles, and that the violation of Article 1 is a breach capable of threatening the continuation of the Agreement, |
|
I. |
whereas the Commission must ensure that the human rights situation in Bangladesh is monitored and that Parliament is kept informed of it, |
|
J. |
emphasising that Bangladesh has obligations under international law as a State Party to both the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the United Nations Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, but has yet not passed any enabling legislation, |
|
1. |
Condemns the repeated bomb attacks and urges the Government of Bangladesh to ensure that international investigators assisting Bangladesh's intelligence forces will have full access to all evidence regarding the attacks in accordance with the government's own promises, and urges the Government of Bangladesh to publish the investigation report in full; |
|
2. |
Urges the Government of Bangladesh to respect the instructions given by its High Court to avoid abuse of legal instruments in detaining opposition demonstrators and to refrain from repressing peaceful political protests through means of detention and torture; |
|
3. |
Urges the Government of Bangladesh, in particular, to put an end to the anti-crime operations by the paramilitary forces RAB (Rapid Action Battalion), which come down to extrajudicial killings; points out that the reputed human rights organisation Odhikar has stated that there were 90 publicly reported custodial deaths due to torture in 2004; |
|
4. |
Encourages the Government of Bangladesh to enable the population to participate in traditional cultural events and to provide security measures in order that these events, which reflect a tradition of tolerance and secularism, can take place safely; |
|
5. |
Urges the Government of Bangladesh to take preventive steps against Muslim paramilitary groups, which have spread violence and intimidation in rural areas of Bangladesh; |
|
6. |
Reiterates its support for the demand that those known to have participated in the massacre of Bangladeshi citizens and other war crimes during the Bangladeshi liberation war of 1971 be brought to trial; |
|
7. |
Considers that, with a view to the parliamentary elections scheduled for late 2006/early 2007, systemic reforms are necessary in order to re-establish the principles of good governance, so that the election commission and the caretaker government can operate independently; |
|
8. |
Considers that a coordinated approach by all donors worldwide will be necessary to support such reforms; |
|
9. |
Calls on all sides to refrain from undemocratic practices and to enter into an all-party dialogue through full participation in the democratic process in parliament; calls, in particular, on the opposition parties to end the boycott of parliamentary activity, since agitation and violence cause suffering to the people of Bangladesh; |
|
10. |
Expresses its support for the principled steps which EU representatives have taken during the last year in defence of the rights of religious minorities in Bangladesh, such as their physical presence at a complex of the Ahmadiyya Muslims, in October 2004, when fundamentalists had prepared to stage a mass assault on the complex; |
|
11. |
Calls on the Council to review the application of the human rights and democracy clause of the EC-Bangladesh Cooperation Agreement and to ascertain whether the Government of Bangladesh is making sufficiently strong efforts to fundamentally improve the human rights situation; |
|
12. |
Notes recent modest steps taken by the Government of Bangladesh to improve the political situation in the country, will encourage the Government of Bangladesh to establish a situation respectful of law and order and will support any substantial progress on issues like good governance, freedom of press, the fight against corruption and respect for human rights; |
|
13. |
Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the European Council, the Council, the Commission, the governments and parliaments of the Member States and candidate countries, the Secretary-General of the United Nations and the Government of Bangladesh. |
P6_TA(2005)0137
Humanitarian assistance to refugees from Western Sahara
European Parliament resolution on humanitarian aid to Sahrawi refugees
The European Parliament,
|
— |
having regard to its resolution of 16 March 2000 on Western Sahara (1), in which it “asks the Commission to step up humanitarian aid to the Sahrawi refugees and more especially calls on it to increase humanitarian aid to the Sahrawi people, particularly in the areas of food, health and education”, |
|
— |
having regard to its resolution of 23 October 2003 on the draft general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2004, Section III: Commission (2), which calls on the Commission to provide guarantees of substantial, uninterrupted humanitarian aid for Sahrawi refugees, |
|
— |
having regard to UN Secretary-General's Reports of 20 October 2004 on the possible reduction of Minurso staff, including civilian and administrative personnel (S/2004/827) and of 27 January 2005 on the situation concerning Western Sahara (S/2005/49) calling on the international community to continue its humanitarian aid to the Sahrawi refugees until the conflict in Western Sahara has been resolved, |
|
— |
having regard to the UN World Food Programme (UNWFP) proposal of 5 May 2004 for aid to the refugees of Western Sahara (WFP/EB.2/2004/4-B/4) which notes a deterioration in the living conditions of the Sahrawi refugees (growth retardation in children, malnutrition, anaemia etc.) as a result of diminishing aid, |
