EUU, Alm.del - 2014-15 (2. samling) - Bilag 56: Referat af COSAC-formandsmøde og Trojka-møde i Luxembourg 12-13/7-15

Europaudvalget 2014-15 (2. samling)
EUU Alm.del Bilag 56
Offentligt

MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE CHAIRPERSONS OF COSAC

Luxembourg, Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, 13 July 2015

AGENDA:

1. Welcome address by Mr Mars DI BARTOLOMEO, Speaker of the Luxembourg

Chambre des Députés

Introductory remarks by Mr Marc ANGEL, Chair of the Committee on Foreign

and European Affairs, Defence, Cooperation and Immigration of the

Luxembourg

Chambre des Députés

2. Adoption of the agenda of the meeting of the Chairpersons of COSAC

3. Priorities of the Luxembourg Presidency of the Council of the European Union -

keynote speaker: Mr Nicolas SCHMIT, Minister of Labour, Employment and

the Social and Solidarity Economy

4. Procedural issues and miscellaneous matters

5. Strengthening of the political dialogue by introducing a "green card" and

improvement of the reasoned opinion procedure ("yellow card") - keynote

speakers: Mr Paulo MOTA PINTO, Chair of the Committee on European

Affairs of the Portuguese

Assembleia da República,

Lord Timothy BOSWELL,

Chair of the European Union Committee of the UK

House of Lords,

and Mr

Frans TIMMERMANS, First Vice-President of the European Commission for

Better Regulation, Interinstitutional Relations, the Rule of Law and the Charter

of Fundamental Rights

PROCEEDINGS

IN THE CHAIR: Mr Marc ANGEL, Chair of the Committee on Foreign and European Affairs,

Defence, Cooperation and Immigration

Luxembourg

Chambre des Députés.

Welcome address by Mr Mars DI BARTOLOMEO, Speaker of the Luxembourg

Chambre

des Députés

Introductory remarks by Mr Marc ANGEL, Chair of the Committee on Foreign and

European Affairs, Defence, Cooperation and Immigration

Luxembourg

Chambre des Députés

Mr DI BARTOLOMEO welcomed all the Chairpersons of COSAC and started his speech affirming

that the European Integration was still something attractive for the peoples of Europe. Referring to

the negotiations in Brussels for a deal on the Greek bailout, he mentioned that the EU had often

been built during crises. Only extraordinary courage and solidarity allowed overcoming of those

crises. He stated that strong, innovative and committed national Parliaments were indispensable for

the evolution of the European project. He explained that the COSAC Chairpersons and other

interparliamentary meetings planned by the Luxembourg Presidency were meant to allow the

representatives of the peoples of Europe to make their voices heard. He indicated that the

Presidency's meetings would include the Interparliamentary Conference for the Common Foreign

and Security Policy (CFSP) and the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP), the

Interparliamentary Conference under Article 13 of the Treaty on Stability, Coordination and

Governance in the Economic and Monetary Union, as well as a Chairpersons meeting on the social

dimension of the EU. In this context, he reminded that the EU should work for an inclusive social

model that would deserve the triple social A. Mr DI BARTOLOMEO also announced that the

Luxembourg

Chambre des Députés

would organise in December a meeting to underline the

EUU, Alm.del - 2014-15 (2. samling) - Bilag 56: Referat af COSAC-formandsmøde og Trojka-møde i Luxembourg 12-13/7-15

importance of 2015 as the European Year of Development. He added that only peace, solidarity and

development were sustainable answers to the suffering of the refugees that we witnessed.

He affirmed his conviction that the national Parliaments should not play only a defensive role. He

invited them to create networks and to jointly promote coordinated actions, namely on the

Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership agreement (TTIP). He concluded wishing that the

parliamentary dimension of the Luxembourg Presidency of the EU Council could reach the

objective of reinforcing the legitimacy of the legislative process of the EU.

Mr Marc ANGEL saluted the fact that the reinforcement of the political dialogue represented one of

the main points on the agenda of this meeting and made the point that a deeper involvement of the

national Parliaments was an effective way to bring the citizens closer to the European institutions.

