22.12.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 443/1

22.12.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 443/2

—

having regard to its resolution of 22 May 2012 on a strategy for strengthening the rights of vulnerable consumers (1),

—

having regard to its resolution of 25 October 2011 on mobility and inclusion of people with disabilities and the European Disability Strategy 2010-2020 (2),

—

having regard to its resolution of 11 June 2013 on a new agenda for European Consumer Policy (3),

—

having regard to its resolution of 15 November 2011 on reform of the EU State aid rules on Services of General Economic Interest (4),

—

having regard to Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market (the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive),

—

having regard to Directive 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2011 on consumer rights, amending Council Directive 93/13/EEC and Directive 1999/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directive 85/577/EEC and Directive 97/7/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council,

—

having regard to Council Directive 2004/113/EC of 13 December 2004 implementing the principle of equal treatment between men and women in the access to and supply of goods and services (5),

—

having regard to the Commission proposal of 13 September 2013 for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down measures concerning the European single market for electronic communications and to achieve a Connected Continent, and amending Directives 2002/20/EC, 2002/21/EC and 2002/22/EC and Regulations (EC) No 1211/2009 and (EU) No 531/2012 (COM(2013)0627),

—

having regard to the Commission communication of 15 November 2012 to the European Parliament, the Council, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions entitled ‘Making the internal energy market work’ (COM(2012)0663),

—

having regard to Directive 2008/6/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 February 2008 amending Directive 97/67/EC with regard to the full accomplishment of the internal market of Community postal services,

—

having regard to Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market (Directive on Electronic Commerce),

—

having regard to Directive 2009/72/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 July 2009 concerning common rules for the internal market in electricity and repealing Directive 2003/54/EC,

—

having regard to the Commission communication entitled ‘Towards a European Charter on the Rights of Energy Consumers’ (COM(2007)0386),

—

having regard to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, as incorporated into the Treaties by Article 6 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU), and in particular Article 8 (protection of personal data), Article 11 (freedom of expression and information), Article 21 (non-discrimination), Article 23 (equality between men and women), Article 25 (the rights of the elderly), Article 26 (integration of persons with disabilities), Article 34 (social security and social assistance), Article 36 (access to services of general economic interest), Article 37 (environmental protection) and Article 38 (consumer protection),

—

having regard to Article 12 TEU,

—

having regard to Article 14 TEU and Protocol No 26 to the TEU,

—

having regard to Rule 48 of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection (A7-0163/2014),

A.

whereas enhanced consumer information regarding utility services is particularly important, and whereas there is a need to ensure that consumers have access to such services while Member States have the necessary flexibility to take vulnerable consumers into account;

B.

whereas sectorial legislation is in place and has already enhanced consumer protection, but whereas the Member States are reminded that, to that end, correct implementation and enforcement is still needed;

C.

whereas, in the case of utility services, national powers and the right of self-administration at local government level must be respected, and whereas the sectoral provisions form an adequate legal framework for utility services;

1.

Notes that some aspects of basic consumer rights are covered by Directive 2011/83/EU and that common characteristics of utility services are outlined in the relevant sectorial legislation;

2.

Reminds the Member States that it was necessary to transpose the Directive on consumer rights by mid-December 2013 and that it will be applicable to all contracts concluded after 13 June 2014;

3.

Points out that consumer protection is effective only if consumers’ rights can be enforced; calls, therefore, on the Member States to implement fully the provisions of the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive (2005/29/EC), the Directive on Misleading and Comparative Advertising (2006/114/EC) and the Consumer Rights Directive (2011/83/EU); highlights, in this context, the importance of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) systems as efficient, cost-saving mechanisms for solving conflicts between both consumers and providers of utilities services; calls, therefore, on the Member States to implement the recently agreed Directive on ADR (2013/11/EU) and Regulation (EU) No 524/2013 on online dispute resolution (ODR);

4.

Highlights that raising consumers’ awareness concerning their rights plays a key role in obtaining a high level of consumer protection, but underlines also the fundamental role of customer service on behalf of utility service providers; stresses that individuals responsible for contacts with clientele should be trained and aware of the rights of consumers; encourages, therefore, utility service providers to train their employees accordingly and ensure that all customers have easy access to personalised assistance at all times;

5.

Stresses the need for consumers to have access to affordable and high-quality utility services throughout the EU, given that such services are essential for ensuring social and territorial cohesion while contributing to European economic competitiveness;

6.

Supports the existence of strong and independent consumer organisations in facilitating comprehensive consumer protection, yet stresses the importance of striking a proper balance between the needs of consumers and the needs of providers;

7.

Emphasises that access to utility services should be facilitated for all consumers, irrespective of their financial circumstances; suggests that, in specific circumstances, Member States may deem that ‘vulnerable consumers’ may require appropriate arrangements;

8.

Calls on the Commission and the Member States to pay more attention to, and invest more in, consumer information and education campaigns in the context of utility services that target the right messages at the right consumer segment;

9.

Believes that an open, transparent and integrated internal energy market is needed to help achieve competitive energy prices, security of supply, sustainability and efficient large-scale deployment of renewable energy, and calls on the Member States properly to transpose, apply and better monitor the third internal energy market package; points out the need for enhanced consumer information, in particular with a view to improving the services offered, and to allowing for the comparability and transparency of tariffs, hence achieving non-discriminatory pricing;

10.

Stresses the crucial importance of timely, correct and full implementation of existing legislation, including the regulatory work called for by the third internal energy market package, in order to achieve an integrated and competitive European internal energy market by 2014;

11.

Welcomes the work of the Vulnerable Consumers working group in the framework of the Citizens Energy Forum, and welcomes the Commission communication of 22 January 2014 on energy prices and costs in Europe (COM(2014)0021) and the annexed report, which analyse the impact and relationship of energy prices and costs in the Member States; recalls that it is also the task of the Member States to address the various factors and situations linked to energy and vulnerable consumers;

12.

Notes that terminating energy contracts often involves restrictive conditions and complex procedures, which makes switching provider difficult; calls for procedures for switching providers to be sped up and simplified; points out that the existing evaluation criteria of the internal energy market package are completed in the respective Electricity and Gas Directives of the third internal energy market package; stresses the importance of regular Commission reports on the enforcement of the Internal Energy Market;

13.

Emphasises the need for the Commission to present its conclusion on e-billing as it pertains to consumer online energy account management;

14.

Regrets that current energy prices do not necessarily factor in external costs, namely the environmental damage associated with a given energy source or production method, which may nevertheless be passed on to society as a whole in the long run; calls for measures to encourage greater price transparency for consumers in this regard;

15.

Takes the view that undertakings should publish information about prices, price changes and changes to contracts in a readily understandable form; reminds the Member States of the fact that the third internal energy market package already obliges them to ensure this; calls on the Member States and the businesses concerned to take appropriate measures to ensure that consumers have access to clear, understandable and comparable information about tariffs, conditions and means of redress;

16.

Recalls that the third internal energy market package suggests that the Member States undertake cost-benefit-analyses before starting the roll-out of smart metering; highlights that smart grids allow consumers to observe and adapt their energy consumption, but points out that some of the cost-benefit analyses that have been conducted by Member States give no indication of substantial cost savings for consumers; highlights that both customers and data protection provisions must be respected, and stresses that the use of smart meters must remain the choice of the consumer;

17.

Stresses that the consumer aspect of the digital single market and the electronic communications sector is of utmost importance, and notes the significant enhancements to consumer protection that have been introduced following the implementation of the 2009 Telecoms Package (Directives 2009/136/EC and 2009/140/EC); highlights the important updates and improvements for consumer protection and empowerment currently being proposed by the Parliament; underlines the significance of access for all consumers to high-quality electronic communications services, and the importance of deploying new infrastructures in order to narrow the digital divide;

18.

Reiterates its proposals to make it easier for customers to switch electronic communication service providers without additional fees other than the actual switching cost, without loss of data and with a minimum of formalities, and to encourage them to do so; supports as well proposals to promote independent information on pricing, billing and service quality, including data speeds;

19.

Notes that consumers benefit from a more quality-focused service in the postal sector and from savings passed on to them through cost reductions; highlights that more delivery options and better transparency, information and prices are preconditions for increasing consumers’ confidence in the delivery market; notes that Directive 97/67/EC, as amended by Directives 2002/39/EC and 2008/6/EC, ensures that postal services provide a universal service; reminds the Commission to examine, in its implementation report, whether this guarantee is fulfilled by the Member States; asks the Commission to encourage postal services operators to improve interoperability and to accelerate the roll-out of streamlined processes aimed at reducing costs, increasing the availability and quality of delivery services;

20.

Emphasises the importance of a comprehensive parcel delivery service throughout the Union; stresses that it is crucial that parcel services provided by postal services and private operators are fast and reliable, not least in order to meet the needs of consumers ordering online; reiterates the suggestions made in its resolution of 4 February 2014 on parcel delivery (6) on the need to assist service improvements and reduce costs;

21.

Welcomes all the efforts already made by delivery market operators to meet the needs of online consumers and retailers in a better way, such as the introduction of flexible delivery and return options; stresses, at the same time, that further incentives to improve interoperability and the quality of services are welcome;

22.

Notes that in recent years the rights of consumers using transport services have been strengthened through sectoral measures;

23.

Emphasises that consumers with access to efficient local public transport should be targeted, regardless of whether they reside in areas where such service would be less profitable; acknowledges the responsibility of the Member States in this respect, and calls on them to take appropriate action;

24.

Points out that, as a result of an ageing population, efficient public transport services will gain in importance in the future, and that they are also essential if the Europa 2020 climate objectives are to be achieved; calls for the development of common tools to ensure optimised multimodality in efficient, high-quality public transport services with a view to ensuring both the free movement of people and the competitiveness of such services;

25.

Calls for a holistic approach with regard to elderly people and people with limited mobility; believes that the whole public transport chain must be taken into consideration, including access to public transport nodes; wishes to address the need for a coherent focal point system in order to help people with limited mobility;

26.

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

22.12.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 443/7

—

having regard to the proposal for a Council decision (COM(2013)0740),

—

having regard to Rule 81(3) of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the interim report of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs (A7-0136/2014),

1.

Requests the Council to take into account the following modifications:

The proposal for a Council decision should be modified as follows:

Modification 1

Proposal for a Council decision

Recital 8

Modification 2

Proposal for a Council decision

Recital 9 a (new)

Modification 3

Proposal for a Council decision

Article 1

Modification 4

Proposal for a Council decision

Article 2 — paragraph 1

Modification 5

Proposal for a Council decision

Article 2 — paragraph 3 — subparagraph 1

Modification 6

Proposal for a Council decision

Article 2 — paragraph 3 — subparagraph 2

Modification 7

Proposal for a Council decision

Article 3 — paragraph 1

Modification 8

Proposal for a Council decision

Article 3 — paragraph 2

Modification 9

Proposal for a Council decision

Article 4 — paragraph 1

Modification 10

Proposal for a Council decision

Article 5

2.

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

22.12.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 443/11

—

having regard to the proposal for a Council regulation laying down the multiannual financial framework (MFF) for the years 2014-2020 (COM(2011)0398), amended on 6 July 2012 (COM(2012)0388), and to the Draft Interinstitutional Agreement (IIA) between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on cooperation in budgetary matters and on sound financial management (COM(2011)0403),

—

having regard to its consent of 19 November 2013 to the MFF Regulation (1), in accordance with Article 312 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and to its approval, on the same day, of the conclusion of the IIA (2),

—

having regard to the MFF and IIA, as finally adopted on 2 December 2013 and published in the Official journal on 20 December 2013,

—

having regard to its resolution of 8 June 2011 on ‘Investing in the future: a new Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) for a competitive, sustainable and inclusive Europe’ (3),

—

having regard to its resolution of 23 October 2012 in the interests of achieving a positive outcome of the Multiannual Financial Framework 2014-2020 approval procedure (4),

—

having regard to its resolution of 13 March 2013 on the European Council conclusions of 7-8 February 2013 concerning the Multiannual Financial Framework (5),

—

having regard to its resolution of 3 July 2013 on the political agreement on the Multiannual Financial Framework 2014-2020 (6),

—

having regard to its resolution of 12 December 2013 on relations between the European Parliament and the institutions representing the national governments (7),

—

having regard to Rule 48 of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgets and the opinions of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs, the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, the Committee on Regional Development and the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (A7-0254/2014),

A.

whereas the agreement on the MFF 2014-2020 was the outcome of long and strenuous negotiations that lasted two and a half years; whereas the final political agreement could only be reached at the highest political level between the three Presidents (Parliament, the Council Presidency and the Commission) according to Article 324 of the TFEU;

B.

whereas the overall level of the next MFF (EUR 960 billion in commitments, EUR 908 billion in payments at 2011 prices), as decided by the European Council and eventually endorsed by Parliament, represents a cut of 3,5 % in commitments and 3,7 % in payments compared to the 2007-2013 financial framework, despite the growing EU competences following the Lisbon Treaty and the enlargement of the Union to 28 Member States; whereas this level falls short of EU political goals and commitments, in particular in relation to the Europe 2020 strategy;

C.

whereas the EU annual budget will continue to represent approximately 1 % of EU GNI in the coming years, a level reached already in the early 1990s, and well below the own resources ceiling of 1,29 % of EU GNI for commitments and 1,23 % of EU GNI for payments, as decided initially in 1992 and reconfirmed in 2010;

D.

whereas, faced politically with the impossibility of changing the overall MFF figures decided by the European Council, Parliament focused on improving the implementation of the MFF by successfully negotiating the inclusion of new provisions that will help to make the new financial framework and the new EU annual budget more operational, consistent, transparent and responsive to the needs of EU citizens and to allow the MFF ceilings to be used to the fullest possible extent; whereas these provisions concern, in particular, the new arrangements relating to the MFF revision, flexibility, the unity and transparency of the EU budget, along with a further engagement on reforming the financing of the EU budget (Joint Declaration on own resources);

E.

whereas, in adherence to the guiding principle that ‘nothing is agreed until everything is agreed’, Parliament gave its consent to the new MFF Regulation and approved the new Interinstitutional Agreement on 19 November 2013, following the Council’s fulfilment of the conditions set out in Parliament’s resolution of 3 July 2013, including the adoption of an additional EUR 11,2 billion in payments for 2013;

F.

whereas the Council failed to make any progress on a much needed reform of the current system for financing the EU budget, despite the ambitious proposals put forward by the Commission aimed not only at overcoming the stalemate caused by the lack of a genuine own resources system but also at making the system of financing the EU budget simpler, fairer and transparent to EU citizens;

G.

whereas, following the agreement on the MFF 2014-2020, the MFF remains non-coterminous with the mandates of the Parliament and Commission whose terms begin in 2014;

H.

whereas the possibilities made available in the Treaty of Lisbon to modify the decision-making procedures for the MFF and own resources decisions were not exploited;

1.

