Aprobación de la gestión 2023: presupuesto general de la UE – Consejo Europeo y Consejo

Texto tal como lo publica el PE, en inglés.

1. Enmienda 1 · Propuesta de ResoluciónRechazada

   Paragraph 20

   Presentada por Pasquale Tridico · The Left

   20. Eliminado: Notes Añadido: Regrets the Council’s tradition of not questioning the appointments of individual Member States for most Eliminado: positions; Añadido: positions which means that the professional qualifications of candidates are not thoroughly checked; insists, therefore, on the need for a review of the Council’s prerogative with a view to guaranteeing and strengthening the participation of the institutions, bodies, offices and agencies concerned and increasing the legitimacy of those appointed; suggests that one possibility to ensure that candidates have the necessary qualifications would be to apply the same screening by an external panel used for the nominations of the judges and advocates-general of the Court of Justice of the European Union.

2. Enmienda 2 · Propuesta de ResoluciónRechazada

   Paragraph 20 a (new)

   Presentada por Pasquale Tridico · The Left

   Añadido: 20 a. Regrets that the Council has so far ignored Parliament’s resolution of 17 December 2020 on the need for a dedicated Council configuration on gender equality1a and insists that a dedicated institutional forum would ensure stronger integration of gender equality in Union policies and strategies as well as essential coordination and progress in the main files related to gender equality; 1a OJ C 445, 29.10.2021, p. 150.

3. Enmienda 3 · Propuesta de ResoluciónRechazada

   Paragraph 22 a (new)

   Presentada por Pasquale Tridico · The Left

   Añadido: 22 a. Expresses its deep concern regarding the increasing role of the European Council in legislative files, despite the fact that it has neither a legislative nor an executive function and that it does not apply the same transparency standards as the Council, meaning that it is not being held accountable;

4. Enmienda 4 · Propuesta de ResoluciónAprobada

   Paragraph 52

   Presentada por Pasquale Tridico · The Left

   … harmonized ethics rules on conflicts of interest, revolving doors, and lobbying transparency; Añadido: recalls the Parliament’s position that Member State representatives who benefit directly from Union subsidies through the businesses they own should not be allowed to participate in policy or budgetary discussions and votes related to those subsidies; regrets that the Council does not fully use the mandatory transparency register …

5. Enmienda 5 · Propuesta de ResoluciónRechazada

   Paragraph 22 a (new)

   Presentada por Carla Tavares · S&D

   Añadido: 22 a. Notes that the use of the unanimity voting procedure in the Council on certain policy areas can negatively affect the Union’s decision-making process and therefore making it prone to blackmailing by Member States, especially those who fail to respect the rule of law; calls on the Council to apply the qualified majority voting procedures whenever provided by the Treaties; notes that a shift to a qualified majority voting procedure in the Council may be one avenue towards more efficient policy-making;

6. Enmienda 7 · Propuesta de ResoluciónRechazada

   Paragraph 23 a (new)

   Presentada por Damian Boeselager · Greens/EFA

   Añadido: 23 a. Raises concerns over the use of unanimity requirement in the Council and European Council, which impedes crucial decision-making in critical areas of foreign policy, enlargement procedures, budgetary matters and transparency; notes that unanimity requirement has caused significant impediment to effectively respond to Russia’s action, in particular on the imposition of sanctions which are subject to renewal every three months; expresses concern that efforts to support for Ukraine have been weakened due to the need for unanimity; calls on the Council to shift to qualified majority voting in critical areas in order for the Union to be able to act effectively in the face of global challenges;

7. Enmienda 8 · Propuesta de ResoluciónRechazada

   Paragraph 57 a (new)

   Presentada por Damian Boeselager, Daniel Freund · Greens/EFA

   Añadido: 57 a. Regrets the Council’s dismissive and inappropriate response to a legitimate written question by Members of the European Parliament regarding the accommodation arrangements during the European Political Community and informal European Council meetings in Budapest; stresses that written questions are an essential instrument for parliamentary scrutiny and accountability; calls on the Council to fully respect Parliament’s right of scrutiny by providing serious, informative, and respectful answers to queries raised by its Members;