He reminded how the political dialogue helped to increase the participation of the national

Parliaments into the European Affairs procedures thus consolidating the parliamentary and

democratic dimension of the EU. He continued asserting that a stronger political dialogue would

mean a more constructive role of the national Parliaments into the legislative process of the EU and

a better legislation. Therefore he welcomed the possibility of debating on the ways to improve the

"yellow card" procedure following the informal working group that met in May in Warsaw. He

added that reinforcing the political dialogue also implied multiplying the meetings with the

European Commission, both at political and staff level. From this point of view, he welcomed the

decision by the European Commission to seek for opportunities to meet the national Parliaments

directly in the capitals of the Member States.

Subsequently, he welcomed Mr Tuur ELZINGA, Chair of the European Affairs Committee of the

Dutch

Eerste Kamer,

participating in COSAC for the first time and announced that Ms Eva KJER

HANSEN, former Chair of the European Affairs Committee of the Danish

Folketing,

had been

appointed as a member of the new Danish Government.

Mr ANGEL explained that, due to time constraints, Minister SCHMIT had to leave earlier and that

the procedural issues would be dealt with after his speech and the following debate on the priorities

of the Luxembourg Presidency.

2. Adoption of the agenda of the Meeting of the Chairpersons of COSAC

The Chair presented the topics and the keynote speakers on the agenda of the meeting of the

Chairpersons. The agenda was adopted without amendment.

3. Priorities of the Luxembourg Presidency of the Council of the European Union

Keynote speaker: Mr Nicolas SCHMIT, Minister of Labour, Employment and the Social and

Solidarity Economy

Mr SCHMIT stressed that the motto of the Luxembourg Presidency was Union for its citizens. Mr

SCHMIT was convinced that the national Parliaments had to play a crucial role and had to be more

included in the EU decision making process. He added that some perceived the EU as a problem,

but, given the right resources, it could be a solution. He mentioned that the EU had to produce

proposals in the field of better regulation in close cooperation with the European Parliament and

that national Parliaments had a fundamental role to play. He believed that the new interinstitutional

agreement between the EU institutions could be reached until the end of the year.

The Luxembourg Presidency had set up seven objectives and priorities.

EUU, Alm.del - 2014-15 (2. samling) - Bilag 56: Referat af COSAC-formandsmøde og Trojka-møde i Luxembourg 12-13/7-15

Firstly, Mr SCHMIT referred to more investment and growth. He said that quick implementation of

Junckers' EU Investment Plan (EU Investment Plan) was the main issue, emphasising, among

others, investment in Research and Development, education, skills to boost social cohesion, and

investment for small and medium enterprises (SMEs).

Secondly, he referred to social cohesion and informed the participants that, in the framework of the

social dimension, the Presidency aimed to open a broad discussion on the social aspect of the

Economic and Monetary Union (EMU), which was missing during the past years.

Mr SCHMIT presented the third objective in the area of Freedom, Justice and Security, which was

managing migration. Referring to the situation in the Mediterranean, he said the Luxembourg

Presidency had taken up this challenge very urgently. In this respect, the Presidency intended to

promote the return of migrants to their countries of origin. He stressed the need for healthy

management of migration and for safeguarding a common EU approach. He underlined that the EU

could not allow only a few countries assume the issue and that solidarity could not be a vague word.

Other important topics in this area included, among others, the EU Passenger Name Record (PNR)

proposal and the establishment of a European Public Prosecutor's Office.

The Presidency's fourth priority was the internal market, which, according to Mr SCHMIT, needed

to be dynamic. He mentioned the work on cutting barriers in the digital market, as well as the

enhanced work on energy union and transport for Europe.

On competitiveness of Europe, the fifth priority, he mentioned, among others, the target of

transparency, job creation, growth and solidarity. Referring to TTIP, he mentioned a report adopted

by the European Parliament the week before stressing the need of compatibility with EU values.

