17.8.2012   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 247/1

—

having regard to the cooperation agreement of 25 February 1989 between the European Union and the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC),

—

having regard to its resolution of 24 April 2008 on the free trade agreement between the EC and the Gulf Cooperation Council (1),

—

having regard to its resolution of 13 July 1990 on the significance of the free trade agreement to be concluded between the EEC and the Gulf Cooperation Council (2),

—

having regard to the Report on Implementation of the European Security Strategy: Providing Security in a Changing World, approved by the Council in December 2008,

—

having regard to the EU’s strategic partnership with the Mediterranean and the Middle East, approved by the Council in June 2004,

—

having regard to the joint communiqué of the 20th EU-GCC Joint Council and Ministerial Meeting of 14 June 2010, held in Luxembourg,

—

having regard to its report of 10 May 2010 on the Union for the Mediterranean,

—

having regard to the joint communiqué of the 19th EU-GCC Joint Council and Ministerial Meeting of 29 April 2009, held in Muscat,

—

having regard to the Joint Action Programme (2010-2013) for implementation of the EU-GCC Cooperation Agreement of 1989,

—

having regard to the Commission communication to Parliament and the Council on strengthening cooperation with third countries in the field of higher education (COM(2001)0385),

—

having regard to its resolution of 10 May 2007 on reforms in the Arab world: what strategy should the European Union adopt? (3),

—

having regard to the Economic Agreement between the GCC member states, adopted on 31 December 2001 in Muscat, Sultanate of Oman, and to the GCC’s Doha declaration on the launch of the customs union for the Cooperation Council of the Arab States of the Gulf, of 21 December 2002,

—

having regard to Articles 207 and 218 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Council must request Parliament’s consent prior to the conclusion of any international agreement that covers fields to which the ordinary legislative procedure applies,

—

having regard to its annual human rights reports,

—

having regard to the Declaration of the UN General Assembly on the Right and Responsibility of Individuals, Groups and Organs of Society to Promote and Protect Universally Recognised Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 1998 (also known as the ‘Declaration on Human Rights Defenders’),

—

having regard to the declarations by the High Representative of 10, 15 and 17 March 2011 and the Council conclusions of 21 March 2011 on Bahrain and underlining in this context its full support for the freedom of expression and the right of citizens to peacefully demonstrate,

—

having regard to Rule 48 of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on Foreign Affairs and the opinions of the Committee on International Trade and the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (A7-0042/2011),

A.

whereas current EU-GCC relations require constant reviewing and updating in view of the recent important and rapidly unfolding developments on the ground, at the heart of which needs to be the pursuit of human rights and democracy,

B.

whereas demonstrators have expressed legitimate democratic aspirations in several GCC States; whereas the violent reaction by the authorities to protests in Bahrain resulted in deaths, injuries, and imprisonments; whereas Saudi, UAE and Kuwaiti troops have arrived in the country under the banner of the GCC to participate in the repression of demonstrators,

C.

whereas the Gulf region has to be seen today in terms of the emergence of a new global economic hub comprising the member states of the GCC, noting that the EU is the second largest trade partner of the GCC and that the GCC is the fifth largest export market for the EU,

D.

whereas its geopolitical environment makes the Gulf a focus of security challenges that have global and regional implications (the Middle East peace process, Iran’s nuclear programme, the stabilisation of Iraq, Yemen and Darfur, terrorism and piracy); whereas the GCC is still the only stable regional organisation based on multilateralism and cooperation,

E.

whereas the Gulf states’ sovereign wealth funds account for more than one third of the world total, and, whereas, in the response to the financial crisis, those funds helped to rescue the global and European financial systems,

F.

whereas the Gulf is a region of crucial importance to the EU and, in a multipolar and interdependent world, such partnerships represent a way of meeting political and security challenges,

G.

whereas the process of structural economic liberalisation and diversification initiated in several GCC member states is producing new internal dynamics, both politically (with constitutional reforms, political participation and a strengthening of institutions) and socially (a voluntary sector is emerging, employers’ associations are developing and women are gaining access to posts with responsibility), and this should be encouraged and supported,

H.

whereas the living and working conditions of migrant workers, particularly female domestic workers, are precarious and deplorable, despite the key role they play in several areas of economic activity in the GCC member states and the fact that they constitute 40 % of their population and some 80 % of the population in certain emirates,

I.

whereas all six GCC member states are hereditary monarchies with limited political representation, particularly for women, and in the majority of cases no elected parliament,

J.

whereas the scale of investment by GCC member states and of the common challenges facing them in the EU’s southern neighbourhood call for cooperative synergies between Europe, the Mediterranean and the Gulf,

K.

whereas the GCC member states’ geo-economic shift of focus towards Asia – in response to the rising demand for oil on Asian markets (in China, India, Singapore, Japan, the Philippines and South Korea) – is currently producing a diversification of commercial and economic relations, backed up by free trade agreements and the development of political dialogue,

L.

whereas the GCC member states play a key role in the global arena and thus have interests in common with the EU in relation to international stability and global economic governance,

M.

having regard to the growing influence of the GCC member states in the Arab and Muslim world and the important role they can play in intercultural dialogue,

N.

whereas the negotiations on a free trade agreement between the EU and the GCC, which were opened 20 years ago, are the longest-running non-concluded trade negotiations that the EU has undertaken,

O.

whereas the EU must take a clear stand and maintain a lasting commitment in the Gulf region, thus guaranteeing itself greater visibility and a strategic presence in the area,

P.

whereas political clauses, and especially the human rights clause, are an integral part of all trade agreements concluded between the Union and third parties,

Q.

whereas the Union’s presence in the Gulf region is limited and the perception of Europe there is commonly conflated with that of certain EU Member States whose ties with the region are more extensive and older,

R.

whereas the EU possesses expertise in the fields of institutional capacity building, education and research, the development of renewable energy and the environment, technical and regulatory support, and political and diplomatic dialogue on neighbourhood stability and global security issues,

1.

Emphasises that concluding the free trade agreement between the EU and the GCC remains a priority, that failure to conclude it would not be in either party’s interests, and that such an agreement will constitute mutual recognition of the credibility of two entities that have chosen the path of multilateralism and integration;

2.

Considers that, given the limited presence of the Union in the Gulf region, as part of the new EU external relations apparatus a policy of integrated communication should contribute to the development of targeted and effective information on the EU in the Gulf countries;

3.

Believes that the EU needs to develop a strategy for the region aimed at strengthening its ties with the GCC, supporting the regional integration process, and encouraging bilateral relations with the GCC member states;

4.

Stresses that the objective is a strategic partnership with the GCC and its member states commensurate with the respective roles of the two entities on the international stage; highlights the importance, to that end, of introducing periodic summit meetings of heads of state and government, independently of the progress of ongoing negotiations;

5.

Also highlights the importance of an equal partnership in cooperation and dialogue, bearing in mind the differences between the two entities, and the potential for developing cooperation and dialogue in various sectors;

6.

Calls for the European External Action Service (EEAS) to devote more human resources to the region and for new EU diplomatic missions to be opened in the GCC member states, thereby helping to raise the profile of the EU, to facilitate political dialogue and to make the Union’s efforts more effective; stresses that these resources should stem principally from a reallocation of staff within the EEAS; calls on those EU Member States with diplomatic representations there to act in line with EU policy; stresses that tailored bilateral approaches to GCC member states minded to engage in closer cooperation with the EU can only complement and strengthen the multilateral framework; calls, therefore, on the European and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy to examine the prospects which such bilateral cooperation would open up;

7.