Strongly regrets the fact that both the procedure leading up to the agreement on the MFF 2014-2020 and the political debate surrounding these negotiations demonstrated a clear lack of shared vision as regards the EU budget and political priorities, showed that there are very divergent approaches among the EU institutions, and fell short of Parliament’s increased role and prerogatives under the Treaty of Lisbon; considers it of the utmost importance, therefore, that this report draw the necessary political and institutional lessons, which can serve as a basis for the preparation of future negotiations, notably in relation to the post-electoral revision of the MFF, due to be launched by the Commission before the end of 2016 at the latest;

2.

Acknowledges that the fiscal consolidation that Member States are currently facing made a more ambitious agreement on the MFF 2014-2020 infeasible; deeply regrets, however, the fact that the role of the EU budget as an important and common policy instrument for overcoming the current economic and social crisis was not properly recognised; points out that the EU budget is primarily an investment budget that offers a unique framework for coordinating and enhancing national efforts made to regain growth, stimulate competitiveness and generate employment in the whole EU;

3.

Is deeply concerned at the fact that budgetary debates in the Council have been for many years poisoned by the logic of ‘fair returns’ instead of being driven by the logic of the European added-value; considers that, while this debate already existed before the introduction of a GNI-based resource, the situation has seriously intensified due to the current system of EU financing, whereby some 74 % of revenues stem from national contributions based on GNI instead of genuine own resources, as foreseen in the Treaty of Rome and all successive EU Treaties; considers that such a system places disproportionate emphasis on net balances between the Member States and has led to the progressive introduction of complex and opaque rebates and other correction mechanisms for the financing of the EU budget;

4.

Believes that this logic also prevailed in the way the MFF agreement was struck by the European Council on 8 February 2013; considers it regrettable that this was reflected in the fact that the national allocations, especially from the two biggest areas of expenditure in the EU budget, agriculture and cohesion policy, were determined at that moment; criticises, in particular, the increased number of special allocations and ‘gifts’ granted in the course of negotiations between Heads of State and Government, which are not based on objective and verifiable criteria, but rather reflect the bargaining power of Member States, trying to secure their national interests and maximise their net returns; denounces the lack of transparency in striking this agreement and the reluctance of the Council and the Commission to provide Parliament with all relevant documents; highlights that the European added value should prevail over national interests;

5.

Strongly rejects this purely accounting vision of the EU budget, which disregards the European added value, contradicts the principle of EU solidarity and underestimates the current and potential role of the EU budget in strengthening economic governance; stresses that the EU budget is predominantly an investment budget with a strong leverage effect that makes possible a number of projects that would otherwise be difficult or impossible to implement, a catalyst for growth, competitiveness and jobs across the Union and a powerful agent for reform; strongly regrets, therefore, that some Member States seem to regard national contributions to the EU budget purely as a cost to be minimised;

6.

Regrets that the European Council took a top-down approach to deciding the overall size of the MFF 2014-2020, which in turn demonstrates a worrying discrepancy between EU political commitments which the European Council has been making and its reluctance to adequately finance them; believes, on the contrary, that this decision should be based on a bottom-up process, resulting from a thorough assessment of EU financial needs and political objectives as set out in EU multiannual programmes and policies defined by the legislative authority;

7.

Is, therefore, convinced that any decision on the financial framework should be preceded by — and based on — a genuine political debate on the role, function and added value of the EU budget and on its compatibility with the political strategy adopted by the Union and operational priorities and objectives assigned to the Union; considers that, in order to bridge the gap between divergent visions on what the EU budget stands for and what it can achieve, this debate should be organised in due time and involve the three EU institutions and all national parliaments, but also engage the highest political level in the Member States;

8.

Is convinced, moreover, that tangible progress can only be achieved following an in-depth reform of the financing of the EU budget that should respect the letter and the spirit of the Treaty and return to a system of genuine, clear, simple and fair own resources; stresses that the introduction of one or several new own resources will reduce the share of GNI-based contributions to the EU budget to a minimum and, accordingly, reduce the burden on national treasuries; reiterates its strong commitment to any process leading to the reform of the system of own resources, which is currently characterised by its complexity, opacity and inefficiency; regrets that the final Council agreement on own resources is even more complex than the previous one since it has introduced new rebates and exceptions;

9.

Recalls that Parliament was the first EU institution to present its vision on the MFF 2014-2020 and the need to reform the financing of the EU budget, with the report of its specialised SURE Committee, in June 2011; believes that this early preparation helped Parliament to establish a large consensus on political priorities and remain united throughout the subsequent negotiating process; considers further that this report provided guidance for the Commission in drafting its own proposals on the MFF and own resources and appreciates the regular political dialogue that was established between the two institutions at all stages of the preparation of this report; considers that this practice should be further developed into a more structured dialogue between the two institutions ahead of the presentation of any MFF proposals;

10.

Recalls that, pursuant to Article 312 TFEU, the Council unanimously adopts the MFF Regulation after obtaining the consent of Parliament, while the three EU institutions ‘shall take any measure necessary to facilitate its adoption’; notes, therefore, that the Treaty does not set out any concrete procedure for the involvement of Parliament in the MFF negotiations and that these modalities were subsequently determined in practice through a number of ad hoc arrangements agreed at political level at Parliament’s initiative;

11.

Considers it regrettable that, prior to the European Council agreement on the MFF of 8 February 2013, no meaningful negotiations were held between Parliament and the Council; considers that the numerous meetings held between its negotiating team and the successive Council presidencies on the margins of the relevant General Affairs Council meetings, and its participation in informal Council meetings dealing with the MFF, facilitated only some information-sharing between the Council and Parliament; sees, therefore, the need for Parliament to build further on the experience acquired and to use all means available to strengthen its influence on the spirit, calendar and content of the negotiations with the Council, by making the Council better acknowledge Parliament’s arguments and positions;

12.

Deplores the fact that, despite Parliament’s strong objections, all successive ‘negotiating boxes’ presented by different Council presidencies and, ultimately, the European Council MFF agreement of 8 February 2013 contained a significant number of legislative elements that should have been decided under the ordinary legislative procedure; stresses that the legally required unanimity in the Council on the MFF Regulation could only be achieved by pre-empting certain major policy changes in EU sectoral policies, thereby hindering, in clear contradiction with the Treaties, Parliament’s prerogatives under co-decision, and in particular its right to amend on an equal footing with the Council;

13.

Notes that genuine negotiations on the MFF Regulation and the IIA were launched only in May 2013, with Council negotiators not having a formal negotiating mandate but instead considering the MFF agreement by the European Council as the only point of reference, with no margin for any discussion; stresses that this attitude not only led to an unnecessary loss of time but also to the unacceptable attempt by Council to exclude certain topics from the negotiations, forcing Parliament to struggle, including at the highest political level, in order to engage in negotiations on every article of the MFF Regulation / IIA;

14.

Recalls that, according to the Treaty, the European Council does not exercise legislative functions; insists, therefore, that the conclusions of the European Council are to be seen as negotiating instructions for the Council and that they in no case constitute red lines which cannot be negotiated with Parliament; calls for a standard formula recalling the provisions of Article 15(1) TFEU to be included in the conclusions of the European Council;

15.

Deeply regrets the fact that the same problem marked the negotiations on EU multiannual programmes, notably in agriculture and cohesion policy; notes that the Council refused in several instances even to refer to the ‘MFF-related aspects’ of those legal bases; stresses the considerable effort and time that was needed by Parliament to ensure that all points of the legal bases decided by co-decision between the Council and Parliament remained on the negotiating table; notes with satisfaction that Parliament’s negotiators were eventually successful in challenging some parts of the European Council agreement;

16.

Notes that the MFF figures (overall level and distribution per heading), as decided by the European Council, were not challenged in the end by Parliament, which acknowledged the particularly difficult economic and financial context at the time of this decision; stresses, however, that this should by no means be perceived as a precedent and reiterates its position that the MFF figures, and every other part of the European Council’s relevant political agreement, are subject to negotiations with Parliament;

17.

Stresses the need to significantly improve the modalities of any future MFF negotiations, in order to avoid deadlocks and save valuable time and resources in the course of negotiations; considers that these modalities should be formalised in an agreement at the highest political level, which should take account of the shortcomings of the recent negotiations and fully safeguard Parliament’s role and prerogatives, as set out in the EU Treaty; considers that this procedure should eventually be enshrined in the IIA itself, as is the case for the budgetary procedure;

18.

Points to the tremendous amount of information exchange and coordination required inside Parliament to ensure consistency in the parallel negotiations of the MFF and the legislative bases of over 60 multiannual programmes; underlines that it is of high importance to distinguish the issues that are to be adopted by codecision and keep them in the remit of the respective committees to the maximum extent possible; suggests that in the next MFF negotiations the European Parliament should approach the legislative proposals in parallel and finally adopt them as a package, applying the principle that nothing is agreed until everything is agreed to the maximum extent possible;

19.

Is convinced that the unanimity rule in the Council means that the agreement represents the lowest common denominator, based on the need to avoid the veto of a single Member State; stresses that a shift towards qualified majority voting for the MFF Regulation would be in line not only with the ordinary legislative procedure, used for the adoption of virtually all EU multiannual programmes, but also with the annual procedure for adopting the EU budget;

20.

Notes that the general passerelle clause (Article 48(7) TEU) could be deployed by the European Council to make the shift towards qualified majority voting and the ordinary legislative procedure for the own resources and MFF decisions; recalls, moreover, that Article 312(2) TFEU in any case allows for the adoption of qualified majority voting for the MFF; urges the European Council to use both these passerelles for their intended purpose in order to streamline decision-making in the Council and to limit the extent to which the politics of national ‘juste retour’ prevail over the articulation of the common interest of the Union as a whole;

21.

Declares its intention to ensure that all new provisions that were successfully incorporated into the MFF Regulation and IIA are utilised in full in the annual budgetary procedure; expects that the Council will not attempt to impose restricted interpretations of these provisions, especially on the nature and scope of all special instruments, but that it will instead act responsibly and approve the necessary appropriations to meet both its previous commitments and unforeseen expenditure even if, as a result, the annual MFF ceilings need to be exceeded; recalls, in that context, that the MFF 2014-2020 ceilings have been set far below the own resources ceilings;

22.

Places particular emphasis on the new rules on flexibility that should allow maximum use of the respective MFF ceilings for commitments and payments; stresses that the practice of previous financial frameworks whereby the annual EU budget remained far below the MFF ceilings, particularly in payment appropriations, can no longer be sustained;

23.

Stresses, in this context, that the accumulated RALs have reached a critical level that might eventually lead the EU budget into structural deficit against the provisions of the Treaty (Articles 310 and 323 TFEU); is deeply concerned that the amount of unpaid bills at the end of the year has been constantly growing since 2011 (EUR 23,4 billion at the end of 2013 from cohesion policy alone), which will put significant pressure on the payment ceilings of the MFF 2014-2020; stresses the need to set the annual payments’ ceilings of the MFF accurately by taking due account of, inter alia, the dynamics of cohesion policy, including the timing of programming, implementation, final closure of the programmes and decommitments;

24.

Emphasises that the purpose of the global margin for commitments is to support investments for growth and employment in Europe, and in particular youth employment; recalls that this instrument was an initiative by the European Parliament;

25.

Recalls that the next Commission, which will come into office after the 2014 European elections, is due to launch a compulsory review and revision of the MFF 2014-2020 by the end of 2016; underlines the fact that this post-electoral MFF review/revision clause was one of Parliament’s key demands in the MFF negotiations, based on the need to allow the next Commission and Parliament to reassess the EU’s political priorities, hence endowing the MFF with renewed democratic legitimacy; emphasises that, following the economic crisis, investment levels in Europe dropped significantly between 2008 and 2012 and recalls that according to some estimates (8), this will cost the continent EUR 540 billion in lost returns by 2020;

26.