Sustainable development, directed towards environment, was also one of the key priorities of the

Luxembourg Presidency, said Mr SCHMIT, mentioning the circular economy package and

preparations for COP21 Paris meeting as the main task in this field.

As last, but not least priority Mr SCHMIT stressed the enhanced presence of the EU across the

world, also in light of the European Year for Development, especially mentioning the enlargement

process and accession negotiations with EU candidate countries.

He concluded mentioning the UK referendum. He said that the Luxembourg Presidency would

listen carefully to the UK proposals. He emphasised that the

acquis communautaire

could not be

jeopardised and that he was convinced that the UK would stay in the EU.

Finally, Mr SCHMIT said that Luxembourg Presidency did not have a modest agenda; Europe was

going through very difficult times and it was a common task not to put the noble project of Europe

in question.

Twenty-one speakers took the floor during the debate.

Mr Jean BIZET first took the floor and presented a joint declaration of the Chairs of the

Committees on EU affairs of the French

Sénat

and the Italian

Senato della Repubblica

on the

situation in Greece.

EUU, Alm.del - 2014-15 (2. samling) - Bilag 56: Referat af COSAC-formandsmøde og Trojka-møde i Luxembourg 12-13/7-15

Some parliamentarians welcomed the agreement on financial assistance for Greece reached by the

euro area Finance Ministers and Heads of State or Government over the week-end of 11 and 12 July

2015.

Many parliamentarians expressed their views on migration. Among others, Ms Ana BIRCHALL,

Romanian

Camera Deputaților,

stressed the need to find the right balance between migration and

security. Mr Ramón Luis VALCÁRCEL SISO, European Parliament, asked what the Luxembourg

Presidency was planning to do during their six month mandate period to reach an agreement

between Member States on the migration issues. Mr Luciano BUSUTTIL, Maltese

Kamra tad-

Deputati,

said that the exercise of migrant relocation was an exercise of solidarity. Mr Paolo

TANCREDI, Italian

Camera dei Deputati,

stressed the importance of solidarity, equal burden and

quota sharing. Mr Edmund WITTBRODT, Polish

Senat,

expressed the view that migration was a

big challenge and that it was necessary to link migration policy with labour mobility. Mr Christian

TYBRING-GJEDDE, Norwegian

Stortinget,

called for short and long-term solutions, which

included, among others, stabilisation of the situation in the countries of origin. Mr Peter LUYKX,

Belgian

Chambre des représentants,

stated that managing of migration was a horizontal issue, and

solidarity was a key aspect in dealing with this policy. He was convinced that every Member State

had to play its role and quota had to be shared among all EU countries. Mr NEOFYTOU, Cyprus

Vouli ton Antiprosopon,

added that the EU must establish a credible return policy.

Several parliamentarians expressed their views on the EU enlargement policy. Among others, Ms

Majlinda BREGU, Albanian

Shqipera,

and Ms Emira MEMMETI,

Sobranie

of the Former

Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, both urged the EU to find ways to continue EU enlargement. Mr

Richard HÖRCSIK, Hungarian

Országgyűlés,

welcomed enlargement as a Presidency priority and

expressed his hope that negotiations with Serbia would be opened soon. Mr Alexander SENIC,

Serbia

Narodna skupština,

expressed his concerns as to whether enlargement was indeed a priority

for the EU institutions and the Luxembourg Presidency, calling for better cooperation on regional

level in the Western Balkans. Ms Marija Maja CATOVIC, Montenegro

Skupština Crne Gore,

well stressed the need for closer regional cooperation in the Western Balkan countries.

Mr Karlheinz KOPF, Austrian

Nationalrat,

welcomed the Luxembourg Presidency's willingness to

implement the EU Investment Plan and urged for special focus on SMEs, especially as concerns

implementation of the Small Business Act. Mr Peter FRIEDRICH, German

Bundesrat,

underlined

the importance of a European industrial policy. He also called for a European tax system in order to

avoid a new crisis and welcomed the priorities on tax harmonisation and tax fraud.