Draws attention to the social and political developments that have taken place in recent years in most GCC member states; encourages all these states to sustain their efforts and to do more to promote human rights, to combat discrimination of all kinds, including discrimination based on gender, sexual orientation and religion; invites the GCC member states to safeguard and promote the rights of minorities – including religious minorities – gender equality, the right to work – including for migrant workers – and freedom of conscience, expression and opinion, calls for continuous dialogue between the EU and the GCC on these issues; invites the GCC member states to interact more positively with civil society and to support the emergence of local structures and associations; calls in particular on the GCC member states to:

8.

Calls on all Member States in the Gulf Cooperation Council to recognise a continuing popular movement for democratic reform within the wider region, and calls for the full engagement with emerging civil society groups to promote a process of genuine peaceful democratic transition, within their own countries, with partners in the region and with the full support of the European Union;

9.

Expresses its deep concern at the violent response of and the use of force against protesters by Bahraini authorities and at the participation of foreign troops under the GCC banner in the repression of demonstrators; whereas this stands in stark contrast to the GCC's support for the protection of the citizens demanding freedom and democracy in Libya; calls for an immediate end to violence against peaceful protesters and for a political dialogue that can lead to further necessary political reforms in the country;

10.

Invites the GCC governments to work together and in a spirit of cooperation to tackle human rights concerns in the region, especially in relation to gender equality, the situation of the ‘Bidun’ group of stateless persons, restrictions on freedom of expression and assembly, including trade union rights, and the need to ensure the independence of the judiciary and the right to a fair and speedy trial; calls for the proposed strengthening of the political dialogue with the GCC to include technical and political dialogue on human rights;

11.

Calls on the GCC member states to withdraw any reservations they may still have with regard to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women and the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination and to ratify the optional protocols to the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination; also stresses the importance of ratifying and implementing the UN Migrant Workers Convention and ILO Conventions 97 and 143;

12.

Encourages the EU to examine and propose, together with the GCC, solutions for removing the obstacles to the full and effective exercise of the fundamental right of religious freedom, both individually and collectively and in both public and private spheres, for members of minority religions in the region;

13.

Stresses the importance of intercultural and inter-faith dialogue; recalls that the European Union and the GCC have made a joint commitment to promote and protect the values of tolerance, moderation and coexistence;

14.

Encourages the governments and the existing parliamentary assemblies of the GCC to take immediate steps to ratify without reservation the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, as well as to cooperate with the thematic mechanisms of the UN Commission on Human Rights and invite them to visit, in particular the special rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers;

15.

Restates the EU’s opposition to the death penalty and Parliament’s call for a global moratorium on it; deplores, in this regard, the continuing retention of the death penalty by all GCC member states; invites them to adopt a moratorium on executions; calls in particular on states practising executions and punishments involving methods such as decapitation, stoning, crucifixion, flagellation or amputation to cease these practices;

16.

Notes the three-year Joint Action Programme adopted by the EU-GCC Joint Council and Ministerial Meeting on 14 June 2010 and intended to strengthen cooperation in many strategic areas of mutual interest, including by setting up a network linking researchers, academics and businessmen; finds it regrettable, however, that it does not contain a section providing for open, regular and constructive political dialogue;

17.

Considers that the implementation of this Joint Action Programme should be accompanied by a precise and detailed funding scheme and carried out by staff specifically assigned to this task both in Brussels and the GCC member states; stresses the importance of ensuring the visibility of this programme and the dissemination of a wide range of information accessible to the administrations and institutions concerned; requests that an evaluation of the results be carried out at the end of the three-year period and that, should the results prove satisfactory, an EU-GCC cooperation agency be envisaged;

18.

Calls on the EU to focus its cooperation programmes with the GCC member states more on civil society organisations and to support the empowerment of women and youth;

19.

Expresses its profound concern at seeing the Gulf region caught up in an arms race; asks the EU to initiate a strategic dialogue with the GCC member states on regional security issues of common interest (the Middle East peace process, Iran’s nuclear programme, the stabilisation of Iraq, Yemen and Darfur, terrorism and piracy) and, ultimately, to contribute to building a regional security structure in the Middle East in partnership with the Gulf states;

20.

Recalls that the GCC member states are important regional players; emphasises that it is in the common interest of the EU and the GCC to promote peace and stability in the Middle East, North Africa and the Horn of Africa, and globally; urges the partners to strengthen cooperation on this matter of common interest;

21.

Takes note of the declaration by the GCC of 7 March 2011 in Abu Dhabi, which states that ‘the Ministerial council demands that the Security Council takes the steps necessary to protect civilians, including a no-fly zone in Libya’, which declaration has contributed to the decision of the Arab League and then the United Nations Security Council to pronounce themselves in favour of such a zone;

22.

Reiterates its support for the Arab peace initiative put forward by one of the GCC member states and approved by all the states of the Arab League and the Organisation of the Islamic Conference; calls on the GCC member states to continue their mediation efforts and support for the Israeli-Palestinian peace process; calls on the EU and the GCC to step up joint efforts to bring about a negotiated end to the occupation of the Palestinian Territories, while continuing to provide full support for a two-state solution to the Israel/Palestine conflict; stresses the joint interest of the EU and the GCC in working together to establish a just and lasting regional peace in the Middle East; suggests in this regard more regular cooperation between the Quartet and the Arab League monitoring committee; recalls that the EU is the largest donor of aid to the Palestinian people; recognises the GCC member states’ support for Palestinian refugees and their contribution to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA); calls on the GCC member states to contribute more to strengthening Palestinian institutions and to economic development, within the context of the Palestinian Authority’s government programme, and to consider paying their financial contributions through existing international aid mechanisms, where appropriate;

23.

Welcomes the fact that GCC integration is continuing (through a customs union, a common market and, ultimately, a single currency); encourages the Commission to propose to the GCC Secretariat that the two bodies jointly draw up a framework for cooperation, under which the Commission can share its experience in the areas of institutional consolidation, administrative capacity building and developing machinery for regulation and the settlement of disputes; emphasises that such an approach can help to inspire processes of ownership;

24.

Welcomes the decision by the presidents of the parliaments of the GCC member states, meeting in Abu Dhabi on 23 November 2010, to begin monitoring the activities of the GCC and its executive decisions and to establish an annual conference of the parliamentary institutions of GCC member states; welcomes the forthcoming establishment of an interparliamentary delegation for relations with the European Parliament; is convinced that far-reaching parliamentary cooperation will make a significant contribution to the development of a strategic partnership between the two groups;

25.

Recalls its resolution of 24 April 2008 on the Free Trade Agreement (FTA) between the EC and the GCC, which was supported by 96 % of its Members; notes that questions raised in the resolution, such as the need for reciprocal market access, effective protection of intellectual property rights, removal of non-tariff barriers to the provision of services, promotion of sustainable development and respect for international conventions, are still topical;

26.

Deeply deplores the fact that negotiations between the EU and the GCC (EU-GCC FTA) have suffered repeated lengthy delays and deplores the GCC’s decision to suspend these negotiations in 2008; believes that it is high time to unblock these negotiations so that a definitive solution can be found which offers maximum benefits to the societies and business communities on both sides;

27.

Deplores the fact that that the region has been neglected by the EU, despite its strategic importance in terms of oil supplies, trade opportunities and regional stability;

28.

Notes that, after 20 years of negotiations, the FTA has still to be concluded; is aware that the human rights and illegal migration clauses have been rejected by some GCC member states;

29.

Considers that, given the region’s strategic importance, the FTA should be seen not only as an instrument to enhance welfare through trade, but also as a tool to foster geopolitical stability;

30.

Notes that the GCC is currently the EU’s sixth largest export market and that the EU is currently the GCC’s main trading partner; notes that, notwithstanding this already intensive level of trade, there is still scope for deepening it, as well as room for greater diversification of trade between the two parties, given the size of the EU market and efforts on the part of GCC member states to diversify their exports; notes that an FTA would also provide new opportunities for technical cooperation and assistance; takes the view that the conclusion of the EU-GCC FTA would foster closer ties and further diversification;

31.