Stresses the need, in view of the post-electoral MFF review/revision, for the next Parliament to reflect in good time on political priorities, i.e. to identify areas for which more investments will be deemed necessary in the second half of the MFF 2014-2020; invites, for this purpose, the next Commission and the next Parliament to carefully evaluate the achievements of the targets of the Europe 2020 strategy, particularly in terms of employment and combatting the economic crisis, as well as the performance of key EU programmes, like Horizon 2020, in order to focus on areas of proven added value of EU spending and for which additional financial resources will be required;

27.

Calls for the MFF mid-term review to prepare for an eventual reduction in the period for which the next MFF is agreed, so as to ensure its subsequent renegotiation during the mandate of each Parliament and Commission, thus ensuring full democratic legitimacy for regular decisions on the financial perspectives of the Union, while taking steps to meet the need for stability of programming cycles and for investment predictability; strongly believes that a five-year MFF cycle would enhance democratic legitimacy, improve the prioritisation of budgetary means and could be considered a precondition for more political debate;

28.

Stresses that the Commission proposals for the MFF revision should take full account of the latest macroeconomic projections and include a thorough assessment of the operation of all special instruments, in particular the global margins in commitments and payments; recalls that this process will not have a downward impact on any pre-allocated national envelopes, including the ESF share of these national envelopes; expects, in this context, the Commission to provide Parliament and Council with identical and consistent data on figures and estimates in order to avoid misunderstandings in the negotiations with regard to the basis of discussion;

29.

Stresses the need to stimulate a broad and open discussion on the results achieved with the EU’s funding programmes, and in particular an assessment of the extent to which these programmes contribute to the achievement of the Europe 2020 objectives;

30.

Emphasises that innovative financial instruments such as the European project bonds can have a very important role to play in stimulating much needed investments if designed correctly; urges the Commission in this regard to make optimal use of the upcoming evaluation also in the context of the review/revision of the MFF 2014-2020;

31.

Welcomes the Joint Declaration by the three institutions agreed in the context of the MFF negotiations according to which the annual budgetary procedures will integrate, as appropriate, gender-responsive elements, taking into account the ways in which the overall financial framework of the Union contributes to increased gender equality (and ensures gender mainstreaming); stresses that these principles should be integrated into the Commission’s proposals on the MFF revision;

32.

Reiterates its intention to make the compulsory MFF revision a key demand in the investiture of the next Commission; calls, therefore, on the next European Parliament to make the election of the proposed candidate for President of the Commission conditional upon a strong and non-ambiguous commitment to implementing the post-electoral review/revision clause and engaging in a genuine and deep political dialogue on its content;

33.

Notes that the new Rules 70 and 70a (interinstitutional negotiations in legislative procedures) of Parliament’s Rules of Procedure will apply for the next round of negotiations; recommends that, early in Parliament’s next mandate, the committee responsible for the Rules of Procedure be asked to look at rationalising those rules with Rule 75 (MFF), Rule 75c (financial trialogue) and Rule 81(3) (consent procedure) with a view to drafting a single coherent Rule specific to the special legislative procedures laid down in Articles 311 and 312 TFEU concerning the determination of the mandate, the conduct of the trialogues (including the role of the President), and scrutiny by the plenary;

34.

Considers that, at the time of the next revision of the Treaties, the Convention should make proposals for a system of genuine codecision between the Council and Parliament on the adoption of the MFF and own resources decisions;

35.

Strongly believes that the High Level Group on Own Resources represents a unique opportunity to overcome the deadlock that has arisen over the reform of the current own-resources system; expects that it will contribute significantly to understanding the shortcomings of the current system and the benefits that can derive from an in-depth, comprehensive reform and the introduction of new and genuine own resources which can significantly reduce the share of GNI contributions to the EU budget;

36.

Recalls that the High Level Group has a mandate to examine all aspects of the reform of the own resources system; is firmly committed to working intensively, through its three representatives, at all stages of this process and to bringing it to a successful conclusion; counts on the Council’s equal ‘ownership’ and commitment to this process; emphasises the need to raise awareness also among national parliaments of the issues at stake; stresses that the findings and conclusions of this High Level Group should be ready in good time to be considered during the 2016 MFF review/revision, in order to pave the way for possible reforms to become operational by the next multiannual financial framework;

37.

Expresses its firm conviction that any new fiscal capacity or budget developed specifically for eurozone Member States whose fiscal functions are not covered by the MFF must be developed within the Union framework and must be subject to proper democratic scrutiny and accountability through the existing institutions;

38.

Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the European Council, the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

22.12.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 443/18

—

having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

—

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

—

having regard to the Small Business Act (COM(2008)0394),

—

having regard to the work of the Commission’s High Level Group of Independent Stakeholders on Administrative Burdens,

—

having regard to the Commission report ‘Minimising regulatory burden for SMEs — Adapting EU regulation to the needs of micro-enterprises’ (COM(2011)0803),

—

having regard to the Commission communication on EU regulatory fitness (COM(2013)0685),

—

having regard to the Commission’s Entrepreneurship 2020 action plan,

—

having regard to the Commission communication ‘An action plan to improve access to finance for SMEs’ (COM(2011)0870),

—

having regard to its resolution of 5 February 2013 on improving access to finance for SMEs (1),

—

having regard to the Late Payments Directive (Directive 2000/35/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council),

—

having regard to the survey conducted by the Council of European Employers of the Metal, Engineering and Technology-Based Industries (CEEMET) entitled ‘Flexible employment contracts responding to changing market circumstances and meeting employee needs’ (2),

—

having regard to the new programme for Employment and Social Innovation (EaSI) which will, among other things, extend the support given to microcredit providers under the current European Progress Microfinance Facility,

—

having regard to the Eurofound report of January 2013 entitled ‘Born global: The potential of job creation in new international businesses’,

—

having regard to the Eurofound report of 2013 entitled ‘Public policy and support for restructuring in SMEs’,

—

having regard to the Eurofound report of 2010 entitled ‘Job creation measures’,

—

having regard to Rule 48 of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs and the opinions of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy and the Committee on Regional Development (A7-0101/2014),

A.

whereas the time it takes to start a business in Europe differs between Member States and varies from 4 to 40 days, which can impact on job creation;

B.

whereas various factors including labour market rigidities have been identified in some Member States as having a negative impact on job creation, and the combination of job flexibility and security can provide a more favourable framework;

C.

whereas the single market and European human resources potential can play a key role in achieving the Europe 2020 employment targets;

D.

whereas SMEs are the backbone of the EU economy and have a huge potential for job creation, being responsible for 85 % of newly created jobs;

E.

whereas 20,7 million SMEs account for over 67 % of private-sector employment in the EU, with 30 % deriving from micro-enterprises;

F.

whereas the cost per employee of complying with regulatory obligations can be up to ten times higher for SMEs than for large businesses (COM(2011)0803);

G.

whereas due to the financial crisis and the credit crunch that arose in consequence SMEs are facing an extremely high cost of credit and the contraction of its availability; whereas, according to the Institute of International Finance, smaller businesses in the peripheral Member States are paying between 4 and 6 percentage points more for bank loans than their counterparts in central Europe, which is putting them at a significant disadvantage and thus hampering the region’s prospects for economic revival and net job creation;

H.

whereas corporate bond, equity and securitisation markets in Europe remain relatively underdeveloped compared to other economies, and non-bank financing remains largely inaccessible to SMEs, undermining their potential to grow and create jobs;

I.

whereas the effective provision of services is crucial for future growth, innovation and job creation;

J.

whereas while we have the best-educated generation of youth in Europe’s history, and Member States have invested huge amounts of money in education and training, our young people are largely cut off from the labour market and their skills remain unused as they compete for temporary and underpaid positions;

K.

whereas the European Social Fund has played an important role in assisting Member States to provide opportunities and training for unemployed people to re-enter the labour market;

L.

whereas the unemployment rate for young Europeans aged between 15 and 24 has reached the unsustainable level of 23 % and is above 50 % in those Member States most severely hit by the crisis; whereas this massive youth unemployment leads to a huge brain drain and significantly undermines our capacity for sustainable growth in the future;

M.

whereas the EU is threatened by the prospect of ‘jobless growth’, which will further undermine the social and economic fabric of our societies as well as the long-term prospects of the EU competing on an equal footing within a globalised knowledge-based economy;

1.

Is concerned at the cost, complexity and time involved in establishing a business in some parts of the European Union, all of which can impact negatively on future job creation; believes that if the EU is to improve its competitiveness and create more jobs, Member States must work to simplify and speed up this process, offer adequate assistance and support arrangements and make it less costly;

2.

Notes that young enterprises that quickly and intensively internationalise after start-up show promising contributions to the economy by creating innovation themselves, fostering innovation in other companies, engaging in international supply chains and creating sustainable and good quality jobs; stresses, however, that these companies are confronted with considerable challenges at the start-up phase which have to be met quickly, while at the same time they have low levels of capital, so that low-cost, simple and quick start-up procedures would be beneficial for them;

3.

Notes that global trends have created competitive pressures as well as opportunities for businesses; stresses the need for Member States to create the right regulatory and fiscal framework to foster the creation of jobs whilst ensuring a safe working environment;

4.

Believes that in order to create a more hospitable environment for job creation, Member States must, with support from the Union where appropriate, put in place the reforms needed to address the following factors: skills, levels of qualification, entrepreneurship, the impact of demographic change, market access, finance, the labour market, rights at work, administrative costs and better regulation;

5.

Emphasises the importance of research and innovation for enhancing the competitiveness, productivity, sustainability and job-creation potential of European SMEs, and notes the significant focus that Horizon 2020 and the EIT place on creating and supporting high-growth, innovative SMEs;

6.

Highlights the job potential of the green economy, which, according to Commission estimates, could create 5 million jobs by 2020 in the energy efficiency and renewable energy sectors alone, provided that ambitious climate and energy policies are put in place; calls on the Member States to ensure sufficient levels of investment in these sectors, anticipate workers’ future skills, and guarantee the quality of ‘green jobs’;

7.

Notes the important role of EU free trade agreements in creating and maintaining investment and jobs in EU Member States;

8.

Takes the view that the steady development and deepening of the EU internal market is creating many substantial new opportunities for businesses of all sizes, clearly necessitating flexible framework provisions to promote entrepreneurship and self-employment, while the smooth functioning thereof requires a set of minimum regulatory standards, particularly in respect of public health and safety, health and safety in the workplace, food safety and environmental protection;

9.

Believes the EU is faced with serious skills shortages and mismatches in certain regions and sectors, which are hindering economic growth and the achievement of the Europe 2020 strategy; notes that there are over 1,85 million unfilled vacancies in the EU; is concerned that the latest results of the Survey of Adult Skills (PIAAC), conducted by the OECD and supported by the Commission’s DG Education and Culture, show that 20 % of the EU working-age population has low literacy and low numeracy skills and 25 % of adults lack the skills to make effective use of ICTs;

10.

Notes the trend towards more skill-intensive jobs, with almost 90 % of jobs expected to be created or become vacant by 2020 requiring medium or high qualifications;

11.

Considers that active policies to promote training courses and further training of workers, continuing education, school-business partnerships and apprenticeships could permit better matching of skills to those sought by businesses;

12.

Recognises, in view of the skills shortage, the benefits that lifelong learning and free movement of workers in the EU can offer in addressing labour market demand;

13.

Stresses that, while excellence, innovation and human resources are what constitute the comparative advantages of the Union, dwindling investment in research, education and training, coupled with the particularly high unemployment rates in individual Member States and in the euro area, are driving many Europeans to seek employment on other labour markets; stresses that the brain drain is a major obstacle to growth, greater Union competitiveness and measures to promote entrepreneurship;

14.

Believes that some Member States' education and training systems should be better adapted to and should converge with future businesses’ skills needs; notes with concern that in 2015 the estimated shortage of qualified ICT personnel in the EU will rise to between 384 000 and 700 000 and that the supply of STEM skills (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) will not match the increasing demands of businesses in the coming years, while the declining rate of women participating in those subjects has not been properly addressed; advocates that Member States be encouraged to establish dual education and training systems focusing on STEM subjects and to promote the retraining and further training of workers, particularly those with low or obsolete skills;

15.

Underscores the importance of dual education and training systems, focusing particularly on STEM subjects and combining practice-based education in vocational schools with learning in the workplace, since this has proved the most effective means of smoothing the transition from school to labour market;

16.

Welcomes the Commission’s communication ‘Opening up Education’, which aims to ensure that young people are equipped with digital skills;

17.

Believes it is indispensable to introduce the teaching of entrepreneurship skills and programmes for learning how the market, the economy and the financial system operate, function and interact into basic education systems; believes that a well-prepared business plan is the first step towards better access to finance and viability; calls on the Commission and the Member States to include financial education and business start-up advice in their education programmes and to regard investment in entrepreneurial learning as a resource; supports, in this connection, the ‘Erasmus for Young Entrepreneurs’ programme, which is designed to promote an entrepreneurial culture and develop the single market and competitiveness;

18.