Mr Malik AZMANI, Dutch

Tweede Kamer,

asked how the Luxembourg Presidency would deal

with internal and external policy challenges, which would also be on the EU agenda during the

Dutch Presidency.

Mr Philippe MAHOUX, Belgian

Sénat,

welcomed the social dimension as one of the key priorities

during the Luxembourg Presidency, calling for working towards a genuine social policy and for

tackling social dumping.

Mr Sean KYNE, Irish

Houses of the Oireachtas,

welcomed the approach of the Luxembourg

Presidency based on outreach and openness, listening to its citizens and supporting enterprises.

Ms Lolita ČIGĀNE, Latvian

Saeima,

after noting the progress made by the Latvian Presidency,

encouraged the Luxembourg Presidency to go on with the realisation of the Digital Single Market

EUU, Alm.del - 2014-15 (2. samling) - Bilag 56: Referat af COSAC-formandsmøde og Trojka-møde i Luxembourg 12-13/7-15

and the Energy Union. She urged the EU to become more active on EU strategic communication in

order to fight the information warfare that the EU was exposed to.

Mr Kalle PALLING, Estonian

Riigikogu,

expressed his worries that, while the EU was busy solving

the crisis in Greece or the migration crisis, Russia was taking advantage of this situation in Ukraine.

In his replies, Mr SCHMIT commented on the crisis in Greece, highlighting that it was difficult to

draw final conclusions; the solution reached was the result of a balance between solidarity and

responsibility, and helped the preservation of the Eurozone and the EU. He acknowledged that

Greece had burdens from the past but it was now time to help Greece to put its economy back on

the right track.

On migration, he highlighted that it was now time to implement the agreed measures by the

Council, which only constituted a first step. The reinstallation of refugees, working on the

instruments concerning repatriation which did not function efficiently and the establishment of a

common list of safe third countries were mentioned as work in progress. He stressed that any

solution must respect the principle of solidarity between Member States. He underlined that the

Luxembourg Presidency would try to find a solution to the migration question at several levels, also

extending actions to foreign policy, to fighting poverty in the countries of origin or to countering

the breakdown of state in some countries.

Commenting on EU economy, the Minister underlined the importance of reconstructing the

economies that were suffering most from the crisis. Europe also had to make sure it did not lag

behind in the switch to a digital economy or when it comes to new technologies. In his view, it was

not enough to invest in the internal market, but the EU must also invest in its human capital through

training or qualification measures, which would also help combatting unemployment. He warned

that if Europe was not able to reorient its economy, there would not be any growth or job creation.

He recalled that Europe had to strengthen its energy policy, notably by investing more in renewable

energies. He warned against being deluded by the cheaper energy price, given that the unstable

situation in some of the countries and unforeseen events could rapidly change this. He underlined

that the investment in renewables was also fundamental in the context of the negotiations in COP21.

On taxation, he underlined the need for more convergence, which did not mean unification, and for

clearer taxation rules, as well as for stepping up the fight against tax dumping, both internally and

externally, in order to avoid that more was to be shifted outside Europe. He added that within the

OECD, the creation of a level playing field on terms of taxation was absolutely essential.

Concerning enlargement, the Minister underlined the huge responsibility that the EU had towards

the countries that were not yet members of the EU. In the Western Balkans, the EU must help the

countries to ensure stability both inside the region but also inside the EU. He reminded that no one

needed another “Srebrenica” at the door of the EU.

He concluded by reminding that the European spirit must prevail. He acknowledged that the

challenges lying ahead could not be solved without the national Parliaments, which needed to be

more consulted and involved more actively in the European process. He underlined that national

Parliaments also had responsibility in combatting the mistrust that is growing against the European

project.

4. Procedural issues and miscellaneous matters

EUU, Alm.del - 2014-15 (2. samling) - Bilag 56: Referat af COSAC-formandsmøde og Trojka-møde i Luxembourg 12-13/7-15

Mr ANGEL gave a brief account of the results of the Troika meeting. He informed that the Troika

had discussed the creation of a working group on strengthening the political dialogue by introducing

a "green card" and by improving the "yellow card" procedure. He presented the draft agenda of the

LIV COSAC which would focus on three topics: a European Agenda on Migration; A Digital

Single Market Strategy for Europe; and Enlargement Policy.