Points out that, given that the GCC member states are increasing their economic diversification with a view to reducing their dependency on oil exports, an increase in services trade and investment would help to foster the development of the GCC economies;

32.

Welcomes the fact that, over the past two decades, economic relations between the EU and the GCC have been intensifying and that trade volumes between the them have increased significantly, despite the failure to conclude an FTA; takes this as a sign that an FTA would further enhance this natural growth and embed it in a more open, predictable and secure environment;

33.

Notes that the bulk of the work on the FTA has already been done, and takes the view that the scope of the FTA as it stands promises great benefits for both parties; calls on both parties, therefore, to look upon this FTA as a major and important endeavour for both regions and their peoples; considers that the EU and the GCC have shared interests and needs and that the EU’s experience in regional integration can be a source of inspiration for the Gulf; considers that, in this connection, the EU can provide valuable technical assistance;

34.

Stresses that, unless remedied, a lack of transparency in public procurement procedures and barriers to access for foreign investors in the services sector could jeopardise the conclusion of the agreement;

35.

Is firmly of the opinion that an EU-GCC FTA would be substantially advantageous to both parties; believes that an FTA with the EU would facilitate the further economic integration of the GCC and that, following the establishment of the GCC Customs Union, it may also lend greater impetus to important projects such as the GCC common market and the completion of a GCC monetary union with a single currency; considers that the GCC could benefit from lessons learned during the formation of a single market and adoption of a single currency by the EU;

36.

Strongly supports the message that the High Representative/Vice-President Catherine Ashton sent during the EU-GCC Joint Ministerial Council meeting in June 2010, and more recently on 22 September 2010, during the EU-GCC meeting held alongside the UN General Assembly ministerial meeting, indicating that the EU was ready to make a final effort to conclude these negotiations; also welcomes the reaction of the GCC, which likewise confirmed its wish to conclude the negotiations;

37.

Acknowledges the sensitivities of some GCC member states on export duties, but deplores the recent decision by the GCC negotiators to revert to their 2008 position in this regard, i.e. to leave penalties for non-compliance on this issue out of the FTA; is firmly of the opinion that no current FTA can ignore the question of export duties and that WTO rules state that FTAs have to provide for the substantial liberalisation of both imports and exports;

38.

Recommends that the EU devote more resources to the GCC via the instrument for cooperation with industrialised and other high-income countries, which should be made more visible and should focus on suitable programmes for training local civil servants, including in trade matters;

39.

Recalls that, under the Lisbon Treaty, international trade policy is one of the EU’s foreign policy tools and that as such, for the Union, respect for democratic principles and fundamental human rights, together with the social and environmental dimensions, are absolutely essential in all its international agreements; calls, therefore, for any future free trade agreement to include an effective and enforceable human rights clause;

40.

Notes that there are 15 million migrant workers in the six GCC member states and that those workers make up 40 % of the total population; draws attention to the precarious situation of migrant workers in the Gulf states, which has been highlighted by the ILO, and supports its call for a minimum wage in the region in order to prevent any further deterioration in the position of domestic and migrant workers; also supports the right of all workers to form and join trade unions in order to defend their interests;

41.

Emphasises the need to respect the democratic principles and fundamental rights established by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights; urges the GCC member states to combat discrimination against women and the exploitation of children, in particular on the labour market, and to implement the UN Conventions on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women and on the Rights of the Child;

42.

Considers that the ratification and full implementation by the GCC member states of the framework established by the UN Convention against Transnational Organised Crime, the UN Convention against Corruption and the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families should be a key issue in the FTA negotiations;

43.

Believes that the conclusion of an FTA would greatly enhance the current relations between the EU Member States and the GCC member states, and would lend added value to the recent Joint Action Programme, in particular, by strengthening capacities and institutions, including within the GCC Secretariat; deplores the fact that the diplomatic presence of the EU in the GCC member states remains minimal and insists that following the establishment of the EEAS the EU should increase its diplomatic presence in the region, including by setting up a Union delegation in each of the six GCC member states, which would work in close cooperation with the national diplomatic services of EU Member States present in the GCC member states, to make the most of their combined expertise concerning the region; believes that a more significant diplomatic presence would greatly increase the chances of a speedy conclusion of the FTA and its subsequent implementation;

44.

Proposes the establishment of a regular heads of state and government summit between the EU and the GCC; stresses that this summit could enhance the political, financial, economic, commercial and cultural ties between the EU and GCC immensely; strongly encourages the EU and the GCC’s top political decision-makers to meet on a regular basis in order to jointly define and promote common interests, thus increasing the likelihood of the FTA being concluded and signed as soon as possible; takes the view that both the EU and the GCC’s top political decision-makers should seek progress in this regard, regardless of whether the FTA is concluded and signed;

45.

Welcomes the fact that over the years the EU and the GCC have become major investment partners and that the GCC, together with Iraq and Yemen, ranked as the top investor in the EU in 2008; takes of the view that the conclusion of the FTA, or at least the official reopening of the negotiations, will surely open the way to further agreements which will encourage and facilitate mutual foreign direct investment (FDI) with a view to eliminating obstacles to foreign ownership and investment protection; recalls that, following the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, FDI now falls within the competence of the EU and therefore provides further scope for the rapid conclusion of an EU-GCC FTA; notes that any future FTA would open up new investment opportunities for both sides whilst enhancing the possibilities for the GCC to fulfil the criteria as a candidate for an EU investment agreement within the future EU investment policy;

46.

Points out that the lowering of GCC tariffs as a result of the FTA would increase the attractiveness of outward investment by transnational enterprises; is convinced that the FTA will result in an increase in services-related investments which will foster the development of the GCC and of the EU Member States;

47.

Suggests the use of the euro in all types of trade between the EU and the GCC; welcomes the fact that, since its inception, the GCC has expressed its determination to create a customs and monetary union; notes that, while the former entered into force in 2009, negotiations on a common currency are currently taking place;

48.

Notes that all six GCC member states currently enjoy preferential access to the EU market under the EU’s Generalised System of Preferences (GSP); stresses that all GCC member states should, in accordance with Article 15(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 732/2008 of 22 July 2008, not only ratify but also implement all 27 ILO and UN conventions listed in Annex III to the regulation; takes the view that, given the level of economic progress in the region, the FTA would be a better tool to spread commercial benefits throughout the region;

49.

Reaffirms that the EU’s primary objective in its relations with the GCC should be to conclude the FTA, which will be a major region-to-region agreement; however, until this happens, and following what some of the GCC’s major trade partners have already done, encourages the High Representative/Vice-President and the Commissioner for Trade to assess alternative approaches to future commercial relations with the GCC member states, in the form of bilateral agreements between the EU and the Gulf States that already feel prepared to enter into further commitments with the EU, taking into account the disparities between the economies of the Gulf States, the varied responses of those states to the financial crisis and their relations with other trade partners;

50.

Hails the significant degree of cooperation between the EU and its Mediterranean partners on energy matters, now extended to embrace renewable energies; considers that synergies must be encouraged here between the three geographic zones on account of their converging interests, technological expertise, sources of funding and abundant resources (sun and wind); welcomes the establishment of the EU-GCC clean energy network, clean energy currently being a prime focus of interest for the GCC member states;

51.

Notes that, in view of the strategic, economic, political and cultural ties between the Gulf countries and the countries on the southern shore of the Mediterranean, and also of the growing influence of the Gulf countries on Mediterranean countries, a stronger, structured partnership between the GCC and the Union for the Mediterranean could be envisaged and that the European Union should actively endeavour to promote such a project which will benefit all parties;

52.

Commends the work carried out by the EU-GCC Energy Expert Group, in particular on natural gas, energy efficiency and nuclear safety;

53.