Underlines the need to improve the pace of the school-to-work transition, thus enabling the young to enter the labour market as soon as possible and avoiding the risk of the NEET (‘not in employment, education or training’) phenomenon;

19.

Notes that the European Structural and Investment (ESI) Funds provide support for authorities and stakeholders at the local, regional and national levels to foster, inter alia, work-based learning, research, development and innovation and to improve the competitiveness of micro-enterprises (especially one-person businesses) and SMEs, through cooperation with science and research facilities, thereby helping tackle the current economic and social challenges, in particular the high unemployment rate;

20.

Stresses that efforts to support growth, innovation and job creation in a sustainable economy should guarantee health and safety standards and ensure a balance between economic, social and environmental requirements, while, inter alia, supporting smart specialisation, respecting the ecosystem and leading to adequately paid, quality jobs in all regions of the EU; underlines, in this connection, the important role to be played by businesses and the education sector through cross-border projects, cooperation between universities and other high-quality educational institutions and the creation of innovative ‘clusters’; calls for local and regional funding programmes for apprenticeship training to be facilitated;

21.

Considers that completion of the digital single market will help support and develop SMEs; considers it necessary to ensure that the necessary qualified ICT staff are available and that the European public possesses the digital skills necessary to make use of ICTs;

22.

Stresses that, in order to address the skills shortage Europe is currently facing, urgent action is needed to speed up women’s access to scientific and technological training and occupations, particularly in the new information and communications technology sector;

23.

Calls for initiatives that will foster partnerships between businesses, research centres and universities and provide the necessary skills to enable Europeans to access ICT-related, energy-related and high-tech manufacturing jobs;

24.

Is concerned that the number of EU citizens who want to be self-employed has dropped from 45 % to 37 % in the last three years, almost one half being afraid of going bankrupt and more than 50 % saying it is difficult to obtain sufficient information on how to start a business; considers that SME growth is linked to entrepreneurship; stresses that start-ups and self-employment create employment opportunities and help build strong industrial and services sectors, and advocates, therefore, that Member States be encouraged to promote entrepreneurial mindsets and skills at different education levels and to put in place business start-up advice in universities and vocational training colleges; notes with concern that women represent only 30 % of all entrepreneurs in Europe; stresses the need to promote female entrepreneurship by facilitating access to technical, scientific and business support networks and the development of coaching/mentoring programmes for women entrepreneurs;

25.

Notes that the ‘risk’ factor regarding self-employment and the adverse effect of the recent economic crisis on borrowing conditions is a deterrent to engaging in such entrepreneurial activities; recommends, accordingly, that consideration be given to adoption of measures by Member States to balance the welfare safety net for the self-employed without detracting from the flexibility of this particular type of activity;

26.

Notes with concern that the financial crisis and the subsequent recession have hit many European SMEs hard and that a significant number have ended up in liquidation, rather than with the company getting a fresh start; highlights the importance of a favourable regulatory framework to favour healthy restructuring and therefore job retention; welcomes the Commission’s Entrepreneurship Action Plan supporting Member States’ efforts to make it easier for sound businesses to survive and for honest entrepreneurs to get a second chance, since this will have a positive impact on job creation; urges the Commission to come forward with an overview of actions taken in the different Member States to enhance the climate for entrepreneurship; underlines the responsibility of the Member States to fully use the support offered by the Commission for improving the climate for entrepreneurs; welcomes the Commission’s efforts to inform citizens and businesses about funding opportunities through publications such as ‘Overview of the financial rules’ and ‘Funding opportunities 2007-2013’;

27.

Welcomes the Programme for the Competitiveness of Enterprises and SMEs (COSME) and the SME instrument provided for under Horizon 2020; laments the fact, however, that the budget for COSME and for SMEs in Horizon 2020 under the multiannual financial framework is limited;

28.

Welcomes, in particular, the specific actions provided for under COSME which are designed to improve framework conditions for enterprises, particularly SMEs, to facilitate access to finance and markets, and to promote entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial culture; stresses that in order to promote the development of entrepreneurship in Europe a predictable and clear regulatory environment is essential; expects measures and actions promoting entrepreneurship at European or national level to cover enterprise models of all types, including cooperatives, craft businesses, liberal professions and social enterprises; welcomes especially the continued support for equity and debt finance provided under Horizon 2020 and COSME;

29.

Believes that young entrepreneurs are enablers of innovation and job creation; underlines the need to connect experienced mentors to aspiring young entrepreneurs and facilitate the creation of support structures in innovative start-ups; welcomes schemes such as Erasmus for Young Entrepreneurs that are aimed at helping new entrepreneurs acquire relevant skills for managing a business, and believes that such programmes should be further promoted in order to help more entrepreneurs develop and create jobs; calls on the Member States to promote the practical aspects of entrepreneurial education and training in schemes such as school-company projects and training placements; calls on the Commission and the Member States to take this into account in the implementation of the COSME programme; welcomes the strengthening of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology (EIT), with its clear focus on providing entrepreneurial and innovative skills to 10 000 Masters’ students and 10 000 Ph.D. students by 2020;

30.

Calls for support for EU mobility programmes for entrepreneurs, such as Erasmus for Young Entrepreneurs, and for entrepreneurship education to be included in national school curricula through the exchange of best practice;

31.

Notes the importance of establishing and supporting business incubators, to provide young entrepreneurs with the opportunity to test their ideas and familiarise themselves with business networks and help them contact potential partners, clients and investors; believes that EU funding can play an essential role, and stresses the success of EU-funded projects and university programmes such as the ERDF-financed Birmingham Skills for Enterprise and Employability Network (BSEEN) in the UK which nurture enterprises and entrepreneurial skills by providing mentoring, intensive start-up support and incubator space for new ventures, and are thus key to future job creation;

32.

Draws attention to the fact that, faced with the threat of closure, workers in many European companies can take over the ownership of those companies through cooperative societies; calls for consideration to be given to possible new lines of support through the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund and the European Investment Bank for companies involved in key sectors under the Europe 2020 strategy;

33.

Is concerned at the growing phenomenon of bogus self-employment in the European Union; calls on the Member States to adopt specific policies to prevent this, such as sufficient employment opportunities or better labour inspection;

34.

Calls on the Member States to promote a culture of internationalisation through information, the presentation of good practices and the provision of a platform for information exchange; urges them to provide skills development in the field of entrepreneurship with an international focus, to promote transparency as regards available support tools for start-ups, to support networking and exchanges that link young entrepreneurs with potential investors and business partners, and to provide operational advice and support even after the start-up phase in order to help them get through the critical early years and provide incentives for employment;

35.

Emphasises the importance of providing young Europeans with entrepreneurial education and encouraging entrepreneurial attitudes; notes, in this context, the landmark role that the EIT plays in promoting an entrepreneurial culture through education, training and practice; notes that all the EIT’s Knowledge and Innovation Communities actively promote entrepreneurship in their respective fields, through the development of curricula that combine excellent science and innovation with entrepreneurial skills and experiences, thus preparing the entrepreneurs of tomorrow and infusing existing businesses with an innovative and entrepreneurial mindset;

36.

States that it is of the utmost importance for the EU’s social cohesion to tackle the high unemployment rates, in particular among young people and other vulnerable groups, in the EU by boosting regional competitiveness and employment and fostering an entrepreneurial spirit; calls, therefore, on the Member States to use the ESI Funds to focus on creating sustainable jobs and business opportunities by providing a hospitable environment and the right regulatory framework for micro-, small and medium-sized enterprises, businesses and start-ups;

37.

Points out that the ESI Funds have an important role to play in supporting employment and concrete projects aimed at enhancing entrepreneurial, enterprise and creative skills, including those of young people; underlines the need for all Member States and regions to make full use of this opportunity in order to tackle youth unemployment; stresses that, through the ESI Funds, local and regional authorities should pay particular attention to promoting entrepreneurship at local and regional level, including a focus on start-ups by young people;

38.

Welcomes the growth in recent years of the social economy as a new form of entrepreneurship in the European Union, particularly for young people; calls on the Member States to develop strategies and programmes promoting the social economy;

39.

Believes that, given the widespread phenomenon of ageing populations, Member States should be encouraged, inter alia in the context of solidarity between the generations, to promote the retention of older workers, both women and men, on the labour market, by valuing experience; stresses that an older labour force and longer working lives can make a positive contribution to the recovery and to future growth; emphasises, therefore, the importance of lifelong learning, in particular for older workers; stresses, finally, that older people are indispensable with a view to passing on knowledge and experience to younger generations;

40.

Believes in the importance of promoting senior entrepreneurship as a means of engaging the senior population with significant business experience in the innovation process, thereby extending working lives and retaining indispensable skills in the labour market;

41.

Calls on the Member States to effectively implement the EU legislation outlawing discrimination in the workplace on the grounds of age, disability, sexual orientation or religion or belief;

42.

Recognises the importance of taking into account the situation of people who have to reconcile work and family life;

43.

Stresses that the opportunities afforded directly by the EU single market must be used to inject new life into Europe’s economies by opening up borders, removing existing obstacles that hamper workers’ mobility, and creating new business opportunities and jobs;

44.

Calls for the remaining barriers to the cross-border provision of services to be dismantled, thus enabling them to create more jobs;

45.

Stresses that for SMEs, size does matter, and that a larger scale allows SMEs to more easily withstand economic cycles, build deeper expertise, find new customers and markets, link into global supply chains, and obtain easier access to bank financing and broaden funding sources, thus creating more jobs; believes that the Commission and the Member States should encourage the provision of education in management and business strategy for SME owners looking to expand their businesses; highlights the importance of aid to SMEs to develop connections to untapped foreign markets by redirecting existing public agencies to work with banks and SMEs’ associations towards that end;

46.

Stresses that the introduction of suitable and flexible single market framework provisions to promote entrepreneurship and support the small and medium-sized undertakings that form the economic backbone of the Union must not, under any circumstances, be achieved to the detriment of minimum European labour standards and fundamental labour rights;

47.

Notes that it is crucial to ensure support for SMEs aiming to internationalise through medium- and long-term loans or equity investments, and to educate SMEs in how to access trade financing;

48.

Notes the importance that the digital economy has for creating jobs, especially when linked to sectors in which Europe is traditionally strong, such as the creative industries, cultural heritage and tourism;

49.

Stresses that free and fair competition in the single market, underpinned by common social standards, is of crucial importance for boosting growth and innovation and thereby increasing employment in the Union;

50.

Notes that bank lending is still the most common source of finance in Europe; believes however, that there are real benefits in new forms of financing through innovative schemes and non-bank routes, such as crowdfunding, SME angels, peer-to-peer lending, micro-lending, easily accessible microcredit agencies and other tools, which can provide vital investment for start-ups and SMEs to grow and create jobs; believes that new forms of financing would be beneficial for young, dynamic businesses which have difficulties in accessing more traditional sources of finance due to their ‘newness’; stresses that such new forms of financing should not be limited to start-up and growth phases and that fostering alternative capital markets would also be beneficial for realising positive outcomes for both companies and their employees, for example in cases of restructuring;

51.

Considers it extremely important for Member States to implement Directive 2011/7/EU on combating late payment in commercial transactions, under which, with regard to transactions between undertakings and public authorities, the contractual payment period must not exceed the time limits laid down in Article 4(3) unless otherwise expressly agreed in the contract and provided it is objectively justified in the light of the particular nature or features of the contract and in any event does not exceed 60 calendar days;

52.

Emphasises that non-innovative and established SMEs looking to expand into new markets or to transfer their ownership often also need public support in order to secure the necessary financing;

53.

Stresses that the cohesion policy for the 2014-2020 period is an important and effective instrument for generating smart, sustainable and inclusive growth and achieving the Europe 2020 targets while supporting, through a wide range of measures and innovative financial instruments, the start-up and development of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), including micro-enterprises, as a key motor of job creation in the EU;

54.

Welcomes initiatives to make it easier for citizens, organisations and businesses, in particular SMEs, to access EU support via a single multilingual portal offering information on the Structural Funds, including the ESF Horizon 2020 and COSME; also welcomes the Enterprise Europe Networks endeavours in this field; believes, nonetheless, that more must be done to disseminate clear and comprehensive information about funding opportunities to existing and potential entrepreneurs through ‘one-stop shops’ throughout the regions, and to encourage financial intermediaries to make greater use of the funding sources available;

55.

Asks for a better coordination of EU funding mechanisms, including Structural Funds, ERDF, Horizon 2020 and EIB investments, especially when it comes to funding innovative SMEs, and asks for an assessment of current obstacles arising from the fact that in several Member States banks fail to transfer funds and loan guarantees to SMEs and the real economy;

56.

Underlines the importance of research and innovation for enhancing the competitiveness, productivity, sustainability and job-creation potential of European SMEs, and notes the significant focus that Horizon 2020 and the EIT place on creating and supporting high-growth innovative SMEs;

57.

Welcomes the creation of an SME instrument under the Horizon 2020 programme enabling SMEs to access financial and non-financial support in order to implement innovative ideas; calls on the Commission to introduce this instrument as of 2014 in the most SME-friendly way, i.e. through a single dedicated agency, allowing for the genuine ‘bottom-up’ submission of projects and supporting all types of innovation, including non-technological and social innovation;

58.