|
— |
having regard to Rule 115(5) of its Rules of Procedure, |
|
A. |
whereas the Sahrawi population finds itself in refugee camps in Algeria as a result of unfinished decolonisation, and whereas the survival of this population is entirely dependent on international humanitarian aid, |
|
B. |
having regard to the deterioration in the humanitarian situation noted by a group of MEPs during their visit of 3 to 6 March 2005 to Sahrawi refugee camps (situated near Tindouf in south-western Algeria), |
|
C. |
having regard to the appeal to donor nations issued on 26 February 2005 by the UNWFP, which states that as of May 2005 the UNWFP will no longer be able to supply the 158 000 Sahrawi refugee beneficiaries with a complete daily ration of 2 100 kcals, owing to the lack of generous contributions and external assistance, which could have a serious nutritional and health impact on the refugees, particularly the women and children, |
|
D. |
concerned at the fact that stocks will run out in May 2005, exposing the already vulnerable refugee population to a major humanitarian crisis if steps are not taken between now and then to provide substantial, rapid aid to alleviate this grave situation, |
|
E. |
having regard to the tragic consequences that would result from a continuing reduction in the aid provided by the Commission through the Humanitarian Aid department (ECHO) to the Sahrawi refugee population (dwindling of food stocks, deterioration in the areas of health and education, etc.), |
|
F. |
having regard to the substantial specific and supplementary assistance (food, health, education, accommodation, hygiene, etc.) given to the Sahrawi refugees by the Commission up to 2002 over and above the aid in the form of basic products supplied by the United Nations institutions in the context of their mandate, |
|
G. |
whereas the humanitarian crisis is due inter alia to the absence of any notable progress in the search for a fair and lasting political solution to the political situation in Western Sahara which is acceptable to all the parties involved, |
|
1. |
Calls on the Commission to grant immediate emergency aid to enable the difficult situation of the Sahrawi population currently living as refugees to be addressed; |
|
2. |
Calls on the Commission to step up and diversify its aid so that it is brought up at least to the 2002 level, thus guaranteeing a decent minimum diet to the Sahrawi refugees, while continuing to place importance on the areas of health, education, accommodation and transport; |
|
3. |
Reiterates its call to the Commission, set out in paragraph 66 of its above mentioned resolution of 23 October 2003, to take appropriate steps to ensure that the aid provided to Sahrawi refugee camps is guaranteed and is under no circumstances interrupted, even momentarily, for merely administrative reasons; |
|
4. |
Calls on the Commission to involve the European NGOs which already have experience on the ground in implementing the ECHO programmes for the Sahrawi refugees, in order to guarantee that the aid granted by the European Union is efficiently and rapidly implemented; |
|
5. |
Calls on the Commission to contribute to strengthening the capacities for administering humanitarian aid in the refugee camps by cooperating with the Sahrawi institutions set up specifically for this purpose; |
|
6. |
Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the UN Secretary-General, the Government of Morocco, the Polisario Front and the President of the African Union. |
P6_TA(2005)0138
Lampedusa
European Parliament resolution on Lampedusa
The European Parliament,
|
— |
having regard to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, particularly Article 14 thereof, |
|
— |
having regard to the 1951 Geneva Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, particularly Article 33(1) thereof, which requires individual cases to be genuinely examined and prohibits the expulsion or return (refoulement) of refugees, |
|
— |
having regard to the European Convention on Human Rights, particularly paragraph 4 of Protocol 4 thereto, according to which “collective expulsion of aliens is prohibited”, |
|
— |
having regard to the Barcelona Declaration, as well as the programme of work, adopted at the Euro-Mediterranean Conference of 27 to 28 November 1995, which concerns the promotion of the defence of fundamental rights in the Mediterranean area, |
|
— |
having regard to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (1), and particularly Article 18 thereof on the right to asylum, |
|
— |
having regard to Article 6 of the EU Treaty and Article 63 of the EC Treaty, |
|
— |
having regard to its written questions E-2616/04 and E-0545/05, |
|
— |
having regard to Rule 115(5) of its Rules of Procedure, |
|
A. |
whereas Lampedusa is a small island of 20 km2 located in the middle of the Sicilian Channel, with a population of 5 500, which has obvious limits to its capacity to receive and host the mass of immigrants and asylum seekers who regularly land on its coast, often in desperate conditions, |
|
B. |
concerned at the collective expulsions of migrants from the island of Lampedusa in Italy to Libya carried out by the Italian authorities between October 2004 and March 2005, |
|
C. |
whereas the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) condemned the return of 180 people on 17 March 2005, saying that it was far from certain that Italy had taken the necessary precautions to ensure that it did not send genuine refugees back to Libya, which could not be regarded as a place of safe asylum; whereas the UNHCR profoundly regretted the lack of transparency on the part of both the Italian and the Libyan authorities, |