Calls on the Commission, in the light of the challenge of climate change and the growing energy consumption in both regions, to address energy efficiency as one of the main areas of development and to enhance cooperation on energy efficiency issues;

54.

Acknowledges that fossil fuels currently supply most of the EU’s energy needs; notes, however, that the EU’s future oil demand will be affected by several factors, such as EU energy and climate policies, supply costs, price volatility and industrial progress (in relation to energy efficiency and electromobility, for example), which combine to create long-term uncertainties about future demand and upstream and downstream investment with regard to production capacity;

55.

Calls for greater transparency in oil and gas data as regards the future demand and supply scenario, in keeping with the shared interest in predictable oil markets; welcomes, therefore, the Joint Oil Data Initiative;

56.

Welcomes the Joint Ministerial Council’s determination to work towards closer cooperation on the environment and climate change;

57.

Recognises that the GCC’s efforts to increase potential natural gas and liquid natural gas (LNG) reserves accord with the EU’s desire to diversify energy sources and supply routes; stresses, therefore, the importance of increasing LNG exports to the EU by establishing LNG terminals in the Southern Corridor, and of establishing pipeline links with the GCC, either directly or by connecting up with current and planned pipelines, such as AGP, Nabucco and ITGI;

58.

Encourages the GCC member states to coordinate the further development of gas-to-liquid (GTL) technology with their European partners in order better to incorporate GTL into the European energy mix; stresses that the GCC could also use GTL as an alternative to the emission of flare gas into the atmosphere;

59.

Emphasises that the EU has opportunities to invest in GCC energy production capacity, using the latest technologies in terms of generation, transmission and interconnection; encourages, in this respect, future cooperation with a particular focus on the integration of electricity networks and smart grid technologies;

60.

Stresses the importance of a reliable partnership between the EU and the GCC in the use of, and access to, raw materials; favours open markets for goods and the removal of non-tariff barriers; welcomes all efforts already made in free-trade negotiations to guarantee a secure and sustainable supply of raw materials;

61.

Calls for joint efforts to address the speculation and price volatility affecting raw materials, through greater transparency and closer supervision of OTC derivatives trading; welcomes, in this context, OPEC’s recent call for tighter controls on OTC trading, along with France’s efforts to address commodity speculation within the G 20;

62.

Highlights the importance of deepening bilateral cooperation with the GCC on research and technology programmes, with a special focus on new knowledge-based industries in areas such as renewable energy sources, CCS, oil and gas derivatives, energy efficiency and biomass; calls for the establishment of cooperation which combines technology transfer with guarantees of a secure, sustainable supply of raw materials;

63.

Calls for the European Research Council (ERC) and the European Institute of Technology (EIT) to step up their collaboration with the GCC in order to foster, and press ahead with, scientific dialogue and cooperation between regions in this field as well;

64.

Notes that the GCC member states have made education a national priority and have extensive requirements in terms of human resources (there are not enough teachers), course content (which has not kept pace with changing labour markets), syllabus quality (teaching methods and materials are out of date) and the use of new technologies; calls for the authorities’ efforts to address these shortcomings to be actively supported and proposes cooperation on an ambitious scale in higher, secondary and primary education to promote greater access to education for both men and women;

65.

Emphasises that this cooperation should include further support for exchange programmes for students, academics and professionals; deplores the fact that the Erasmus Mundus programme remains virtually unknown in the region as a whole, mainly because of a lack of information; welcomes the initiatives taken by French, British and German universities to establish university partnerships and exchange programmes; recalls, however, that Europe continues to lag behind the United States and Asia in this area; calls on the Commission to organise information days to promote teaching and European scientific research on the spot; insists that these exchange programmes should target students, teachers, researchers and administrative staff, while ensuring balanced gender representation; believes that exchange programmes should be established for younger age groups by targeting secondary school and high school students;

66.

Welcomes the Al-Jisr project on EU-GCC Public Diplomacy and Outreach Activities which, with the Commission’s support, has proven to be immensely beneficial; encourages, in this connection, the High Representative/Vice-President’s staff to consider expanding public diplomacy activities in a region where the EU is still not clearly understood and mechanisms to overcome this deficit are limited; stresses the importance of developing a better communication strategy, including the need to explain EU policies and positions in Arabic, with a view to reaching a wider audience in the region;

67.

Emphasises that the lack of cooperation programmes between the EU and the GCC in the field of the media is resulting in an information deficit; calls on the Commission to put forward measures to involve the GCC member states in closer cooperation in this area in order to raise the profile of the Union in the region and promote mutual understanding;

68.

Considers it essential to remedy shortcomings in Europe with regard to research into and study of the Gulf states; encourages the establishment in universities of contemporary study programmes devoted to this part of the Arab world; believes that study programmes on the European Union should also be offered in universities in the region;

69.

Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the President of the Council of the European Union, the President of the Commission, the Vice-President of the Commission/ High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, the governments and parliaments of the Member States, the GCC Secretariat and the governments and parliaments of the GCC member states.

17.8.2012   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 247/11

—

having regard to the letter of 10 March 2011 from the European Supervisory Authority (European Banking Authority),

—

having regard to Article 51(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 establishing a European Supervisory Authority (European Banking Authority) (1),

—

having regard to the fact that, at its meeting of 17 March 2011, the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs heard the candidate selected by the Board of Supervisors of the European Supervisory Authority (European Banking Authority),

—

having regard to Rule 120 of its Rules of Procedure,

A.

whereas Adam Farkas fulfils the criteria set out in Article 51(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010),

1.

Approves the appointment of Adam Farkas as Executive Director of the European Supervisory Authority (European Banking Authority);

2.

Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the European Supervisory Authority (European Banking Authority).

17.8.2012   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 247/12

—

having regard to the letter of 10 March 2011 from the European Supervisory Authority (European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority),

—

having regard to Article 51(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 establishing a European Supervisory Authority (European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority) (1),

—

having regard to the fact that, at its meeting of 17 March 2011, the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs heard the candidate selected by the Board of Supervisors of the European Supervisory Authority (European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority),

—

having regard to Rule 120 of its Rules of Procedure,

A.

whereas Carlos Montalvo fulfils the criteria set out in Article 51(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010),

1.

Approves the appointment of Carlos Montalvo as Executive Director of the European Supervisory Authority (European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority);

2.

Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the European Supervisory Authority (European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority).

17.8.2012   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 247/13

—

having regard to the letter of 28 February 2011 from the European Supervisory Authority (European Securities and Markets Authority),

—

having regard to Article 51(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 establishing a European Supervisory Authority (European Securities and Markets Authority) (1),

—

having regard to the fact that, at its meeting of 17 March 2011, the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs heard the candidate selected by the Board of Supervisors of the European Supervisory Authority (European Securities and Markets Authority),

—

having regard to Rule 120 of its Rules of Procedure,

A.

whereas Verena Ross fulfils the criteria set out in Article 51(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010),

1.

Approves the appointment of Verena Ross as Executive Director of the European Supervisory Authority (European Securities and Markets Authority);

2.

Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the European Supervisory Authority (European Securities and Markets Authority).

17.8.2012   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 247/13

—

having regard to Articles 313 and 314 TFEU,

—

having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement (IIA) of 17 May 2006 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline and sound financial management (1),

—

having regard to its resolution of 17 February 2011 on Europe 2020 (2),

—

having regard to its resolution of 15 December 2010 on the Communication from the Commission on the Commission Work Programme 2011 (3),

—

having regard to its resolution of 20 October 2010 on ‘the financial, economic and social crisis: recommendations concerning measures and initiatives to be taken (mid-term report)’ (4),

—

having regard to its resolution of 16 June 2010 on economic governance (5),

—

having regard to the Commission’s updated financial programming for 2007-2013, submitted in accordance with Point 46 of the aforementioned IIA of 17 May 2006,

—

having regard to the European Union’s general budget for the 2011 financial year,

—

having regard to the Council conclusions of 15 February 2011 on the budget guidelines for 2012,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgets (A7-0058/2011),

1.