Points out that firms, however, often face problems in finding money to finance their research, develop new products or access new markets;

59.

Supports EU initiatives which help SMEs access more financial resources with greater ease, on the grounds that they make for easier, faster access to funding for young and innovative companies, encourage Member States to adopt mechanisms to foster innovation (e.g. tax credit mechanisms to fund research and innovation) and redress inequalities between Member States; supports initiatives seeking to encourage entrepreneurs whose businesses have failed, so as to offer them a second chance and not discourage risk-taking;

60.

Welcomes the simplification of reimbursement methods as part of the Commission’s proposal for a Common Provisions Regulation on the Structural Funds, given the important role that these instruments play in many regions in the promotion of entrepreneurship and skills; asks the Commission to monitor SMEs’ access to Community funding and to report to Parliament on the matter;

61.

Takes the view that public investment and state support for the setting-up and continued operation of undertakings is crucial; believes that Member States should demand safeguards and guarantees from companies setting up in each Member State and receiving public support; with the objective of preserving jobs;

62.

Strongly believes that businesses could create more jobs if the right conditions exist, including access to a qualified and highly-skilled workforce, work-life balance, reasonable costs and taxes, and keeping administrative and regulatory burdens to a minimum;

63.

Notes the importance of workplace flexisecurity, on the one hand in giving workers a fair degree of security and on the other in allowing economic operators to react in a flexible way to changes in the market;

64.

Sees the introduction of ‘youth coaches’ in employment agencies as an important step towards further reducing the numbers of young people who fail to make the transition from education to the labour market;

65.

Believes Member States must invest more in human capital and be more responsive to labour market needs, notably by ensuring strong links between the world of education and the world of work, ensuring that young people are equipped with the right information, advice and guidance to make sound career choices, and fostering work-based learning apprenticeships, as well as retraining of employees and provision of lifelong learning opportunities;

66.

Considers that there is major scope for increasing the involvement of the social partners and the bodies concerned in the formulation of a long-term strategy for small and medium-sized enterprises, this being the only way to identify malfunctions, formulate intelligent and flexible legislation, avoid market fragmentation and promote the creation and development of sustainable and quality employment;

67.

Calls on the Commission and the Member States to create viable transition schemes from higher education and vocational training to the labour market, especially for first-time young professionals;

68.

Calls on the Member States to continue taking policy measures, accompanied by economic and regulatory incentive mechanisms, which shape culture and educational systems through the creation of partnerships and exchange networks between all the various levels of education and companies, in order to bridge the current gap between academia and the market and make it easier for researchers to move from universities to companies, thereby fostering innovation;

69.

Considers that SMEs are the main drivers of innovation and economic growth in the EU and play a crucial role in providing pathways into work for people of all ages and for both women and men; regrets that in many Member States they are excluded from public research, innovation and development policy;

70.

Highlights the importance of SMEs not only in creating but also in preserving jobs;

71.

Points out that more than 20 million SMEs in the EU represent 99 % of businesses, and that SMEs are a key driver of economic growth, innovation, employment and social integration;

72.

Believes that public policy measures play an important role in supporting and stimulating the creation and development of SMEs (e.g. affordable loans, advisory services on public initiatives and legislation, incubators and accelerators, clusters, technology transfer offices, coaching and mentoring schemes, etc); considers that networking and the exchange of best practice play an important role in this respect; believes that intangible and non-financial forms of support, such as access to knowledge and information, financial education and business networks, are essential for new entrepreneurs and SMEs to develop their businesses; considers that, in order to stimulate the internal market and trade among small businesses, it is particularly important to ensure the mutual recognition of occupational qualifications and the interoperability of different commercial regulatory systems;

73.

Believes that innovation in SMEs is an important route to job creation; points out that if SMEs are to participate successfully in the innovation system, it is essential that they are in the driving seat with regard to their innovative activities and that support is better tailored to their real needs;

74.

Underlines the ‘think small first’ principle; recognises the benefits of crossborder e-commerce in providing new opportunities for SMEs to access the single market, create employment opportunities, reduce costs and compete globally;

75.

Stresses the opportunities offered by ICTs in terms of enhancing productivity and competitiveness; emphasises the need for the potential of the digital single market to be unleashed, and points out that the cost of creating an innovative ICT start-up has fallen by a factor of 100 in the last ten years, mainly as a result of technologies such as ultra-fast and ubiquitous broadband, cloud computing, open-source software, open data and access to public-sector information;

76.

Highlights the fact that eGovernment is particularly beneficial for entrepreneurs (particularly SMEs, who often face insurmountable barriers when operating across borders within the EU), as it brings reduced administrative costs and burdens, increased productivity, efficiency, competitiveness, transparency, openness, policy effectiveness, accessibility and streamlining of procedures;

77.

Believes that the lack of adequate protection for SMEs can in many cases cripple businesses and stall economic growth, and may also discourage entrepreneurs from taking chances, which will impact on their ability to grow and create jobs;

78.

Notes that the main barriers facing start-ups and affecting the development of high-growth SMEs are difficult access to and cost of finance, burdensome regulation, lack of knowledge of regulations, indirect costs, restricted access to export markets, average payment times and skills shortages;

79.

Welcomes the introduction of the ‘SME test’ and the Commission’s commitment to propose lighter regulatory regimes for SMEs and exemptions for micro-businesses on a case-by-case basis, without compromising on health, safety and employment standards; believes that mitigating measures must be introduced across a range of legislative proposals, e.g. longer implementation time, efficient and effective inspections, or guidelines to simplify firms’ paperwork, but without creating a two-tier labour market;

80.

Welcomes initiatives such as the CREATE project which address the barriers to growth and job creation and competitiveness experienced by SMEs in rural areas;

81.

Believes that Member States must be encouraged to share best practice — for example, through the European Network of SME Envoys on innovative ways to create jobs, by reducing bureaucracy and red tape and improving communication, particularly for SMEs and microenterprises;

82.

Urges the Commission and the Member States to help local authorities and SMEs’ associations promote local production and product quality, for example through the formation of business clusters for joint research and development projects;

83.

Believes that also organisations representing SMEs should be encouraged to share cross- border best practices on innovative ways to reduce bureaucracy and red tape;

84.

Regrets that the labour reforms taking place in various Member States are resulting in many workers no longer being protected by collective agreements, especially in SMEs; considers that any improvements in labour flexibility should be accompanied by adequate labour protection;

85.

Believes that the framework for SME participation in public procurement should be improved;

86.

Notes that in many Member States there is insufficient support and/or an insufficient regulatory framework to ensure appropriate conditions for young and innovative companies and start-ups, and stresses the need for better coordination of the different European, national, regional and local policies and instruments concerning SMEs;

87.

Stresses the need to strengthen EU rules on product traceability, so as to combat counterfeiting and create an effective means of encouraging the development of SMEs;

88.

Stresses the need for more efficient and more clearly-worded regulations that can be implemented in a simple manner and can help all actors, including entrepreneurs, operate within the rule of law and enable both entrepreneurs and employees to benefit from the opportunities and protection afforded by employment and health and safety legislation;

89.

Underlines the need for greater integration of Union policies in favour of SMEs as regards innovation, growth, competitiveness, internationalisation, entrepreneurship, resource productivity, reducing bureaucracy, the quality of human resources, and environmental and social responsibility;

90.

Acknowledges the Commission’s actions to address the results of the review of the ‘Top 10’ most burdensome laws for SMEs, which will help businesses create more employment opportunities; believes that the Commission should urgently prioritise the improvement of these regulations in ways that address SMEs’ concerns; believes there is a need to ensure that the EU and Member States take account of the specific needs of, and considers support measures for businesses, in particular SMEs and micro-enterprises, in the policy process;

91.

Points out that young companies which internationalise rapidly and intensively after their start-up phase make useful contributions to the economy by creating innovation, encouraging other companies to innovate, taking part in international supply chains and creating sustainable high-quality employment; notes, however, that since these companies face considerable challenges during the start-up phase due to low levels of capital, low-cost, simple and quick start-up procedures would be of benefit to them;

92.

Stresses that rules on health and safety at work and workers’ protection cannot be considered as burdensome regulations; calls on the Commission to simplify excessive administrative burdens while always ensuring health and safety at work and guaranteeing that SMEs have adequate knowledge and resources enabling them to manage their employees’ working environment properly;

93.

Notes the new health and safety strategy; hopes it will focus on prevention, usability, clarification, simplification, prevention, and better implementation of existing legislation in order to ensure workers’ health and safety;

94.

Welcomes the reduction of REACH registration fees for SMEs, even though fees represent a fraction of overall compliance costs; is extremely concerned, however, that initial cost estimates from REACH were underestimated, with this difference already amounting to over EUR1 billion — a figure that will continue to rise;

95.

Stresses the need to improve overall business efficiency through projects and instruments which make it possible to confront the challenge of energy recovery with a view to encouraging reduced energy costs;

96.

Points out that the provisions of the regulations for the 2014-2020 cohesion policy period aim to reduce the administrative burden on micro-enterprises and SMEs, particularly as regards the activation of unemployed people, thereby contributing to better conditions for job creation; calls on the Member States to do away with the obstacles standing in the way of better implementation of the ESI Funds for the benefit of micro-enterprises and SMEs;

97.

Calls on the Commission and the Member States to act with speed and ambition to reduce the regulatory burden on SMEs, while ensuring that any proposed solutions are evidence-based and respecting health and safety and Article 9 TFEU;

98.

Calls on the Commission and the Member States to fully exploit the job potential of the green economy by developing a Renaissance of Industry for a Sustainable Europe (RISE) strategy that pursues technological, business and social innovation towards a third industrial revolution including a low-carbon modernisation offensive; argues that RISE will create new markets, business models and creative entrepreneurs, new jobs and decent work, bringing an industrial renewal with economic dynamism, confidence and competitiveness; believes that energy and resource efficiency are key pillars of such a strategy;

99.

Considers that an appropriate approach could be offered by the Commission’s proposal that micro-entities should be excluded from the scope of future proposed legislation unless there is a need for them to be covered;

100.

Calls on the Commission to ensure that national SME organisations are part of the newly-established network of SME Envoys and the SME Assembly and are properly informed of EU initiatives and policy proposals; stresses, in this context, the equally important role of the European Information Centres (EICs), which have so far not managed to provide a service that lives up to the expectations and needs of European businesses;

101.

Calls on the Member States to promote language learning through lifelong learning (vocational training), for employees of SMEs and micro-entities, as a means of reinforcing access to and participation in the single market for such firms;

102.

Asks the Commission to ensure easier access for SMEs to structural funds, notably by relaxing the requirements for pre-financed projects, reducing the requirements for cofinancing, better targeting different types of SMES, closing the financing gap between call cycles, and supporting capacity-building for SME funding;

103.

Recommends MEPs to make full use of the Impact Assessment and European Added Value Directorate in order to scrutinise the cost, benefits and other implications of proposed draft legislation on SMEs and job creation in particular;

104.

Calls on the Commission and the Member States to be more rigorous in assessing the impact of future and existing regulation on SMEs and competitiveness in general;

105.

Reminds Member States of their commitment under the Small Business Act to make it possible to start a business within 48 hours maximum; calls on the Member States, in this context, to make every effort to reach this target in order to achieve the employment targets contained in the Europe 2020 strategy;

106.

Calls on the Commission to address any identified negative effects that EU legislation has on businesses and their ability to create jobs, particularly with regard to the aspects of lack of knowledge, overall perception and lack of support for the practical application of EU legislation; calls on the Commission to improve the flow of information to SMEs;

107.

Calls on the Commission, in the context of the REFIT programme, to check that all legislation is doing what it was intended to do, and to identify areas where there are inconsistencies or ineffective measures affecting employment opportunities;

108.

Highlights the recent trend of companies returning production and services to Europe and the opportunities this brings for job creation; believes that the economies of the EU have a unique opportunity to accelerate this trend of re-shoring jobs and calls on the Member States, together with the Commission, to consider dedicating support, including the possibility of setting up ‘one-stop shops’, to help businesses take advantage of the opportunities offered by re-shoring;

109.

Calls on the Member States and the Commission to support self-employment, possibly across borders and especially among women and young people, by creating an environment and developing an education and social protection system that will encourage entrepreneurs to set up and develop their businesses and create new jobs by, for example, promoting entrepreneurship among students and professionals;

110.

Expresses its hope that entrepreneurship will be a more prominent topic in the next years; notes that this will require reflection, particularly with regard to the implementation of the Entrepreneurship 2020 Action Plan; considers that developing entrepreneurial spirit and skills is a sustainable way forward in terms of job creation, more start-ups and business innovation; would like to see the Commission name 2017 the ‘European Year for Entrepreneurship’;

111.

Calls on the social partners to embrace smart regulation tools, increase the use of impact assessments in their negotiations, and refer agreements proposing legislative action to the Commission’s Impact Assessment Board;

112.

Insists that the Data Protection Regulation should follow a balanced approach, protecting data privacy while stimulating the digital economy, job creation and growth;

113.

Calls on the EU to work with Member States, universities, research establishments and businesses in order to coordinate and make full use of EU funding sources (e.g. ESF, ERDF, COSME, Horizon 2020 and Erasmus+), in order to promote an entrepreneurial culture, particularly among women and young people, develop and upgrade the qualifications and skills needed by the labour market, and support the creation of new businesses;

114.