|
D. |
concerned at the refusal of the Italian authorities to give the UNHCR access to the Lampedusa reception centre on 15 March 2005, even though the Italian authorities had, according to the UNHCR, given such access to Libyan officials, |
|
E. |
deeply concerned about the fate of the hundreds of asylum seekers returned to Libya, since that country is not a signatory to the Geneva Convention on Refugees, has no functioning asylum system, offers no effective guarantee of refugee rights and practises arbitrary arrest, detention and expulsion; and whereas the people expelled are usually handcuffed and do not know what their destination is, |
|
F. |
concerned at the treatment and deplorable living conditions of people held in camps in Libya, as well as by the recent massive repatriations of foreigners from Libya to their countries of origin in conditions guaranteeing neither their dignity nor their survival; concerned also at the reports from Libyan sources of 106 alleged deaths resulting from these expulsions, |
|
G. |
having regard to the bilateral agreement between Italy and Libya, the content of which is still secret and which is thought to give the Libyan authorities the task of supervising migration and to commit them to readmitting people returned by Italy, |
|
H. |
concerned about the absence in Italy of a law on the right to asylum, |
|
I. |
having regard to the demand by the European Court of Human Rights to Italy of 6 April 2005 to provide information on the situation in Lampedusa, following Application No 11593/05 filed by a group of expelled migrants, |
|
1. |
Calls on the Italian authorities and on all Member States to refrain from collective expulsions of asylum seekers and “irregular migrants” to Libya as well as to other countries and to guarantee that requests for asylum are examined individually and the principle of “non-refoulement” adhered to; |
|
2. |
Takes the view that the collective expulsions of migrants by Italy to Libya, including those of 17 March 2005, constitute a violation of the principle of “non-refoulement” and that the Italian authorities have failed to meet their international obligations by not ensuring that the lives of the people expelled by them are not threatened in their countries of origin; |
|
3. |
Calls on the Italian authorities to grant the UNHCR free access to the Lampedusa detention centre and the people held there, who might be in need of international protection; |
|
4. |
Calls on the Commission, as the guardian of the Treaties, to ensure that the right of asylum is respected in the European Union in accordance with Article 6 of the EU Treaty and Article 63 of the EC Treaty, to put a stop to the collective expulsions and to insist that Italy and the other Member States comply with their obligations under EU law; |
|
5. |
Recalls the need for a Community immigration and asylum policy based on an opening up of legal immigration channels and on the definition of a common standard of protection of the fundamental rights of immigrants and asylum seekers throughout the European Union, as established by the 1999 Tampere European Council and confirmed by the Hague Programme; |
|
6. |
Reiterates its deep reservations about the lowest common denominator approach in the proposal for a Council Directive on asylum procedures (COM(2002)0326) and calls on Member States to ensure a prompt transposition of Directive 2004/83/EC (2) on minimum standards for the qualification and status of refugees; |
|
7. |
Calls on the Commission to conduct a transparent dialogue on this subject, that includes making publicly available the outcome of its technical mission to Libya in November and December 2004 on illegal immigration; |
|
8. |
Calls on Libya to allow access to international observers, to call a halt to the expulsion and arbitrary arrest of migrants, to ratify the Geneva Convention on Refugees and to recognise the mandate of the UNHCR, and demands furthermore that any readmission agreement with Libya is made public; |
|
9. |
Calls for a delegation of members of the relevant committees to be sent to the Lampedusa refugee centre and to Libya to assess the magnitude of the problem and to verify the legitimacy of the actions of the Italian and Libyan authorities; |
|
10. |
Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the governments and parliaments of the Member States, the Government of Libya and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. |
P6_TA(2005)0139
Drought in Portugal
European Parliament resolution on the drought in Portugal
The European Parliament,
|
— |
having regard to Article 2 and Article 6 of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which environmental protection requirements must be integrated into the Community's policies for various sectors with the objective of environmentally sustainable economic development, |
|
— |
having regard to Article 174 of the EC Treaty, |
|
— |
having regard to the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) of December 1997 and the EC's ratification of the Kyoto Protocol on 4 March 2002, |
|
— |
having regard to the Commission report on Climate Change and the European Water Dimension, |
|
— |
having regard to Rule 103(2) of its Rules of Procedure, |
|
A. |
whereas southern Europe, and particularly the Iberian peninsula, has suffered from many severe droughts in the last few years, |
|
B. |
whereas the absence of precipitation in Portugal between 1 October 2004 and the end of March 2005, with rainfall less than 50 % of the average between 1961 and 1990, has been causing extremely low levels of ground water, less than 20 % in some southern areas of the country, |