Takes the view that the Europe 2020 strategy should help Europe recover from the crisis and come out stronger, through smart, sustainable and inclusive growth based on the five EU headline targets, namely promoting employment, improving the conditions for – and public spending on – innovation, research and development, meeting our climate change and energy objectives, improving education levels and promoting social inclusion, in particular through the reduction of poverty; recalls that the Member States themselves have fully endorsed these five targets;

2.

Points out that some consistency must be ensured between achieving these objectives and the funding allocated to them at European and national level; insists that EU budgetary policy must be in line with this principle; takes the view that the European Semester, as a new mechanism for enhanced European economic governance, should afford an opportunity to consider how best to deliver on these five headline targets;

3.

Strongly believes that the European Semester should aim at improving the coordination and consistency of national and European economic and budgetary policies; takes the view that it should focus on improving synergies between European and national public investments in order better to achieve the EU’s overall political objectives; notes the fundamental differences between the structure of the EU budget and that of national budgets; believes, however, that aggregate EU and national public expenditure on common political objectives should be determined as soon as possible;

4.

Acknowledges the Council’s concern about economic and budgetary constraints at national level, but recalls, first and foremost, that under Treaty provisions the EU budget can not run a public deficit; recalls that, in 2009, the accumulated public deficit in the EU as a whole amounted to EUR 801 billion, and that the EU budget represents a mere 2 % of total public spending in the EU;

5.

Takes the view, however, that the difficult economic situation across the Union makes it more important than ever to ensure proper implementation of the EU budget, quality of spending and optimal use of existing Community financing; suggests that a thorough review should be undertaken of those lines which have a history of low outturn or where problems have arisen in implementation;

6.

Is of the opinion that the EU budget brings added value to national public expenditure when initiating, supporting and complementing investments in those policy areas which are at the core of Europe 2020; believes, moreover, that the EU budget has an instrumental role to play in helping the EU to exit the current economic and financial crisis through its capacity as a catalyst to boost investment, growth and jobs in Europe; takes the view that the EU budget could at least mitigate the effects of current restrictive national budgetary policies while supporting the efforts of national governments; stresses also that, given its redistributive nature, lowering the level of the EU budget may harm European solidarity and have an adverse impact on the pace of economic development in many Member States; believes that a purely ‘net contributor’/‘net beneficiary’ approach does not take due account of spill-over effects between EU countries and therefore undermines common EU policy goals;

7.

Recalls that delivering on the Europe 2020 strategy’s seven flagship initiatives will require a huge amount of future-oriented investment, estimated at no less than EUR 1 800 billion until 2020 by the Commission in its communication entitled ‘The EU Budget Review’ (COM(2010)0700); stresses that one of the main objectives of the Europe 2020 strategy – namely, to promote jobs and high-quality employment for all Europeans – will be achieved only if the necessary investments in education, in favour of a knowledge society, research and development, innovation, SMEs and green and new technologies are made now and not delayed any longer; calls for a renewed political compromise combining the reduction of public deficits and debt with the promotion of such investments; expresses its willingness, with a view to magnifying the impact of the EU budget and contributing to the EU’s response to the economic crisis, to explore possible ways to widen existing instruments enhancing the synergy between the EU budget and EIB actions, in order to support long-term investments; welcomes, moreover, the Commission’s launch of public consultation on the ‘Europe 2020 Project Bond Initiative’;

8.

Opposes, therefore, attempts to limit or reduce budget appropriations linked to the delivery of the Europe 2020 strategy’s headline targets and seven flagship initiatives; notes that any such attempt would be counter-productive, most likely resulting in the failure of Europe 2020, as was the case for the Lisbon Strategy; takes the view that the Europe 2020 strategy can be credible only if adequately funded, and recalls that the EP has on numerous occasions raised this serious political concern; reiterates its strong request for the Commission to clarify the budgetary dimension of the flagship initiatives, and to inform Parliament of the budgetary means needed for the implementation of the Europe 2020 strategy;

9.

Highlights the fact that budgetary measures are not the only factor in achieving the Europe 2020 strategy’s targets, but that budgetary efforts must be supplemented by concrete proposals for simplification in order to create the environment needed in order to achieve our goals in the fields of employment, research and innovation, including green and energy technologies; is equally convinced that achieving the Europe 2020 objectives, including the creation of new green jobs, is a question not only of increased budgetary means, but also of a qualitative refocusing of existing EU policies, including the CAP, by taking due account of sustainability criteria;

10.

Takes the view, moreover, that 2012 budget appropriations, including in those areas not directly linked to the achievement of the Europe 2020 strategy, need to be kept at an appropriate level to ensure the continuation of EU policies and the achievement of EU objectives well beyond the duration of the current economic crisis;

11.

Calls for greater coherence between external and internal EU policies, bearing in mind the major impact of global developments on the EU’s economic, natural and industrial environment, competitiveness and employment; underlines, therefore, the need to endow the EU with the necessary financial means to be able to respond adequately to growing global challenges and to defend and promote its common interests and core values – like human rights, democracy, the rule of law, fundamental freedoms and environmental protection – effectively; recalls that moderate additional expenditure at EU level can often generate proportionately higher savings at Member State level;

12.

Believes that the EU has an important role to play in assisting and financially supporting Arab countries at this historical point in their democratic development and economic and social transformation; welcomes, in this connection, the Commission communication entitled ‘A partnership for democracy and shared prosperity with the southern Mediterranean’ (COM(2011)0200));

13.

Deplores the absence of any parliamentary dimension to the first European Semester exercise, despite the role that the European Parliament and the 27 national parliaments play in their respective budgetary procedures; is, instead, firmly convinced that stronger parliamentary involvement would significantly improve the democratic nature and transparency of such an exercise; supports the initiative of its Committee on Budgets to organise, as a first step, a meeting with national parliaments in order to discuss the general outline of the 2012 budgets of the Member States and of the EU;

14.

Welcomes the Hungarian and Polish presidencies’ public commitments to enter into an open and constructive dialogue with the EP on budget matters in 2011; reaffirms its willingness to work in close cooperation with the Council and the Commission in full accordance with the provisions of the Lisbon Treaty; expects that the present guidelines will be taken into account fully during the 2012 budgetary procedure;

15.

Notes that, for 2012, the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) for 2007-2013 provides for an overall level of commitment appropriations (CA) of EUR 147,55 billion and an overall ceiling for payment appropriations (PA) of EUR 141,36 billion; recalls that these amounts are in any case considerably lower (by around EUR 25 billion in the case of CA, and around EUR 22 billion in the case of PA) than the ceiling specified in the current Own Resources Decision;

16.

Stresses that the financial programming presented by the Commission on 31 January 2011 represents an indicative reference envelope for commitment appropriations for each of the existing EU programmes and actions; takes note that the overall level of commitment appropriations may be set at EUR 147,88 billion;

17.

Underlines that these figures constitute a yearly breakdown of multiannual global amounts agreed upon by both Parliament and the Council when these programmes and actions were adopted; stresses that the annual amounts programmed represent appropriations which allow for achieving EU objectives and priorities, notably in the context of Europe 2020; acknowledges, however, that some room for manoeuvre may appear under certain headings of the MFF, given the very provisional indicative figures (in particular under Heading 2) put forward by the Commission at that point in the year;

18.

Points out that the 2012 budget is the sixth of seven under the current MFF; believes that the two arms of the budgetary authority now have, therefore, a clearer view of the shortfalls and positive developments associated with existing multiannual programmes; notes that the mid-term reviews of most co-decided programmes have already taken place, and calls on the Commission to present any budgetary implications resulting from this exercise; emphasises, in this connection, that the EP is determined – should it prove necessary in order to support and enhance EU political priorities as well as to address new political needs and in close cooperation with its specialised committees – to make full use of, inter alia, Point 37 of the IIA (allowing a 5 % margin of legislative flexibility);

19.

