On the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member States of the Commission’s exercise of implementing powers
AGRI-PA-647138
Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development · Rapporteur: Bronis Ropė
Written by a language model from the full text only; every figure comes from the text. The paragraph links open the paragraph a statement rests on — check the text itself before relying on it.
The Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development's draft opinion responds to the Commission's proposal to amend Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 on comitology. It proposes amendments to increase democracy, transparency and Member States' responsibility, and to ensure important decisions are not left to a small number of Member States.¶¶¶ The draft deletes the proposed further appeal committee meeting at ministerial level and the change to voting rules that would count only present or non-abstaining Member States. It deletes the proposed referral to the Council and adds a precautionary principle rule for authorisations concerning health or the environment.¶¶¶ It strengthens transparency by requiring publication of how Member State representatives vote, their substantive reasons, and details on committee composition and attendance. It also allows Parliament or the Council to ask the Commission to review implementing powers in a basic act.¶¶¶
Committee position. The committee proposes amendments to the Commission's proposal to increase democracy, transparency and Member States' responsibility, and to delete provisions on further appeal committee meetings, changed voting rules and referral to the Council.¶¶¶
Key points
- The draft opinion aims to increase democracy, transparency and accountability in the comitology process and to make Member States more responsible.¶¶¶
- It opposes counting only present or non-abstaining Member States for qualified majority calculations, as this would leave important decisions to a small number of Member States.¶¶
- It deletes the proposed further appeal committee meeting at ministerial level, as results usually do not differ from the standing committee.¶¶
- It deletes the proposed change to voting rules for the appeal committee, arguing Member State representatives may have valid reasons to abstain.¶¶
- It deletes the proposed referral to the Council for an opinion on the wider implications of no opinion, as its added value is unclear.¶¶
- It requires transparency throughout the legislative process, including publication of how Member State representatives vote and their substantive reasons.¶¶
- It adds a new recital allowing Parliament and the Council to indicate that the conferral of implementing powers in a basic act needs review when positive opinions are difficult to obtain.¶¶
- It adds a rule that for basic acts concerning health or safety of humans, animals, plants or the environment, if no positive opinion is voted, the Commission shall not adopt the draft implementing act and authorisation is not granted.¶¶
- It requires summary records to include lists of persons present and the authorities and organisations they belong to.¶¶
- It requires voting results to include votes expressed by each Member State representative and their substantive reasons.¶¶
- It allows Parliament or the Council to indicate that a draft implementing act exceeds implementing powers or that the conferral of implementing powers needs review, and the Commission must review and inform them of its intentions.¶¶
Who is affected
- Member States: must assume greater responsibility and provide substantive reasons for votes.¶¶
- European Commission: must review draft implementing acts or basic acts when Parliament or Council indicates concerns.¶
- European Parliament and Council: may indicate that implementing powers need review.¶
- Products or substances requiring authorisation: authorisation not granted if no positive opinion and health or environmental protection is concerned.¶