Mr Levan BERDZENISHVILI,

Parliament of Georgia,

expressed his gratitude for the invitation to

attend the meeting. He reaffirmed Georgia’s willingness to reinforce interparliamentary cooperation

on the EU integration affairs. He mentioned the critical issue of the finalisation of visa liberalisation

process and expressed satisfaction for the launch of the EU-Georgia Parliamentary Association

Committee. He stressed that for his country de-occupation of occupied territories and consolidation

of international support for Georgia's sovereignty and territorial integrity was a top priority.

Mr Svetlen TANCHEV, Bulgarian

Narodno sabranie,

asked to add to the programme of the LIV

COSAC meeting a declaration in support of the accession of Bulgaria and Romania to the Schengen

area.

Mr ANGEL replied that at the LIV COSAC meeting in December the Bulgarian and Romanian

delegations would be able to make a statement on the issue during the session dedicated to the

security of external borders in the debate on the European agenda on migration.

Mr Vaclav HAMPL, Czech

Senát,

observed that the time constraints once more would leave little

time for discussions and that not all participants would be able to take the floor. For this reason, he

asked if it was possible in future to increase the time for discussion.

Mr ANGEL quoted Rule 8.4 of the COSAC Rules of Procedures concerning the allocation of

speaking time and said he would submit the question to the next meeting of the Presidential Troika.

Ms BIRCHALL underlined that Romania was acting as a

de facto

member of the Schengen area

since 2010. She congratulated the European institutions for their defence of the Schengen

acquis

from the attempts to use security as an excuse to restrict the freedom of movements. She concluded

by stressing the request that the two countries be judged for their achievements and not according to

the moving targets based on political decisions due to the internal affairs of some Member States.

Mr ANGEL, acknowledging the two countries' efforts in securing the external borders of the EU

and the technical progress made, stressed that a lengthier debate on these aspects would take place

during the LIV COSAC meeting in December, together with the broader question of the

conclusions to take from the cooperation and verification mechanism report.

Mr ANGEL presented the outline of the 24th Bi-annual Report of COSAC divided in three

chapters: the Future of parliamentary scrutiny of EU Affairs; the European agenda for Migration;

and Enlargement policy. The outline was approved with no amendment. He announced that the

questionnaire would be sent out by 29 July with a deadline for answers on 14 September 2015.

Mr ANGEL subsequently raised the point of the co-financing and appointment of the Permanent

Member of the COSAC Secretariat. He mentioned Rule 9.5 of the Rules of Procedure of COSAC

and indicated that the current agreement would expire by the end of 2015. He announced his

intention to address a letter to the Chairpersons of the European Affairs Committees asking

Parliaments to confirm their intention to extend the current co-financing agreement for two more

EUU, Alm.del - 2014-15 (2. samling) - Bilag 56: Referat af COSAC-formandsmøde og Trojka-møde i Luxembourg 12-13/7-15

years. He announced that the letters of intent would be expected by 15 October 2015. Referring to

Rule 9.3 regarding the appointment of the Permanent Member of the COSAC Secretariat, he

reminded the participants that the mandate of the current Permanent Member, Ms Christiana

FRYDA, would expire at the end of 2015. He announced that he had received a letter from the

Cyprus

Vouli ton Antiprosopon

recommending a renewal of Ms FRYDA`s mandate. The Chair

informed that the Troika, at its meeting the previous day, had agreed on proposing a renewal of the

term and submitted the proposal to the Chairpersons. The Chairpersons agreed, thus the Chair

suggested there was no need to invite national Parliaments to nominate candidates for the post. Mr

ANGEL thanked Ms FRYDA for her excellent work and the Cyprus

Vouli ton Antiprosopon

for

delegating her to the COSAC Secretariat. He underlined that the renewal of the appointment had to

be confirmed at the LIV COSAC meeting in December.

Finally, Mr ANGEL reported on the Troika's decisions as regards the letters received by the

Presidency.

5. Strengthening of the political dialogue by introducing a "green card" and improvement of

the reasoned opinion procedure ("yellow card")

Keynote speakers: Mr Paulo MOTA PINTO, Chair of the Committee on European Affairs of the

Portuguese

Assembleia da República,

Lord Timothy BOSWELL, Chair of the European Union

Committee of the UK

House of Lords,

and Mr Frans TIMMERMANS, First Vice-President of the

European Commission for Better Regulation, Interinstitutional Relations, the Rule of Law and the

Charter of Fundamental Rights.

Mr ANGEL noted that during the LIII COSAC in Riga a majority of Parliaments expressed their

willingness to create a new tool to reinforce the political dialogue by introducing a “green card”,

which would also help the national Parliaments to appear in a more positive light, instead of being

seen as hindrances to the work at European level. He reminded that the Contributions of Riga

invited the Luxembourg Presidency to set up a working group on strengthening the political

dialogue by introducing a “green card” and improving the reasoned opinion procedure (“yellow

card”). The intention of the Luxembourg Presidency was to propose to be concise, to discuss at a

political level in an efficient working group, that is to say one representative per chamber plus one

civil servant, to limit the language regime to French and English and to schedule the meetings

taking into account the dates of the COSAC meetings. The working group would also prepare a set

of non-binding guidelines on the drafting of reasoned opinions and also possibly of the

contributions in the context of political dialogue.

Mr Paulo MOTA PINTO, Chair of the Committee on European Affairs of the Portuguese

Assembleia da República,

recalled the evolution of the role of national Parliaments from an initial

perspective mainly focused on subsidiarity checks to a broader analysis in which the main question

was how national Parliaments could ensure influence in the EU decision-making process. He

welcomed the exchange of views on improving the “yellow card” mechanism that had taken place

in the past, but underlined that the exercise was not yet conclusive and the establishment of non-

binding set of rules of procedure needed to be analysed. However, in order to fulfill the provisions

of Article 12 of the Treaty of Lisbon, the “yellow card” could not be the only answer; the

participation of national Parliaments should be built mostly upon the political dialogue. He stressed

that national Parliaments were, in their own right, actors in the EU and should play a constructive

role by using their prerogatives without using however subsidiarity and the legitimacy of the

national Parliaments to undermine European integration.

EUU, Alm.del - 2014-15 (2. samling) - Bilag 56: Referat af COSAC-formandsmøde og Trojka-møde i Luxembourg 12-13/7-15

He acknowledged that political dialogue had no legal framework, but mirrored the expression of a

common will of both the national Parliaments and the European Commission, to work together

towards better legislation. In his view, the best way to improve the political dialogue was by

improving the content of the replies of the European Commission to national Parliaments’

contributions, namely by mentioning the impact of the positions; ensuring regular visits of

European Commissioners to national Parliaments; creating more opportunities for exchange of

views between parliamentary committees and the European Commission; extending the opinions of

national Parliaments also to matters of proportionality in the framework of the political dialogue

without the same legal effect as reasoned opinions; and by fully respecting the institutional balance

of powers foreseen in Article 289 (4) of the Treaty of Lisbon and the role of the European

Parliament foreseen in Article 225 TFEU.

Lord Timothy BOSWELL, Chair of the European Union Committee of the UK

House of Lords,

shared the experiences on the pilot “green card” on food waste launched by the UK

House of Lords

and in which several Parliaments agreed to participate. He estimated that the level of support had

been excellent, because fourteen Chambers, representing a third of all chambers, agreed to sign the

draft “green card”, while the time for endorsing the “green card” was still running. He suggested

sending this “green card” to the President of the Commission by the end of July and expressed his

hope that the European Commission would take the “green card” for what it was: a genuine attempt

to make a constructive proposal, reflecting the views of parliamentarians, and the people they

represented, across the EU.

Lord BOSWELL indicated that one of the lessons to be learnt from this pilot was that not all the

parliamentary Chambers had the same constitutional room for manoeuvre and the implementation

of this instrument would imply the modification of internal rules in some Member States. If a

formal procedure for a “green card” was to be established, some procedural issues needed to be

addressed in the long run, for example the question if formal assent should be given to a “green

card” by plenary or by committee. A second problem was the absence of a procedure to deal with

differences of opinion or proposed amendments; the question arose as to how amendments could be

integrated into the draft “green card”.

He concluded that the “green card” could be a valuable tool which would give national Parliaments

a forward gear. He added that democratic control was not only about saying no, but being

responsive to the citizens’ needs and acting upon them. He stressed that the aim of the “green card”

was not to challenge the role of the European Parliament, which remained crucial, but to help the

national Parliaments play a proper part and express their opinion within the framework of the

political dialogue and to contribute to a better future for Europe.

Mr Frans TIMMERMANS, First Vice-President of the European Commission for Better

Regulation, Interinstitutional Relations, the Rule of Law and the Charter of Fundamental Rights

underlined that the new Commission had 160 visits and contacts with national Parliaments and was

aiming at continuing this effort. He then highlighted that the reconnection of Europe with its

citizens passed through a stronger role of national Parliaments which would bridge the gap between

the EU level and how it was perceived by the citizens. He asserted that the age-old traditional

dichotomy between the national and the European levels belonged to the past. The Vice-President

indicated his wish to close the file on the Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Regulation under

the Luxembourg Presidency. He added that Europe needed to be more transparent because it was

often blamed for legislation that was actually added on at national level; national governments

should not get away with blaming Brussels for everything.

EUU, Alm.del - 2014-15 (2. samling) - Bilag 56: Referat af COSAC-formandsmøde og Trojka-møde i Luxembourg 12-13/7-15

He further stated that the perception in the EU institutions had been that national Parliaments were

looking for ways to say "no", however, he acknowledged that the initiative of the “green card”

would give national Parliaments the opportunity to say "yes". In his view, the “green card” implied

a change of philosophy which he appreciated.

Mr TIMMERMANS

underlining that he was speaking in political terms and not only in purely

legal terms, stressed that the European Commission would try and work constructively with any

initiatives that could count on broad support in national Parliaments. He expressed his opinion that

national Parliaments and the European Commission could work within the remit of the existing

treaties because there would not be any Treaty changes for this. He stated clearly that the treaties

foresaw the exclusive right of initiative for the European Commission, which the Commission

would not give up, but, that this would not mean the Commission was not listening to stakeholders.

In this regard, he referred to the Commission's relationship with the European Parliament based on

the treaties and on the European Parliament's role in giving a clear indication as to where it wanted

to go in political terms. On the concrete proposal on food waste, the First Vice-President

emphasised that the Commission strongly favoured the introduction of a circular economy,

underlining that the EU needed to transform its economy faster than other competitors into a

circular economy. The European Commission wanted to create the necessary legal environment to

help this transition, of which food waste was an important part.

Opening the floor to interventions, Mr ANGEL noted that all agreed to work towards enhancing the

political dialogue within the framework of the Treaty without going beyond it or against the

institutional balance of powers.

During the debate, 12 speakers took the floor. Several of them stressed the importance to strengthen

the existing forms of interparliamentary cooperation, but also the need to explore new initiatives on

improving cooperation. Many of the national Parliaments, as well as Mr VALCÁRCEL SISO,

European Parliament, expressed the view that any new initiative should respect the treaties and the

current inter-institutional balance. Mr SISO warned against new parallel procedures that could

jeopardise; existing procedures and problems should be tackled in a pragmatic way. Ms

BIRCHALL said that the EU did not need long institutional debates, but effective actions on

important issues and projects. She pointed out that existing mechanisms should be fully exploited

before creating new instruments.

The current efforts of the European Commission to interact more with and to pay closer attention to

national Parliaments were specifically mentioned by many delegations and were widely welcomed.