Highlights the fact that leaving sufficient margins below all MFF headings is not the only solution in order to address unforeseen circumstances; points out the recurrent under-financing of certain headings of the MFF, in particular Headings 1a, 3b and 4, as compared to the needs and EU political priorities endorsed by the Member States; finds that the approach underpinning the Council’s budget guidelines for 2012 does not reflect a long-term perspective and could put existing actions and programmes at risk, should unforeseen events or new political priorities arise; stresses that recent events in several North African countries are already pointing in that direction, and invites the Commission to asses how the EU’s existing financial instruments could be used to support aspirations to democracy;

20.

Believes, on the contrary, that the various flexibility mechanisms foreseen by the IIA (such as shifting expenditure between headings or mobilising the flexibility instrument) are tools to be used fully; recalls that they have had to be used every year since 2007 in response to various challenges that have arisen; expects the Council’s to give its full cooperation in using them, and to enter into such discussions at an early stage in order to avoid disproportionately long and difficult negotiations on their mobilisation;

21.

Stresses, in this connection, that keeping commitment appropriations under strict control would require not only significant redeployments and reprioritisation, but also the joint identification of possible negative priorities and savings by the institutions; strongly urges its specialised committees seriously to embark on the process of determining clear political priorities in all EU policy fields; highlights, however, the fact that, to this end, greater budgetary flexibility is needed, and that a revision of the MFF (for example, offsetting between headings of the current MFF) may be a necessity for the Union’s ability to function, not only in terms of facing the new challenges but also with a view to facilitating the decision-making process within the institutions in order to align budgetary resources with evolving circumstances and priorities; emphasises that this process must be fully transparent;

22.

Emphasises that the strengthening of a number of policies and the new competences established at EU level following the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty should logically imply additional financial capacity for the EU, which was hardly the case for 2011, the first year after its entry into force; reminds the Council and the Commission of the political declaration annexed to the 2011 budget, whereby the Commission undertakes to consider ways to strengthen the Lisbon Treaty priority areas and thoroughly to assess the needs when preparing the draft budget for 2012; expects the Commission to follow suit by, for example, proposing to turn successful Lisbon-related pilot projects or preparatory actions into multiannual programmes;

23.

Considers the Commission’s approach to determining EU decentralised agencies’ subsidies from the EU budget to be reliable and to provide the right incentives; stresses that EU agencies’ budget allocations are far from being confined to administrative expenditure alone, but instead contribute to achieving the Europe 2020 goals and EU objectives in general, as decided by the legislative authority; reaffirms the need to examine requests for new posts carefully in relation to newly assigned tasks; underlines, however, the importance of adequate funding for those agencies whose tasks have been increased, so as not to hinder their performance; calls for a specific approach in respect of the recruitment of specialised scientific staff with professional experience, especially when these posts are financed exclusively by fees and are thus budget-neutral for the EU budget; supports the work carried out by the interinstitutional working group on the future of agencies, which was set up in early 2009, and looks forward to its conclusions, notably on the above mentioned points;

24.

Notes that the 2012 level of payments will result directly from previous years’ legal and political commitments; believes that an increase compared to the 2011 budget level is foreseeable and in line with the general profile of payments over the 2007-2013 programming period (see tables in annex);

25.

Emphasises the urgent need to address the issue of the growing level of outstanding commitments (RAL) at the end of 2010 (EUR 194 billion, see table in annex); regrets the attitude adopted by the Council in deciding on the level of payments a priori, without taking into account an accurate assessment of the actual needs; highlights the fact that the level of RAL is particularly high under Heading 1b; does not consider the Council’s option of reducing EU budget commitments in order to decrease the level of RAL to be a sustainable solution, since this would be detrimental to the achievement of previously agreed EU objectives and priorities; underlines, in this connection, the Council’s commitment to a joint declaration with Parliament on the possibility of resolving needs in payments which arise in the course of 2011 by means of an amending budget;

26.

Emphasises that a certain level of RAL is unavoidable when multiannual programmes are implemented, and that the existence of outstanding commitments by definition requires corresponding payments to be made; requests, therefore, that an orderly relationship between commitments and payments be maintained, and will do its utmost throughout the budgetary procedure to reduce the discrepancy between commitment and payment appropriations;

27.

Shares the Council’s view that realistic budgeting should be promoted; calls on the Commission to ensure that its draft budget is based on this principle; notes, however, that past implementation, which has improved in recent years, may not constitute a very accurate indicator of 2012 needs in some cases, since the implementation of some programmes could speed up in 2012, and payment needs increase accordingly; endorses the Council’s call for the Member States to provide better implementation forecasts, notably with a view to avoiding under-implementation, and takes the view that the bulk of the effort in this respect should be undertaken by the Member States themselves, since the level of the Commission’s draft budget is determined mainly by their own forecasts (particularly under Heading 2) and their implementation capacity; recalls that the Member States co-manage, together with the Commission, more than 80 % of EU funding; reminds the Member States of their legal responsibility in defining and enforcing financial rules applicable to the recipients of EU funding;

28.

Points out that, since the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, the protection of financial interests has also been the responsibility of the Member States; emphasises the European Court of Auditors’ finding that the management and control systems in some of the Member States are not fully effective; recalls furthermore, that wrongly spent structural funding amounting to billions of euros has not yet been recovered; notes that DG REGIO’s current annual report cannot declare the legality and regularity of the Member States’ expenditure, because some Member States have not complied with their obligation to submit their reports on time; points out that, as a result of the Member States’ ongoing under-financing of the EU budget, Parliament may be forced to identify negative priorities among EU projects, and subsequently to cut their budgets;

29.

Is aware that the level of payments finally implemented every year sometimes entails a significant so-called ‘surplus’ compared with the level of payments originally agreed by the budget authority, meaning that Member States’ national contributions to the EU budget are therefore decreased accordingly, and their fiscal positions improved; does not consider the Council’s concerns as to the level and timing of this ‘return’ relevant in addressing the sensitive underlying political issue of the financing of the EU budget; is, rather, of the opinion that unspent payments from year ‘n’ should be carried over to the following budget year (‘n+1’) rather than being deducted from the calculation of Member States’ national contributions; strongly urges the Commission, therefore, to make ambitious proposals for the establishment of new and genuine own resources, so as fully to provide the EU with real and autonomous financial resources; insists, moreover, that any new own resources should be based on a comprehensive impact assessment, and aimed at developing ways to strengthen the EU’s competitiveness and economic growth; asks the Council to cooperate constructively in the debate on fair and new own resources for the EU;

30.

Takes due account of the letter dated 3 February 2011 from the Commissioner for Financial Programming and Budget, reaffirming the Commission’s commitment to zero staff increase as well as its endeavour to limit the nominal increase (as compared with 2011) in administrative appropriations under Heading 5; is aware, however, that while EU competences keep on increasing, this trend may not be sustainable in the long term and may have an adverse impact on the swift and effective implementation of EU actions;

31.

Calls on the Commission to consider the long-term impact of its outsourcing policy, and of its approach of employing a growing number of contract agents, on the quality and independence of the European civil service; underlines that although this generates savings on salaries and pensions, it leads to a situation whereby an increasing number of staff employed by the Commission are not included in its establishment plan; recalls that pension and salary levels are determined by legally binding agreements with which the Commission has to comply in their entirety;

32.

Highlights the fact that, in the case of multi-annual programmes, some specific administrative expenditure (including that of executive agencies) is included in the programmes’ overall financial envelope along with so-called ‘operational expenditure’; points out that the Council’s habit of cutting these budget lines horizontally with the aim of reducing administrative expenditure would inevitably end up modifying the entire co-decided envelope for these programmes, and risk affecting the swiftness and quality of their implementation;

33.

Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Commission, the Council and the Court of Auditors.

17.8.2012   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 247/20

—

having regard to Rule 110(2) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.

having regard to the devastating earthquake and the tsunami which struck Japan and the Pacific region on 11 March 2011, resulting in the death or disappearance of thousands of people and causing considerable material damage,

B.

whereas this disaster caused an extremely serious nuclear accident, which is affecting Fukushima nuclear power station and constitutes a fresh threat,

C.

whereas the Prime Minister of Japan, Naoto Kan, has stated that the country is facing its most serious crisis in 65 years, since the Second World War,

1.

Expresses its most complete solidarity with the Japanese people and government and presents its sincere condolences to the victims of this threefold disaster, bearing in mind that the human losses and material damage have not yet been fully assessed; welcomes the mobilisation, courage and determination of the Japanese people and of the authorities in response to this disaster;

2.

Calls on the Union and its Member States, as a priority, to give Japan and the disaster regions all necessary humanitarian, technical and financial aid and support and welcomes the fact that the Union immediately activated its Civil Protection Mechanism to coordinate its emergency aid;

3.

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

17.8.2012   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 247/21

—

having regard to the letter of 22 March 2011 from the Chair of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs,

—

having regard to Rule 211 of its Rules of Procedure,

1.

Decides to append the following interpretation to Rule 128:

‘Rule 90(6) of the Rules of Procedure lays down a specific procedure by means of which Parliament can take a decision on whether to exercise its prerogative, pursuant to Article 218(11) TFEU, to seek an opinion from the Court of Justice on the compatibility of an international agreement with the Treaties; that provision constitutes a “lex specialis” which takes precedence over the general provision laid down in Rule 128 of the Rules of Procedure.

When a decision must be taken as to whether Parliament should exercise its rights vis-à-vis the Court of Justice of the European Union, and the act in question is not covered by Rule 128 of the Rules of Procedure, the procedure provided for in this rule should apply, mutatis mutandis.’;

2.

Instructs its President to forward this decision to the Council, the Commission and the Court of Justice of the European Union, for information.

17.8.2012   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 247/22

—

having regard to Article 48(6) and Article 48(2) of the Treaty on European Union (TEU),

—

having regard to the final report of the Task Force to the European Council on ‘Strengthening Economic Governance in the EU’,

—

having regard to the draft European Council decision amending Article 136 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), as submitted to the European Council on 16 December 2010 (00033/2010 – C7-0014/2011),

—

having regard to the letters from the Presidents of the European Council and of the Euro Group and the Commissioner responsible for monetary policy, annexed to this resolution,

—

having regard to Rule 74b of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the letter of 18 February 2011 from the Committee on Budgets to the Committee on Constitutional Affairs,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs and the opinion of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (A7-0052/2011),

A.

whereas Article 3(4) TEU states: ‘The Union shall establish an economic and monetary union whose currency is the euro’,

B.

whereas the United Kingdom has opted out of the single currency,

C.

whereas, under Article 3(1) TFEU, ‘monetary policy for the Member States whose currency is the euro’ is an exclusive competence of the Union,

D.

whereas Article 5(1) TFEU provides: ‘The Member States shall coordinate their economic policies within the Union’, with specific provisions applying to those Member States whose currency is the euro,

E.

whereas the draft European Council decision, if adopted, might lead to the constitution of a mechanism completely outside the Union's sphere, without any role being assigned to the Union institutions as such,

F.

whereas participation by the Union institutions in the new European stability mechanism should be fully ensured and permanently safeguarded and a link should be established for the possible intervention of the Union budget in the guarantee system,

G.

whereas all possibilities should be explored with a view to bringing the European stability mechanism fully into the institutional framework of the Union and providing for the involvement in it of those Member States whose currency is not the euro; whereas this may include recourse to Article 20 TEU on enhanced cooperation, where this is appropriate in order to ensure the consistency of the Union’s economic policy,

H.

whereas the rules governing the European stability mechanism should preferably be proposed by the Commission, and should ensure appropriate audit, accountability and transparency arrangements,

I.

whereas the European stability mechanism should be accompanied by the strengthening of the preventive and corrective arm of the Stability and Growth Pact (SGP), and by measures relating to medium and long-term competitiveness and tackling macro-economic imbalances between Member States,

J.

whereas, as a complement to the European stability mechanism, the Union should promote a consolidated Eurobonds market,

K.

whereas the Commission should present proposals for legislation and where necessary Treaty revision, with a view to building, over the medium term, a system of economic government for the Union, and in particular for the euro area, which would strengthen the cohesion and competitiveness of the economy and stabilise the financial system,

L.

whereas Article 48(6) TEU allows the European Council, after consulting Parliament, to adopt a decision amending all or part of the provisions of Part Three of the TFEU without affecting the balance of competences between the Union and its Member States,

M.

whereas any increase or decrease of the Union competences would require an ordinary revision procedure,

N.

whereas any further revision of the TFEU should be conducted under the ordinary revision procedure,

O.

whereas the proposed decision can only enter into force once it has been approved by the Member States in accordance with their respective constitutional requirements,

1.

Emphasises that the monetary policy for the Member States whose currency is the euro is an exclusive competence of the Union and has been a Community policy since the Maastricht Treaty;

2.

Stresses the importance of the euro for the European political and economic project, and underlines the importance of the commitment made by all Member States in favour of the stability of the euro area and the sense of responsibility and solidarity they have shown;

3.

Stresses that the European stability mechanism constitutes an important part of a global package of measures which are designed to define a new framework, reinforcing budgetary discipline and coordination of economic and financial policies of the Member States which should include the promotion of a joint European Union response to growth challenges, concomitantly overcoming economic and social imbalances and improving competitivity;

4.

Notes that the Council has not used all the possibilities provided for by the Treaties to fully enforce the SGP and to improve economic coordination at European Union level;

5.

Considers that it is essential to go beyond the temporary measures aimed at stabilising the euro area, and that the Union should build up its economic governance, including by means of policies and instruments designed to promote sustainable growth in Member States; takes the view that the reinforcement of the SGP, the European semester, the EU 2020 strategy and the amendment of Article136 TFEU concerning the European stability mechanism are only a first step in that direction;

6.

Stresses that the European stability mechanism, and the strict conditionality incorporated therein, involves all Member States whose currency is the euro, even the small ones whose economy may be seen as not ‘indispensable’ for the purposes of safeguarding the euro area as a whole;

7.

Warns that the intention to establish the permanent stability mechanism outside the EU institutional framework poses a risk to the integrity of the Treaty-based system; considers that the Commission must be a member of the board of this mechanism, and not simply an observer; considers, moreover, that in this context the Commission should be entitled to take the appropriate initiatives in order to achieve, with the consent of the Member States concerned, the objectives of the European stability mechanism; underlines that Member States must at any rate respect Union law and the prerogatives of the institutions laid down therein;

8.

Stresses that the establishment and functioning of the permanent stability mechanism must fully respect the core principles of democratic decision-making such as transparency, parliamentary scrutiny and democratic accountability; emphasises that the European stability mechanism should closely involve the Union institutions and bodies responsible for monetary issues – the European Commission, the European Central Bank (ECB) and the European Investment Bank; underlines that the mechanism must not give rise to a new model of European governance which falls short of the level of democratic standards achieved in the Union;

9.

Regrets that the European Council has not explored all the possibilities contained in the Treaties for establishing a permanent stability mechanism; considers in particular that, in the framework of the present Union competences with regard to economic and monetary union (Article 3(4) TEU) and monetary policy for Member States whose currency is the euro (Article 3(1)(c) TFEU), it would have been appropriate to make use of the powers conferred on the Council in Article 136 TFEU, or in the alternative to have recourse to Article 352 TFEU in conjunction with Articles 133 and 136 TFEU;

10.

