Sittings · Compare
What changed
DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION
on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the supplementary protection certificate for plant protection products (recast)
(COM(2023)0223 – C90149/2023 – 2023/0128(COD))
(Ordinary legislative procedure – recast)
The European Parliament,
– having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2023)0223),
– having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 114(1) Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C90149/2023),
– having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
– having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 27 September 2023,
– having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 28 November 2001 on a more structured use of the recasting technique for legal acts,
– having regard to Rules 110 and 59 of its Rules of Procedure,
– having regard to the opinion of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development,
– having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs (A9-0023/2024),
A. whereas, according to the Consultative Working Party of the legal services of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission, the Commission proposal does not include any substantive amendments other than those identified as such in the proposal and whereas, as regards the codification of the unchanged provisions of the earlier acts together with those amendments, the proposal contains a straightforward codification of the existing texts, without any change in their substance;
1. Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;
2. Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it replaces, substantially amends or intends to substantially amend its proposal;
3. Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.
Amendment 1
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Amendment 2
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Amendment 3
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32
Amendment 4
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40
Amendment 5
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41
Amendment 6
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 15 a (new)
Amendment 7
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2
Amendment 8
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Amendment 9
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – point a
Amendment 10
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 2
Amendment 11
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 3
Amendment 12
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 2
Amendment 13
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 4 – point c a (new)
Amendment 14
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 6
Amendment 15
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 8 a (new)
Amendment 16
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 9
Amendment 17
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 10
Amendment 18
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 11
Amendment 19
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 12 a (new)
Amendment 20
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1
Amendment 21
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 3 – point a
Amendment 22
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 3 – point a a (new)
Amendment 23
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 3 – point c
Amendment 24
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 3
Amendment 25
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Amendment 26
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 5
Amendment 27
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 4
Amendment 28
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Amendment 29
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 1 – point j
Amendment 30
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 1 – point l
Amendment 31
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 1 – point m
Amendment 32
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 3
Amendment 33
Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – paragraph 1
ANNEX: ENTITIES OR PERSONS FROM WHOM THE RAPPORTEUR HAS RECEIVED INPUT
Pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure, the rapporteur declares that he has received input from the following entities or persons in the preparation of the report, until the adoption thereof in committee:
The list above is drawn up under the exclusive responsibility of the rapporteur.
29.6.2023
LETTER OF THE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT
Mr Adrián Vázquez Lázara
Norbert Lins
6.11.2023
LETTER OF THE COMMITTEE ON LEGAL AFFAIRS
Mr Adrián Vázquez Lázara
Chair
Committee on Legal Affairs
BRUSSELS
Subject: Opinion on the Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the supplementary protection certificate for plant protection products (recast) (COM(2023)0223 – C90149/2023 – 2023/0128(COD))
Dear Mr Chair,
The Committee on Legal Affairs has examined the proposal referred to above pursuant to Rule 110 on recasting of Parliament's Rules of Procedure.
Paragraph 3 of that Rule reads as follows:
“If the committee responsible for legal affairs considers that the proposal does not entail any substantive changes other than those identified as such in the proposal, it shall inform the committee responsible for the subject matter thereof.
In such a case, over and above the conditions laid down in Rules 180 and 181, amendments shall be admissible within the committee responsible for the subject-matter only if they concern those parts of the proposal which contain changes.
However, amendments to parts of the proposal which remain unchanged may, by way of exception and on a case-by-case basis, be accepted by the Chair of the committee responsible for the subject matter if he or she considers that this is necessary for pressing reasons relating to the internal logic of the text or because the amendments are inextricably linked to other admissible amendments. Such reasons must be stated in a written justification to the amendments.”
Following the here attached opinion of the Consultative Working Party of the Legal Services of the Parliament, the Council and the Commission, which has examined the recast proposal, and in keeping with the recommendations of the Rapporteur, the Committee on Legal Affairs considers that the proposal in question does not include any substantive changes other than those identified as such and that, as regards the codification of the unchanged provisions of the earlier act with those substantive amendments, the proposal contains a straightforward codification of the existing text, without any change in its substance.
In conclusion, at its meeting of 24 October 2023, the Committee on Legal Affairs unanimously decided to recommend that the Committee on Legal Affairs, as the committee responsible, proceed to examine the above proposal in accordance with Rule 110.
Yours sincerely,
Adrián Vázquez Lázara
Encl.: Opinion of the Consultative Working Party.
Annex
Brussels, 1 August 2023
OPINION
FOR THE ATTENTION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
THE COUNCIL
THE COMMISSION
Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the supplementary protection certificate for plant protection products
COM(2023)0223 of 27.4.2023 – 2023/0128(COD)
Having regard to the Inter-institutional Agreement of 28 November 2001 on a more structured use of the recasting technique for legal acts, and in particular to point 9 thereof, the Consultative Working Party consisting of the respective legal services of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission met on 6 July 2023 for the purpose of examining the aforementioned proposal submitted by the Commission.
At that meeting, an examination of the proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council recasting Regulation (EC) No 1610/96 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 July 1996 concerning the creation of a supplementary protection certificate for plant protection products resulted in the Consultative Working Party’s establishing, by common accord, as follows.
1. The deletion of recitals 13 and 14 of Regulation (EC) No 1610/96 should have been marked with the grey-shaded type generally used for identifying substantive amendments.
2. The following should have been identified as formal adaptations:
- in the title of the act, the replacement of the words ‘concerning the creation of a supplementary protection certificate’ with the words ‘on the supplementary protection certificate’;
- in Article 3(1), introductory wording, the adding of the word ‘and’;
- in Article 8(1), point (a)(iv) and point (c), the replacement of the words ‘to place’ with the words ‘for placing’;
- in Article 8(2), the replacement of the word ‘require’ with the word ‘provide’;
- in Article 12, the adding of the word ‘that’ and the deletion of the word ‘to’ before the words ‘be subject’.
3. In Article 3(1), point (b), and in Article 8(1), point (c), the words ‘medicinal product’ should be replaced by the words ‘plant protection product’.
In consequence, examination of the proposal has enabled the Consultative Working Party to conclude, without dissent, that the proposal does not comprise any substantive amendments other than those identified as such. The Working Party also concluded, as regards the codification of the unchanged provisions of the earlier act with those substantive amendments, that the proposal contains a straightforward codification of the existing legal text, without any change in its substance.
F. DREXLER E. FINNEGAN D. CALLEJA CRESPO
Jurisconsult Jurisconsult Director-General
PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE
FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE