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
ENVI-PA-615396
Committee on Environment, Public Health and Food Safety · Rapporteur: Angélique Delahaye
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 the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety gives its draft opinion on the Commission proposal to amend Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 on Member States' control of the Commission's implementing powers.¶¶ The rapporteur welcomes the proposals on calculating a qualified majority, a further referral to the appeal committee and a possible referral to the Council, and on disclosure of votes.¶¶¶ The rapporteur stresses that the current system works well and that the changes concern only around 2% of draft implementing acts, so the comitology framework should not be changed as such.¶ The draft opinion asks for more transparency: disclosure of votes with reasons, information campaigns, and Parliament being informed of referrals to the Council and of the adoption of basic acts.¶¶¶ It tables 13 amendments to the proposal, covering scientific evidence, sensitive sectors, the appeal committee's further meeting, the Council's role and transparency of votes.¶¶¶
Committee position. The rapporteur welcomes the proposal's aims on qualified majority calculation, further referral and disclosure of votes, but wants more transparency and broader wording on sensitive sectors and the appeal committee's political level. The committee calls on the Committee on Legal Affairs to take into account 13 amendments.¶¶¶
Key points
- The rapporteur welcomes the proposal to stop counting abstaining Member States' votes when calculating a qualified majority in the appeal committee.¶
- The rapporteur welcomes the proposed further referral to the appeal committee and a possible referral to the Council by the Commission, and the disclosure of votes.¶¶
- The rapporteur says the current system works well and the changes should apply only at appeal committee level when no opinion is delivered, around 2% of draft implementing acts.¶
- The rapporteur wants greater transparency on sensitive issues such as tax, consumer health, food safety and environmental protection, through disclosure of votes with reasons and information campaigns.¶¶
- The rapporteur says disclosure of votes and reasons lets abstaining Member States explain their position, since their vote will no longer count for the qualified majority.¶
- The rapporteur asks that Parliament always be properly informed at the same time as the Council of the adoption of basic acts, and of the conclusions of any referral to the Council.¶
- Amendment 1 adds to Recital 2 that decision-making must keep based on sound, objective and non-discriminatory scientific evidence and the most up-to-date scientific standards and methods.¶¶
- Amendment 2 adds particularly sensitive sectors, such as tax, consumer health, food safety and environmental protection, to Recital 3, so as not to focus only on some sectors.¶¶
- Amendment 3 adds a recital stating that only a very limited number of cases have been referred to the appeal committee.¶¶
- Amendments 4 and 5 move the detail on sensitive sectors to Recital 3 and state that Member States should fully assume their responsibility and take a collective decision.¶¶¶
- Amendments 6 and 10 provide for a further appeal committee meeting at an appropriate political level, with the opinion to be delivered within 3 months of the initial referral.¶¶¶
- Amendments 7, 8, 9, 11, 12 and 13 require the Council to give its opinion at the Commission's request, votes to be public with a justification, a joint communication on risk assessment, and Parliament to be informed of the referral outcome and of basic acts.¶¶¶
Who is affected
- Member States: must assume their responsibilities, explain their votes and no longer have abstentions counted for the qualified majority in the appeal committee.¶¶¶
- The Commission: must take account of the Council's position within 3 months and inform Parliament of the referral outcome.¶¶
- The Council: may give its opinion on the wider implications of the absence of an opinion, at the Commission's request.
- The European Parliament: must be informed as soon as possible of the referral outcome and, at the same time as the Council, of the adoption of basic acts.¶¶
- European citizens: to be better informed through a joint communication on risk assessment and the EU decision-making process.¶