Calls on the Commission to look for other mechanisms to ensure the financial stability and sustainable and adequate economic growth of the euro area, and to make the necessary legislative proposals; underlines the need for the European stability mechanism to include measures used to reduce risks to financial, economic and social stability, including effective regulation of financial markets, revision of the SGP and better economic coordination, the introduction of instruments for the reduction of macroeconomic imbalances inside the euro area and measures directed at ecological reconstruction;

11.

Considers, moreover, that the setting-up and functioning of the permanent stability mechanism should be brought into the European Union framework, also making use, by analogy, of the institutional mechanism of enhanced cooperation as a means of involving the Union institutions at all stages and of encouraging the participation in the European stability mechanism of those Member States whose currency is not yet the euro;

12.

Notes that, in the light of the discussions in Parliament, the Heads of State and Government of the euro area agreed at their meeting of 11 March 2011, in the context of the pact for the euro, that the Commission should play a strong central role in the monitoring of the implementation of the commitments, in particular so as to ensure that measures are compatible with, and supportive of, the EU rules and the involvement of Parliament; notes that, in their consideration of the general features for the European stability mechanism, they agreed that assistance provided to a Member State whose currency is the euro will be based on a stringent programme of economic and fiscal adjustment and on a rigorous debt sustainability analysis conducted by the Commission and the International Monetary Fund (IMF), in liaison with the ECB;

13.

Acknowledges the positive signals perceived in the letters from the Presidents of the European Council and of the Euro Group and the Commissioner responsible for monetary policy; takes note that:

14.

Endorses the draft European Council decision, notwithstanding its reservation that it would have been preferable to draft it as proposed in Annex I to this resolution; agrees with the view expressed in the opinion by the ECB supporting recourse to the Union method allowing for the European stability mechanism to become a Union mechanism at an appropriate point in time; calls on the European Council to ensure that:

15.

Recalls that the future permanent stability mechanism should make use of the Union institutions, since this would avoid the setting-up of double structures which would prove detrimental to European integration;

16.

Demands that the lending conditions to be applied for the repayment of funds to the permanent stability mechanism in the event of its being activated be similar to those applied to the Balance-of-Payments Facility and Macro-financial Assistance instruments used by the Commission, i.e. strictly back-to-back without a margin over borrowing costs; furthermore considers that the interest rates to be used by the permanent stability mechanism should be offered on favourable terms;

17.

Insists that compliance by Member States with the economic guidelines set up by the Commission and with the conditions imposed by the European stability mechanism needs to be scrutinised by Parliament, and stresses that each national parliament shall be fully involved, in accordance with their budgetary and control rights, at all stages, especially in the context of the European semester, in order to increase the transparency, ownership and accountability of any decision taken;

18.

Endorses the Commission's intention to ‘ensure consistency between the future mechanism and the Union’s economic governance in the euro area in particular, while respecting the competences conferred on the Union and its institutions by the Treaty’;

19.

Underlines that the draft European Council decision as amended would not increase the competences of the Union and would therefore remain within the scope of the simplified Treaty revision procedure; notes, conversely, that that decision cannot reduce the competences of the Union institutions in the fields of economic and monetary policy and of monetary policy for Member States whose currency is the euro, and cannot in any event prejudice the correct application of Union law, in particular Articles 122 and 143 TFEU, and of the Union acquis;

20.

Reaffirms that the use of Article 48(6) TEU is an exceptional procedure, and recalls Parliament's right pursuant to Article 48(3) TEU to call for a Convention in order to reshape the institutions, procedures and policies that make up the economic governance of the Union;

21.

Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the European Council, the Council, the Commission and the European Central Bank as the opinion of the European Parliament pursuant to the second subparagraph of Article 48(6) TEU.

17.8.2012   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 247/37

—

having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2010)0649),

—

having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 207(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C7-0364/2010),

—

having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

—

having regard to Rule 55 and 46(1) of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on International Trade (A7-0041/2011),

1.

Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;

2.

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

3.

Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

17.8.2012   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 247/38

—

having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2010)0142),

—

having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 207(2), of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C7-0135/2010),

—

having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

—

having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on International Trade and the opinion of the Committee on Development (A7-0051/2011),

1.

Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;

2.

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

3.

Calls on the Commission to present a proposal for a new Regulation applying a scheme of generalised tariff preferences without delay;

4.

Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

17.8.2012   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 247/39

—

having regard to the draft decision of the Council and the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States of the European Union, meeting within the Council (15381/2010),

—

having regard to the draft protocol amending the 2007 agreement between the European Community and United States of America on Air Transport (09913/2010),

—

having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Article 100(2), Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a)(v) and Article 218(8) first subparagraph, of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C7-0385/2010),

—

having regard to its resolution of 17 June 2010 on the EU-US air agreement (1),

—

having regard to Rules 81 and 90(8) of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on Transport and Tourism (A7-0046/2011),

1.

Consents to conclusion of the protocol;

2.

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

17.8.2012   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 247/40

—

having regard to the draft decision of the Council and of the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States, meeting within the Council (15380/2010),

—

having regard to the draft Agreement between the European Community and its Member States and Canada on air transport (08303/10/2009),

—

having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Article 100(2), Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a)(v) and Article 218(8) first subparagraph, of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C7-0386/2010),

—

having regard to Rules 81 and 90(8) of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on Transport and Tourism (A7-0045/2011),

1.

Consents to conclusion of the Agreement;

2.

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

17.8.2012   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 247/40

—

having regard to the draft Council decision (14876/2010),

—

having regard to the draft Agreement between the European Union and the Government of the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam on certain aspects of air services (07170/2009),

—

having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Article 100(2) and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a), of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C7-0366/2010),

—

having regard to Rules 81 and 90(8) of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on Transport and Tourism (A7-0044/2011),

1.

Consents to conclusion of the Agreement;

2.

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

17.8.2012   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 247/41

—

having regard to the Council recommendation of 15 February 2011 (00003/2011),

—

having regard to the second subparagraph of Article 283(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the European Council consulted Parliament (C7-0058/2011),

—

having regard to Rule 109 of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (A7-0064/2011),

A.

whereas by letter of 18 February 2011 the European Council consulted the European Parliament on the appointment of Peter Praet as a member of the Executive Board of the European Central Bank for a term of office of eight years with effect from 1 June 2011,

B.

whereas Parliament's Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs then proceeded to evaluate the credentials of the nominee, in particular in view of the requirements laid down in Article 283(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and in the light of the need for full independence of the ECB pursuant to Article 130 of that Treaty, and whereas in carrying out this evaluation, the committee received a CV from the candidate as well as his replies to the written questionnaire that was sent out to him,

C.

whereas the committee subsequently held a one-and-a-half-hour hearing with the nominee on 16 March 2011, at which he made an opening statement and then responded to questions from the members of the committee,

1.

Delivers a favourable opinion to the European Council on the Council recommendation to appoint Peter Praet as a member of the Executive Board of the European Central Bank;

2.

Instructs its President to forward this decision to the European Council and the Council.

17.8.2012   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 247/42

—

having regard to the Commission proposal to the Council (COM(2007)0638),

—

having regard to Articles 63(3)(a) and 67 of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C6-0470/2007),

—

having regard to its position of 20 November 2008 (1),

—

having regard to the Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council entitled ‘Consequences of the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon for ongoing interinstitutional decision-making procedures’ (COM(2009)0665),

—

having regard to Article 294(3) and points (a) and (b) of Article 79(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

—

having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 9 July 2008 (2),

—

having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions of 18 June 2008 (3),

—

having regard to Rules 55 and 56(3) of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs and the opinion of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs (A7-0265/2010),

1.

Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;

2.

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

3.

Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

17.8.2012   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 247/55