Calls on the EU and the Member States to cooperate on introducing entrepreneurship skills into curricula at all stages of education;

115.

Calls on the EU to work with Member States, schools and universities on the implementation of open technology-based education;

116.

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

22.12.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 443/31

—

having regard to Articles 165 and 166 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

—

having regard to Article 14 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,

—

having regard to the Commission Communication of 25 September 2013 entitled ‘Opening up Education: Innovative teaching and learning for all through new Technologies and Open Educational Resources’ (COM(2013)0654) and the accompanying staff working document on analysis and mapping of innovative teaching and learning for all through new Technologies and Open Educational Resources in Europe (SWD(2013)0341),

—

having regard to the Commission Communication of 11 July 2013 entitled ‘European higher education in the world’ (COM(2013)0499),

—

having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1288/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013 establishing ‘Erasmus+’: the Union programme for education, training, youth and sport and repealing Decisions No 1719/2006/EC, No 1720/2006/EC and No 1298/2008/EC (1),

—

having regard to the Council conclusions of 24 February 2014 on efficient and innovative education and training to invest in skills — supporting the 2014 European Semester (2),

—

having regard to the Council recommendation of 20 December 2012 on the validation of non-formal and informal learning (3),

—

having regard to the Council conclusions of 14 February 2011 on the role of education and training in the implementation of the Europe 2020 strategy (4),

—

having regard to the Council conclusions of 11 May 2010 on the social dimension of education and training (5),

—

having regard to the Council conclusions of 11 May 2010 on the internationalisation of higher education (6),

—

having regard to its resolution of 22 October 2013 on rethinking education (7),

—

having regard to its resolution of 12 September 2013 on the digital agenda for growth, mobility and employment: time to move up a gear (8),

—

having regard to its resolution of 11 September 2012 on education, training and Europe 2020 (9),

—

having regard to its resolution of 20 April 2012 on modernising Europe’s higher education systems (10),

—

having regard to its resolution of 26 October 2011 on the agenda for new skills and jobs (11),

—

having regard to its resolution of 12 May 2011 on Youth on the Move — a framework for improving Europe’s education and training systems (12),

—

having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 26 February 2014 (13),

—

having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions of 31 January 2014 (14),

—

having regard to Rule 48 of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on Culture and Education (A7-0249/2014),

A.

whereas education and training systems need to be geared towards achieving equal opportunities in learning and towards meeting an increasing need for the continuous updating of knowledge and skills and an increasingly international labour market while aiming at greater efficiency and equity;

B.

whereas the Europe 2020 strategy aims to boost innovation, create new employment opportunities, improve social cohesion and build solid foundations for sustainable and inclusive growth in the EU through a highly skilled workforce that enjoys equal access to education;

C.

whereas high unemployment levels, particularly among young people, including university graduates, coincide with a significant number of vacancies in Europe that cannot be filled, pointing to a marked skills gap that could best be overcome, inter alia, through dual vocational training models; whereas in 2012 15,8 % of young people in the EU were neither in employment nor in education or training (NEET), and thus at risk of being excluded from the labour market due to increased skills mismatches;

D.

whereas it is expected that by 2020, 90 % of jobs will require digital skills, and whereas by 2015 there will be up to 900 000 unfilled information and communication technologies (ICT)-related vacancies in the EU;

E.

whereas the number of university graduates is expected to quadruple by 2030;

F.

whereas 18-28 % of students in the EU have few possibilities to access and use the internet either at school or at home; whereas only 30 % of students in the EU can be considered as digitally competent; whereas only 20 % of students in the EU are taught by digitally confident and supportive teachers; whereas 70 % of teachers in the EU do not consider themselves digitally confident and would like to further develop their ICT skills; whereas 40 % of Europeans aged 16-74 have low or no ICT skills;

G.

whereas open educational resources (OERs) can play a crucial role in facilitating lifelong learning for all learners and in improving the quality of content and the distribution of both formal and informal education providers, and whereas, at the same time, a digitally inadequate education system can hamper the development of learners’ knowledge and skills;

H.

whereas the EU has still not fully grasped the potential of ICT in terms of cultural and educational wealth and diversity, access to information and the exchange of good practices;

I.

whereas the modernisation of education systems in Europe requires investment in education facilities that are well equipped in terms of information and communication technologies;

J.

whereas, it is therefore vital that broadband access become more widespread, including in the rural, mountain and outlying areas of the Member States;

K.

whereas schools should also train children and young people in the practical and critical use of digital technologies and the internet;

1.

Welcomes the Commission communication which sets out a Union agenda in the field of OERs, and which focuses on the potential of these resources to widen access to and equity in education and further diversify it, and acknowledges the relevance of OERs in an increasingly digital society; believes that the emergence of a European framework for the development of OERs may allow for improvement in the Member States’ education systems;

2.

Notes that, in order to realise the benefits of OERs, actions leading to universal digital education should be supported, with a focus on good practices and their promotion in various environments;

3.

Emphasises that OERs create opportunities for both individuals, such as teachers, students, pupils and learners of all ages, and educational and training institutions to teach and learn in innovative ways; calls on educational institutions to further assess the potential benefits of OERs in the respective educational systems and in view of possibly creating an organisational environment in which such innovation is welcomed, internalised, applied and promoted; calls, in this connection, on the Member States and regions, as part of smart specialisation strategies, to establish innovation and start-up centres of excellence which make full use of the potential of ICT;

4.

Deplores the lack of differentiation in the Commission communication between school levels as regards the deployment of new technologies and digital content for learning and teaching purposes; stresses that learners acquire different skills and competences depending on their age, and that consequently curricula and learning methods vary according to school level;

5.

Notes that quality assurance plays a crucial role in increasing the trust in and use of OERs; encourages research on and the dissemination of good practices to facilitate the effective use of OERs, investing, in particular, in the areas of methodological experimentation, meta-skills (reflexive, proactive and critical thinking skills) and soft skills; notes that research should also be encouraged with regard to the methods of assessing the skills acquired for such courses which cannot be restricted to peer assessment or automated systems, as occurs in communities of practice;

6.

Acknowledges the fact that OERs are generally produced in a limited number of languages and mainly, although not exclusively, by higher education institutions (especially as regards massive open online courses (MOOCs)); encourages education and training institutions at all levels across the Member States, as well as other relevant stakeholders, to produce OERs in their own languages in order to exploit the full potential of digital technology and multilingualism; recalls that the availability, accessibility and innovativeness of materials plays a key role in terms of using e-learning materials in education;

7.

Points out that ICT and OERs are currently mainly used in higher education; encourages, where appropriate, their use in primary and secondary education, as well as in vocational education and in other informal learning settings, where student-centred learning combined with ICT also carries huge potential;

8.

Notes that proper contextualisation is a critical factor in making educational software effective; points out that this process must be suitably embedded into teaching and learning processes, and must take into account pedagogical and curriculum objectives, tools and individual learning paths;

9.

Stresses the need to facilitate the recognition of knowledge and skills acquired through OERs by means of further dialogue with stakeholders, and calls on the Member States to incorporate appropriate measures into their national qualification frameworks for the validation of such learning;

10.

Points to the need to make it easier to obtain recognition for skills acquired abroad, in order to boost and facilitate the use of OERs and MOOCs by pruning bureaucratic structures;

11.

Highlights the fact that availability of and access to free, high-quality and suitable online teaching materials is crucial;

12.

Stresses the need for the harmonisation of existing limitations and exceptions in copyright for the purpose of illustration in non-commercial teaching, in order to facilitate OERs and distance learning across borders, and to allow European platforms to compete globally by creating economies of scale;

13.

Urges the Commission to put forward a proposal to review Directive 2001/29/EC, with the aim of establishing a harmonised and flexible system of copyright and related rights in the EU which is fit for the digital age and acknowledges the public value of access to knowledge;

14.

Encourages Member States to explore the predicted potential of OERs for reducing the public and private costs of education, in particular the costs of education materials, without neglecting quality;

15.

Notes the importance of ensuring sustainable models for the creation of OERs and MOOCs; calls on the Commission to support further research into the formation, usage and uptake thereof, in dialogue with stakeholders;

16.

Acknowledges that the adoption of OERs should be done in a manner that fosters development of 21st century learning solutions, and creates new business opportunities for small and medium-sized innovative European providers of learning solutions;

17.

Calls on the Member States to strengthen informal education on online safety and to provide for online safety policies in schools by offering appropriate training to teachers;

18.

Calls on the Member States to ensure coordinated and progressive education on internet safety in schools; notes that parents and legal guardians should be regarded as partners in ensuring web safety, and recommends that complementary strategies targeting them be developed, thereby strengthening the role of parental mediation; stresses the fact that these efforts should be aimed at strengthening young people’s independence so that they can take ownership of their actions and responsibilities on the web and develop e-skills; insists that the protection of the physical and psychological integrity and privacy of teachers and learners using OERs must be assured;

19.

Calls on the Commission to support the exchange of good practices between Member States in the formal and informal education sectors with regard to online safety, the creation of relevant educational content and the formation of public-private partnerships with the aim of involving young people, their parents and teachers and all those who work with young people, including the non-governmental organisations involved in the Safer Internet network;

20.

Notes that new technologies and OERs allow for a more interactive learning experience and are valuable instruments in placing the learner at the centre of the educational process;

21.

Stresses that teachers at all levels of education have a fundamental role in facilitating access to and the use of online learning materials by all learners and in assisting them in acquiring digital skills;

22.

Stresses the urgent need for all learners to have the fastest and best possible technical equipment, as well as vital access to broadband internet;

23.

Recalls the crucial importance of high-quality training for teachers and trainers that must be complemented with mandatory career-long professional training focusing on innovative teaching methods and instructing learners about approaches to education (‘learning how to learn’);

24.

Urges the Member States to support teachers in their professional development by offering them modern curricula in their initial education, and by providing them with in-service training geared to equip them with the necessary competences for the use of digitally supported teaching methods;

25.

Emphasises, in particular, the proven benefits of European experience abroad for teachers and trainers, for example through the Erasmus+ programme, and calls for a massive expansion of this and other related programmes;

26.

Points out that basic literacy and numeracy skills, in addition to meta-skills and soft skills, as well as transversal skills, such as critical thinking and learning to learn, are a prerequisite for developing digital skills and using online educational materials, including OERs, effectively; calls, in this context, on the Commission to further assess the impact of digital and/or online learning materials on the learning performance of learners according to their age and school level;

27.

Recognises the importance of traditional ways of teaching and learning, and calls on the Commission to support further research into the question of whether and how OERs and MOOCs can enhance individuals’ learning outcomes in addition to, or as an integral part of, traditional teaching methods;

28.

Recalls that innovative teaching methods facilitated through ICT and OERs contribute to the development of soft and transversal skills, such as critical thinking, decision-making, communications skills and problem-solving, which are crucial for employability and job market realisation;

29.

Stresses that education policies should primarily aim at assisting learners in the development of crucial cognitive and social skills; calls on the Commission to further assess the impact on learners of deploying digital devices and contents for pedagogical purposes while ensuring their physical and psychological integrity;

30.

Points out that OERs geared towards the needs of adult learners should be developed so as to ensure greater lifelong learning opportunities for low-skilled European citizens, bearing in mind the fact that many learners have low ICT skills;

31.

Underlines the fact that digital skills and knowledge are vital for citizens in an information-driven society that aims to become the most dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world;

32.

Notes that digital literacy, in opening up new channels for communication and education, has a positive impact in terms of strengthening social cohesion, personal development, intercultural dialogue and active citizenship;

33.

Highlights the fact that ICT and online educational materials, including OERs, can support the teaching and learning of foreign languages at all levels of education and training; stresses that social interaction is a prerequisite for learning a foreign language;

34.

Urges the Member States to improve and deepen digital skills also by including coding and programming in their respective curricula, in order to foster economic competitiveness and equip students with the right skills for the job market of the future;

35.

Reiterates that continuous updating of knowledge and skills is essential for successful labour market integration, and notes that OERs can contribute to facilitating the lifelong learning that is necessary in order to remain competitive on the labour market; encourages a more gender-balanced use of ICT with a view to ensuring that women who remain outside the labour market for a given period, for example for maternity or other family care tasks, are also able to benefit from this type of training to update their skills and educate themselves, thereby improving their future re-employment opportunities on the labour market;

36.

Points out that public libraries and education centres can offer free access to computers and the internet and training on internet resources;

37.

Stresses the importance of access to education and training and IT equipment for all learners in all age groups, as well as for those with disabilities, those coming from disadvantaged backgrounds, young people currently not in education, employment or training (NEET) and those coming from geographically remote regions, as well as anyone wishing to improve their qualifications;

38.

Notes, once again, that not everyone has access to ICTs under equivalent pricing arrangements and in terms of service quality, and that, in general, urban areas are better served than rural areas, thereby creating a digital divide that undermines the notion of equal opportunities for all citizens, wherever they may be in the EU;

39.

Stresses the growing importance of adult education, particularly in the context of lifelong vocational training, and calls for the Europe-wide recognition, strengthening and promotion of all adult education organisations;

40.

Highlights the advantages of inter-generational learning, and points to the great educational potential offered by digital learning and OERs, also as regards wider access to education and training for all age groups;

41.

Acknowledges that new technologies and OERs, in particular MOOCs, have made it possible for education and training institutions to reach thousands of learners in the Union, including in its outermost regions, and around the world; recognises that education and knowledge now travel easily across borders, which increases the potential for international cooperation and helps to promote European educational institutions as centres for innovation and the development of new technologies;

42.

Notes that it is important to keep a fair balance between the quality and accessibility of education; highlights the fact that new technologies can be used to ensure that more accessible education does not mean a reduction in the quality of education;

43.

Notes that the EU risks falling behind other regions of the world, such as the United States or Asia, where heavy investments are made in research and development, new technologies and OERs; insists that the Union must build on its strength in cultural and linguistic diversity and adapt investments in e-learning material, including OERs, and in new technologies to best support its population;

44.

Recalls that new technologies can contribute to the competitiveness of European education on the global stage, offer opportunities for the internationalisation of European higher education, and, as a result, increase Europe’s attractiveness as an educational destination;

45.

Stresses that OERs can contribute to improving the quality of European education; encourages, in this connection, cooperation with educational institutions around the world, in particular in the United States;

46.

Reiterates that successful OER strategies and MOOCs can support internationalisation strategies by improving the quality and visibility of European (higher) education institutions and attracting students and researchers in an increasingly global competition for talent;

47.

Calls on the Member States to promote cooperation and synergies in the field of lifelong learning, in particular to make it as easy as possible to gain access to learning and to adapt and modernise the curricula of educational institutions to the rapidly developing potential and possibilities of digital learning and OERs, in order to address the new challenges of the contemporary world as effectively as possible;

48.

Encourages strengthened cooperation between European education and training institutions, and with international organisations and stakeholders, to facilitate a better understanding of new teaching and learning methods and the impact of ICT on education; encourages the development of common platforms for such cooperation;

49.

Stresses that the use of new technologies in education should be well targeted to respond to the needs of the job market and overcome the present skills gap; stresses the need for improved communication and cooperation between educational and training institutions and the business sector;

50.

Notes that new technologies and e-learning have the added value of providing an international learning experience for those who do not participate in mobility schemes;

51.

Points out that digital technologies are not fully exploited in education and training across the Union; fears that this situation may lead to a further fragmentation of teaching and learning approaches; calls on the Member States to apply equity principles to the new markets, given that OERs should remain a tool to broaden access to education and not become a purely economic endeavour;

52.

Stresses that digital technology is an important learning tool for citizenship, facilitating the participation of many citizens living in peripheral areas and especially of young audiences, allowing them to benefit fully from freedom of expression and online communication;

53.

Welcomes the launch of the Open Education Europa portal in all EU languages, providing a single gateway to European OERs, and calls for the portal to be vigorously developed and promoted in the Member States;

54.

Notes that an appropriate digital infrastructure based on commonly used, popular technologies is a prerequisite for reaching the highest possible number of learners with OERs;

55.

Calls on the Commission to organise an annual European regional planning conference to ensure that all citizens have access to ICT services wherever they may be in the EU;

56.

Points out that local and regional authorities have a key role to play in developing infrastructures, disseminating and publicising various measures to a wider public, involving other local stakeholders and disseminating and implementing the relevant European initiatives at national, regional and local level;

57.

Calls on the Member States and the local and regional authorities to use the funding available through the European Structural and Investment Funds to overcome the territorial digital divide by improving infrastructure and networks and promoting training in ICT and the effective use thereof, taking into account the needs of educational institutions, in particular in rural and remote regions; notes that the smart and comprehensive use of EU funding requires synergy between the different programmes and instruments, including Erasmus+, Horizon 2020 and the structural and investment funds;

58.

Calls on the Commission to encourage the exchange of good practices between Member States and between educational institutions, drawing on existing projects and experiences;

59.

Welcomes the Commission initiative to develop indicators to closely monitor the integration of ICT in teaching and training institutions, and to support Union-wide quantitative surveys;

60.

Calls on the Commission to promote and extend the network and action of European Schoolnet;

61.

Appreciates that all educational materials drawn up with support from Erasmus+ will be available to the public under open licences; encourages similar practices for other Union programmes, including a broad roll-out of open access under the Horizon 2020 programme;

62.

Highlights the fact that Erasmus+ and Horizon 2020 can play an important role in generating OERs through communities of practice, such as that of school teachers using the eTwinning platform; encourages an extension of the use of these platforms to other educational sectors;

63.

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

22.12.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 443/39

—

having regard to the third paragraph of Article 226 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

—

having regard to Rules 41 and 48 of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs (A7-0352/2011),

1.

Adopts as its proposal for a regulation the text adopted on 23 May 2012 (1);

2.

Invites the Council and the Commission to notify their consent to the proposal;

3.

Invites the Council and the Commission, if they are unable to give their consent to the proposal in its present form, to resume negotiations with the newly elected Parliament, acknowledging the progress made in past negotiations at political level and during the informal contacts at technical level, notably concerning the issue of confidentiality and the handling of classified and other information;

4.

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

22.12.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 443/40

—

having regard to the Treaty on European Union (TEU), in particular the preamble thereto and Articles 4(3) (sincere cooperation between the Union and Member States), 5 (conferral of competences and subsidiarity), 10(1) (representative democracy), 10(2) (representation of EU citizens) and 12 (role of national parliaments) thereof,

—

having regard to Protocol No 1 on the role of national parliaments in the European Union, in particular the preamble thereto and Title II, on interparliamentary cooperation, thereof, and to Protocol No 2 on the application of the principles of subsidiary and proportionality, annexed to the Treaty of Lisbon,

—

having regard to its resolutions of 12 June 1997 on relations between the European Parliament and the national parliaments (1), of 7 February 2002 on relations between the European Parliament and the national parliaments in European integration (2), and of 7 May 2009 on the development of the relations between the European Parliament and national parliaments under the Treaty of Lisbon (3),

—

having regard to its resolution of 4 February 2014 on ‘EU Regulatory Fitness and Subsidiarity and Proportionality — 19th report on Better Lawmaking covering the year 2011’ (4),

—

having regard to the final recommendations of 20 December 2011 of the steering group on relations with national parliaments under the Lisbon Treaty,

—

having regard to the Commission’s annual reports on relations between the European Commission and national parliaments, in particular the report for 2012 (COM(2013)0565),

—

having regard to the conclusions adopted by the Conference of Speakers of EU Parliaments (the EU Speakers’ Conference) at its meetings since the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty (5), in particular those held in Warsaw in 2012 and in Nicosia in 2013,

—

having regard to the contributions to, and conclusions of, the meetings of the Conference of Parliamentary Committees for Union Affairs of Parliaments of the European Union (COSAC) since the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, in particular the L COSAC meeting in Vilnius in 2013, and to COSAC’s biannual reports (6),

—

having regard to COSAC’s 20th biannual report, in particular the sections on democratic legitimacy in the EU and the role of parliaments and on political dialogue and the European elections in 2014,

—

having regard to the contribution from the national parliaments to the meeting of COSAC chairpersons held at the Greek Parliament in Athens on 26 and 27 January 2014,

—

having regard to the guidelines on interparliamentary cooperation adopted by the EU Speakers’ Conference at its meeting of 21 July 2008 in Lisbon,

—

having regard to the conclusions of the Ιnterparliamentary Conferences for the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) and the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) of 9 and 10 September 2012 in Paphos (Cyprus), of 24 to 26 March 2013 in Dublin (Ireland) and of 4 to 6 September 2013 in Vilnius (Lithuania), and to the contribution of the Interparliamentary Conference on Economic and Financial Governance of the EU held under Article 13 of the Treaty on Stability, Coordination and Governance (TSCG) on 16 and 17 October 2013 in Vilnius (Lithuania),

—

having regard to its resolutions of 12 December 2013 on constitutional problems of a multitier governance in the European Union (7) and on relations between the European Parliament and the institutions representing the national governments (8),

—

having regard to the report entitled ‘Towards a genuine economic and monetary union’, presented on 5 December 2012 by Presidents Van Rompuy, Juncker, Barroso and Draghi,

—

having regard to the conclusions of the European Council meetings of 13 and 14 December 2012, of 24 and 25 October 2013 and of 19 and 20 December 2013,

—

having regard to Rule 130 of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to its resolution of 13 March 2014 on the implementation of the Treaty of Lisbon with respect to the European Parliament (9),

—

having regard to Rule 48 of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs (A7-0255/2014),

A.

whereas, in accordance with the TEU, the European Union’s current institutional set-up must be viewed as a stage in the process of creating an ever closer union, which was begun when the European Communities were established;

B.

whereas under the principle of sincere cooperation the Union and its Member States assist each other, in full mutual respect, in carrying out tasks flowing from the Treaties, and whereas the Member States facilitate the achievement of the Union's tasks and refrain from any measures that could jeopardise the attainment of the Union's objectives;

C.

whereas Article 12 of the TEU, covering the activities of the national parliaments, fleshes out the principle of sincere cooperation by stating that the national parliaments contribute actively to the good functioning of the Union;

D.

whereas the principle of conferral defines the competences of the Union, which are exercised in accordance with the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality, and whereas all the EU institutions, together with the national parliaments, seek to ensure that legislative acts comply with the subsidiarity principle;

E.

whereas democratic legitimacy and accountability must be ensured at all levels at which decisions are taken and implemented, and also in the mutual interactions between those levels;

F.

whereas the Union operates on the basis of representative democracy and a twofold democratic legitimacy stemming from the European Parliament, directly elected by the citizens, and the Member States, as represented in the Council by their governments, which are in turn democratically accountable to their national parliaments and citizens;

G.

whereas the European Parliament and the national parliaments are, in their respective spheres, the pillars of the Union’s twofold democratic legitimacy, the former as the institution in which EU citizens are directly represented and the latter as the national institutions to which the governments represented in the Council are directly accountable;

H.

whereas, accordingly, the national parliaments do not form a ‘third chamber’ of the EU's legislature, but instead serve to hold to account the Union's second chamber, the Council;

I.

whereas it is therefore appropriate to accept this constructive approach from the national parliaments, which is expressed in the communication of such contributions;

J.

whereas the national parliaments should develop strong and coherent EU-related structures with the aim of enhancing links with the European institutions and gaining further expertise on issues pertaining to European affairs;

K.

whereas, at the current stage of integration, the national parliaments have their own special role to play in bolstering ‘European awareness’ in the Member States and bringing citizens closer to the EU;

L.

whereas interparliamentary cooperation can play an essential role in driving the European integration process forward by allowing exchanges of information, joint examination of issues, mutually beneficial dialogue and smoother transposition of EU legislation into national law;

M.

whereas following the establishment of the Interparliamentary Conference for the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) and the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) and of the Interparliamentary Conference on Economic Governance, as well as the consolidation of the role of interparliamentary committee meetings as the preferred channel for cooperation, COSAC should remain the forum for a regular exchange of views, information and best practice regarding the practical aspects of parliamentary scrutiny;

N.

whereas the European Parliament should be more closely involved in the ‘political dialogue’ — in particular the enhanced version engaged in as part of the European semester for economic policy coordination — that the Commission has established with the national parliaments, above all in view of the interdependence between the decisions of the European Parliament and those of the national parliaments;

O.

whereas the changes made to its Rules of Procedure have taken into account the Lisbon Treaty provisions on the role of the national parliaments in the EU;

P.

whereas the role played by the EU Speakers’ Conference in interparliamentary cooperation at the current stage should be noted;

1.

Welcomes the Treaty provisions giving the national parliaments a range of rights and duties allowing them to contribute actively to the good functioning of the Union; sees these rights and duties as covering:

2.

Points out that the twofold democratic legitimacy of the Union, as a union of citizens and of Member States, is embodied, in the EU legislative process, by the European Parliament and the Council; believes that, if the Member States are to be represented in a unitary, fully democratic manner in the EU, the stances taken by national governments in the Council should take due account of the views of their national parliaments, thereby reinforcing the democratic nature of the Council;

3.

Stresses that proper legitimacy and accountability must be ensured at national and EU level by the national parliaments and the European Parliament respectively; recalls the principle, set out in the conclusions of the December 2012 European Council meeting, that ‘throughout the process, the general objective remains to ensure democratic legitimacy and accountability at the level at which decisions are taken and implemented’;

4.

Commends the national parliaments for taking steps to:

5.

Recognises the role played by the committees of the European Parliament and those of the national parliaments throughout the EU legislative process;

6.

Deplores, therefore, the lack of transparency of such deliberations and the lack of balance in the flow of information between the European Parliament and the Council; calls on the Council to apply the same standards of transparency as Parliament, in particular during the drafting of legislative acts;

7.

Believes that the lack of transparency of Council deliberations, in particular regarding legislative acts, makes it difficult for governments to be genuinely accountable to their national parliaments;

8.

Notes that the thresholds provided for in Article 7(3) of Protocol No 2 have been reached twice to date in the subsidiarity scrutiny process; recalls that the purpose of the early warning mechanism is not to block the European decision-making process, but to improve the quality of EU legislation by ensuring, in particular, that the EU operates within its competences;

9.