|
C. |
whereas on 15 March 2005 almost 88 % of mainland Portugal was experiencing severe or even extreme drought and whereas a few days of light rainfall have not been sufficient to alter the situation to an adequate extent, |
|
D. |
whereas the effects of the water shortage are being felt, with serious socio-economic repercussions, in agriculture, in livestock rearing, in forestry — with very slight or non-existent development of plant growth, in particular for cereals, forage crops and natural meadows, jeopardising harvests of straw and cereals and causing an enormous shortage of animal feed, the stocks of which are exhausted — in human consumption, in the environment, in national health care and hence in tourism, which is a major Portuguese industry, |
|
E. |
whereas between May and the beginning of autumn there will be no new precipitation and hence it will be necessary to continue to feed animals not only during summer but also during the coming winter, |
|
F. |
whereas the people who are most directly affected are those who have the lowest levels of financial resources, and whereas the direct effects are compounded by the consequences for spring crops — which are jeopardised by the low level of water stored in the main reservoirs — as well as by the increased risk of summer fires, which already occur on a disastrous scale, as was particularly the case in 2003, |
|
G. |
whereas, according to research carried out into the projected impact of the drought over the next eleven months, a loss of 34 % in net added value is estimated, and losses of as much as 40 % may occur in the worst-hit areas of the south, |
|
H. |
considering that the persistent drought in Portugal is further evidence of the adverse effects of climate change, and emphasising that this is another sign of the need for ambitious worldwide action to halt climate change; whereas the EU should continue to play a leading role in this process and step up its efforts in the key fields of the environment, energy and transport, |
|
1. |
Expresses its sympathy with the populations and sectors affected, and expresses its concern at the situation currently affecting Portuguese farmers and livestock breeders and also the regions which are experiencing a water shortage, the situation in the central and southern parts of the country being particularly serious; |
|
2. |
Considers that Community intervention is called for, though not solely in order to provide support for those most affected; efforts must also be made to limit the damage and prevent similar situations in the future from having such devastating effects; in this connection and on the basis of the information already supplied by the Portuguese authorities, urges the Commission to:
|
|
3. |
Alerts the Commission and Council to the immediate need for funding to be made available and resources marshalled in order to enable action to be taken in good time to prevent a higher number of forest fires from occurring next summer on account of the drought; |
|
4. |
Welcomes the Commission's Communication on risk and crisis management in agriculture (COM (2005)0074), and encourages the Commission and Council to take urgent action in response to it so as to establish, as swiftly as possible, an effective Community protection system to safeguard European farmers against risks and crises such as those resulting from the current drought in Portugal; believes it is necessary to introduce a public form of agricultural insurance, financed from Community funds, so as to guarantee a minimum income for farmers in cases of public disasters such as drought and fires; |
|
5. |
Believes it is necessary to obtain a heading providing for financial support to minimise the increase in costs and reduction in agricultural production, as well as a temporary exemption from social security contributions (with no loss of rights) for full-time farmers with incomes under 12 ESU, together with the prolongation of the harvest credit, for two years and interest-free; |
|
6. |
Calls on the Council and Commission to reconsider the possibility of drawing on the Solidarity Fund, and, in particular, of ensuring that the fund can also be used in response to situations of this kind, which are particularly frequent in southern Europe; |
|
7. |
Calls on the Commission to take initiatives to ensure respect for the Kyoto commitments; |
|
8. |
Urges the Commission to carry out an in-depth study into the occurrence of such phenomena in order to determine whether they are cyclical or occasional in nature, or whether they are a further indicator of long-term climate change, and to explore options for a post-2012 agreement in the UN climate change process, together with the development of a ong-term EU strategy, considering emission reductions by 2020 as a lead for the developed countries to follow; insists that the EU should retain its leading role in international efforts to tackle climate change and present concrete proposals for strategic action beyond 2012; |
|
9. |
Notes with interest the recent Commission report on the global phenomenon of climate change and its direct effect on water supply and quality and on ecosystems; welcomes in particular the proposal to provide relevant input to EU water policymakers on the impacts on the water sector (agriculture, urban centres, industrial and energy sectors, civil protection, spatial planning) under climate change scenarios; |
|
10. |
Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the Portuguese Parliament and Government, and the local authorities in the areas affected. |