Takes the view, therefore, that the monitoring of compliance with the subsidiarity principle by the national parliaments and the European institutions should be seen not as an undue restriction, but as a mechanism for guaranteeing the competences of the national parliaments. in that it helps to mould the form and substance of beneficial EU legislative activity;

10.

Believes that the early warning mechanism should be viewed and used as one of the tools for ensuring effective cooperation between European and national institutions;

11.

Welcomes the fact that in practice this mechanism is also being used as a channel for consultation and cooperative dialogue between the various institutions within the EU’s multilevel system;

12.

Believes that reasoned opinions delivered by the national parliaments should be viewed by the institutions not least as an opportunity to gain a clearer picture of how best to achieve the objectives set for legislative acts, and calls on the Commission to reply promptly and fully to reasoned opinions and contributions sent in by the national parliaments;

13.

Reiterates that EU interparliamentary cooperation does not take the place of the normal parliamentary scrutiny exercised by the European Parliament in accordance with the competences conferred on it by the Treaties and by the national parliaments over their governments’ EU-related activities; believes that its aim is to:

14.

Views interparliamentary meetings as places where EU and national policies come together and feed off each other, to the benefit of both; believes that a key function of such meetings is to allow the national parliaments to take account of the European perspective in national debates, and the European Parliament to take account of the national perspective in European debates;

15.

Draws attention to the fact that the novel European interparliamentary system is still taking shape and needs to reflect a consensus-based approach in accordance with Title II, Article 9 of Protocol No 1 to the Lisbon Treaty, under which both the European Parliament and the national parliaments are jointly tasked with determining by consensus the organisation and promotion of interparliamentary cooperation within the Union, although any attempt to devise a common framework for interparliamentary cooperation is still premature;

16.

Welcomes the actions that have been taken — in accordance with the recommendations of the steering group on relations with the national parliaments — since the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon to intensify cooperation between the national parliaments and the European Parliament, in particular as regards the planning of interparliamentary committee meetings, the increase in the number of such meetings (50 since 2010), the forwarding to members of the national parliaments and relevant political bodies of national parliament submissions (reasoned opinions and contributions), the introduction of videoconferences, the promotion of bilateral visits, technical improvements to the InterParliamentary EU information eXchange (IPEX), the increase in the number of collaborative projects carried out under the aegis of the European Centre for Parliamentary Research and Documentation (ECPRD), visits by administrative officials and the exchange of information and of best practice; believes that these actions help to make interparliamentary relations more efficient and more focused, while contributing to parliamentary democratisation;

17.

Stresses that interparliamentary meetings need to be organised in close cooperation with the national parliaments in order to enhance their effectiveness and quality; recommends, therefore, their inclusion at the earliest stage possible in drafting the agenda for interparliamentary meetings;

18.

Believes that the development of interparliamentary meetings should be based on practical arrangements allowing for the special features of each type of meeting;

19.

Commends the effectiveness of interparliamentary committee meetings and calls for closer cooperation between rapporteurs on specific legislative issues;

20.

Welcomes the effective meetings between political groups and European political parties as part of the arrangements for EU interparliamentary cooperation; calls for further endorsement of these meetings as an effective means of developing an authentic European political consciousness;

21.

Welcomes the role played by IPEX, above all as a platform for the exchange of information on parliamentary scrutiny procedures, notwithstanding the language-related difficulties that may arise; calls, with a view to making the dialogue between parliaments as effective as possible, for the national parliaments to pay particular attention to the principle of multilingualism;

22.

Stresses that interparliamentary cooperation must be open and inclusive, and voices its concern about restricted interparliamentary meetings, to which some parliaments are not invited, being organised without proper consultation in order to adopt positions on EU affairs which are not consensus-based;

23.

Notes that the ‘political dialogue’, set up under the Barroso Initiative in 2006, and the early warning mechanism are two sides of the same coin; notes the development of wide-ranging relations between the national parliaments and the Commission and the establishment of ‘enhanced political dialogue’ as part of the European semester for economic policy coordination;

24.

Proposes that an understanding be developed between the national parliaments and the European Parliament, which could form the basis for efficient cooperation pursuant to Article 9 of Protocol No 1 to the Lisbon Treaty and Rule 130 of its own Rules of Procedure;

25.

Calls for regular, thematically structured and effective meetings between political groups and European political parties to be held in the framework of EU interparliamentary cooperation;

26.

Stresses that interparliamentary cooperation must seek at all times to bring the right people together at the right time to address the right issues in a meaningful way, so as to ensure that the decisions taken in the various areas of responsibility benefit from the ‘added value’ brought by real dialogue and proper debate;

27.

Believes that COSAC should remain the forum for a regular exchange of views, information and best practice regarding practical aspects of parliamentary scrutiny;

28.

Recalls that with respect to the conference on economic governance, which is based on Article 13 of the Treaty on Stability, Coordination and Governance, an agreement reached by the EU Speakers at their conference in Nicosia in April 2013 provides for a number of arrangements for that conference and for a review of these arrangements, to be completed in 2015 at the Rome EU Speakers' Conference; takes the view, therefore, that any procedure for the adoption of practical arrangements for the conference on economic governance prior to that review would be premature and should therefore be avoided;

29.

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

22.12.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 443/46

—

having regard to the draft Council regulation (05600/2014),

—

having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with the fourth paragraph of Article 311 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and Article 106a of the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community (C7-0047/2014),

—

having regard to its resolution of 29 March 2007 on the future of the European Union’s own resources (1),

—

having regard to its resolution of 8 June 2011 on investing in the future: a new Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) for a competitive, sustainable and inclusive Europe (2),

—

having regard to its resolution of 13 June 2012 on the Multiannual Financial Framework and own resources (3),

—

having regard to its resolution of 23 October 2012 in the interest of achieving a positive outcome of the Multiannual Financial Framework approval procedure (4),

—

having regard to its resolution of 13 March 2013 on the European Council conclusions of 7-8 February 2013 concerning the Multiannual Financial Framework (5),

—

having regard to its resolution of 3 July 2013 on the political agreement on the Multiannual Financial Framework 2014-2020 (6),

—

having regard to its resolution of 16 April 2014 on implementing measures for the system of own resources of the European Union (7),

—

having regard to the fact that for the first time the Treaty requires Parliament's consent to implementing measures for the system of the Union's own resources,

—

having regard to Rule 81(1), first and third subparagraphs, of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on Budgets (A7-0269/2014),

1.

Gives its consent to the draft Council regulation;

2.

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

22.12.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 443/47

—

having regard to the draft Council decision (05600/2014),

—

having regard to the Commission proposal for a Council regulation (COM(2011)0740),

—

having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with the third paragraph of Article 311 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C7-0047/2014),

—

having regard to its resolution of 29 March 2007 on the future of the European Union’s own resources (1),

—

having regard to its resolution of 8 June 2011 on investing in the future: a new Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) for a competitive, sustainable and inclusive Europe (2),

—

having regard to its resolution of 13 June 2012 on the Multiannual Financial Framework and own resources (3),

—

having regard to its resolution of 23 October 2012 in the interest of achieving a positive outcome of the Multiannual Financial Framework approval procedure (4),

—

having regard to its resolution of 13 March 2013 on the European Council conclusions of 7-8 February 2013 concerning the Multiannual Financial Framework (5),

—

having regard to its resolution of 3 July 2013 on the political agreement on the Multiannual Financial Framework 2014-2020 (6),

—

having regard to the second subparagraph of Rule 81(1) of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgets (A7-0270/2014),

A.

whereas, according to Article 311 TFEU, the Council, acting by means of regulation in accordance with a special legislative procedure, shall lay down implementing measures for the Union’s own resources system in so far as this is provided for in the decision laying down the provisions relating to the system of own resources of the Union;

B.

whereas Article 311 TFEU also stipulates that the budget shall be financed wholly from own resources and allows the Council to establish new categories of own resources or abolish an existing category, providing thus the legal basis for an in-depth reform of the own resources system;

C.

whereas Parliament has continuously called for the financing of the EU budget to return to a genuine system of own resources, as stipulated in the Treaty; whereas it has regularly highlighted the shortcomings and limits of the existing system of own resources, the lack of transparency and high complexity of which make it totally incomprehensible to European citizens, who ultimately bear the consequences;

D.

whereas national contributions to the EU budget, based on GNI, which amount nowadays to around 74 % of total EU revenue, cannot be considered as genuine own resources as they simply constitute transfers from national treasuries to the EU budget; whereas the VAT-based resource, which represents around 11 % of total EU revenue, has developed in such way that it is also perceived as a national contribution to the EU budget; whereas this situation has reinforced, over decades, the logic of ‘fair return’ that also clearly prevailed in the conclusions of the European Council of 7-8 February 2013 on the MFF 2014-2020 and has largely prevented a structural reform of the EU budget;

E.

whereas, because of austerity measures, Member States are reluctant to increase their contributions to the EU budget, despite the undisputed benefits they derive from EU budget-funded programmes, and whereas a system of direct own resources for the EU is the only viable solution;

F.

whereas Parliament has consistently manifested its support for the Commission proposals, presented in June 2011, which — by reducing the share of national contributions to the EU budget to a maximum of 40 %, abolishing the current purely statistical VAT-based contribution and replacing it by a genuine VAT-based EU resource, creating one new and genuine own resource and replacing all rebates and correction mechanisms by a system of lump sums for the period 2014-2020 — took a step in the right direction by bringing the EU budget revenue side into line with the letter and spirit of the Treaty, and which, as such, from the outset gained the support of an overwhelming majority in Parliament;

G.

whereas despite its discontent with the inability of the Council to progress on the reform of the system of own resources, Parliament eventually gave its consent to the MFF 2014-2020 Regulation in November 2013, following the agreement with the Council on a joint declaration on the establishment of the High-Level Group on Own Resources; whereas, on that occasion, the Lithuanian Presidency declared its commitment to organising the inaugural meeting of this Group on 18-19 December 2013; whereas, due to delays within the Council in deciding on its three nominees to this High-Level Group, the meeting is only taking place in April 2014;

H.

whereas the High-Level Group on Own Resources aims to produce a first assessment of the current system’s shortcomings by the end of 2014, with a final outcome in 2016 to be assessed at an interinstitutional conference with the participation of national parliaments; whereas the High-Level Group should examine all aspects of the reform of the own resources system with a view to providing the Commission with the necessary means to assess whether new own-resource initiatives are appropriate in parallel with the post electoral review/revision of the 2014-2020 MFF (to be launched no later than the end of 2016) and to propose a successful reform for the period covered by the post-2020 Multiannual Financial Framework;

1.

Welcomes the Council’s agreement to lay down implementing measures for the Union’s own resources as provided for in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;

2.

Considers it regrettable, however, that the Council has decided to transfer the provisions related to the calculation of the GNI resources back to the Own Resources Decision; takes the view that this represents a missed opportunity to group together all implementing provisions in a single text, and that Article 311 of the Treaty of Lisbon does not provide an objective justification for this split;

3.

Deplores the fact that the Council has not been able to make any progress on the reform of the own resources system on the basis of the legislative proposals put forward by the Commission;

4.

Maintains its call for reform of the own resources system of the European Union in order to make it simple, transparent, fair, visible and understandable to EU citizens, thereby reinforcing the EU citizens’ link to the European project while at the same time reducing the burden on Member States’ national treasuries;

5.

Places high expectations on the work of the High-Level Group on Own Resources, which it believes offers a unique opportunity to overcome the current blockage of the reform of the system of own resources; welcomes the first meeting of the High-Level Group on 3 April 2014; expects that, despite the considerable and regrettable delay in organising this inaugural meeting, the High-Level Group will still comply with the objectives and the calendar set out in the joint declaration establishing the High-Level Group on Own Resources;

6.

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

22.12.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 443/49

—

having regard to the first bilateral summit held in the Hague in 1991 and to the adoption of a joint declaration on EC-Japan relations,

—

having regard to the 10th bilateral summit held in Brussels in 2001 and the adoption of the EU-Japan action plan entitled ‘Shaping our common future’, including the objectives of promoting peace and security, strengthening the economic and trade partnership, coping with global and societal challenges, and bringing together people and cultures,

—

having regard to the negotiations authorised by the Council on 29 November 2012 and opened in Brussels on 25 March 2013 on an EU-Japan strategic partnership agreement,

—

having regard to the negotiations launched on 25 March 2013 on an EU-Japan free trade agreement,

—

having regard to the 21st EU-Japan summit held in Tokyo on 19 November 2013,

—

having regard to the Guidelines on the EU’s Foreign and Security Policy in East Asia, which were approved by the Council on 15 June 2012,

—

having regard to its resolutions of 3 February 2009 on Second Strategic Energy Review (1) and of 24 March 2011 on the situation in Japan, particularly the state of alert at the nuclear power stations (2),

—

having regard to its resolution of 7 October 2010 on the EU strategic objectives for the 10th Meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), to be held in Nagoya (Japan) from 18 to 29 October 2010 (3),

—

having regard to its resolution of 16 February 2012 on the death penalty in Japan (4),

—

having regard to its resolution of 11 May 2011 on EU-Japan trade relations (5),

—

having regard to its resolution of 10 December 2013 containing the European Parliament’s recommendation to the Council, the Commission and the European External Action Service on the negotiations for an EU-Canada Strategic Partnership Agreement (6),