Mr Vannino CHITI, Italian

Senato della Repubblica,

explained the importance not only of

strengthening cooperation among national Parliaments, but also with the European Parliament and

the European Commission. He also mentioned that the commitment to strengthen the political

dialogue with the European Parliament and European Commission should be linked to the

Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Regulation.

Mr Jérôme LAMBERT, French

Assemblée nationale,

underlined what positively had been done by

the European Commission and the progress made in improving the quality of the replies that the

European Commission gave to national Parliaments in the context of the political dialogue. Mr

Richard HÖRCSIK, Hungarian

Országgyűlés

thanked the European Commission with regards to

the increase of visits of European Commissioners to national Parliaments.

On the introduction of the "green card", Lord BOSWELL's initiative on food waste was

appreciated, in some instances also by representatives of national Parliaments whose

EUU, Alm.del - 2014-15 (2. samling) - Bilag 56: Referat af COSAC-formandsmøde og Trojka-møde i Luxembourg 12-13/7-15

Parliaments/Chambers could not, due to their constitutional or internal arrangements, co-sign the

letter proposed by Lord BOSWELL. In the case of Belgium, for example, Mr Peter LUYKX

explained that the specific topic fell within the competences of the country's regional Parliaments

which would be encouraged to participate in the pilot exercise. Ms Agnieska POMASKA, Polish

Sejm,

said that her Parliament could not support the "green card" due to legal and constitutional

concerns in Poland, emphasising the need for ensuring political consensus in order to stress the

positive nature of the initiative. She stressed the importance of including the European Parliament

in the process.

A general consensus emerged among the speakers who had taken the floor regarding the need to

engage in introducing a "green card", as an instrument in the context of increased political dialogue.

A few speakers stressed that national Parliaments did not claim to have a right of initiative and that

current inter-institutional procedures would not be affected. Mr Jean BIZET, French

Sénat,

pointed

out that the "green card" gave national Parliaments the right to fully play their added value,

stressing at the same time the need to act in a practical way within the existing treaties. Ms

ČIGĀNE appreciated the fact that Mr TIMMERMANS regarded the "green card" as a positive

engagement and possible within the existing framework. Mr LAMBERT mentioned a possible

future "green card" on the proposal relating to social responsibility of companies.

Mr Paolo TANCREDI, Italian

Camera dei deputati,

expressed the view that the procedure should

not be formalised, that the existing mechanisms and practices should be maintained and that there

should be no thresholds, no deadlines, as well as no confusion or interference with Article 225

TFEU. In his opinion, the conclusions reached had to be submitted to the EU Speakers Conference.

On the improvement of the reasoned opinion procedure ("yellow card"), some speakers on this topic

thanked for the work already done, especially the work of the informal working group on the issue

that had taken place in the Polish

Sejm

in Warsaw earlier in May. Some mentioned that the report of

that meeting provided a good starting point for further debate and cooperation between national

Parliaments. A number of speakers (Mr Edgar MAYER, Austrian

Bundesrat,

Mr AZMANI and Mr

BIZET) underscored the need to improve the timeliness and quality of the European Commission's

replies to national Parliaments and also to extend the deadline for issuing a reasoned opinion from

eight to 12 weeks.

Reflecting on the debate, Mr MONTA PINTO stressed that there seemed to be an agreement that

the "green card" was a political initiative in the framework of enhanced political dialogue and that it

did not constitute a legal instrument. He stressed that it did not imply competition with the

European Parliament and would not affect inter-institutional balance, advising caution, in future

discussions, as to its scope and degree of formalisation. Lord BOSWELL agreed that it was indeed

right to consider this effort as a collective exercise in the context of political dialogue; it was about

making a point together. He further encouraged Parliaments/Chambers to co-sign the proposed

letter.

Mr TIMMERMANS stressed that for the European Commission it was out of question to change

the treaties or to modify the inter-institutional balance. He expressed his wish to interact politically

with Parliaments in the context of political dialogue, underlining at the same time the restrictions

and limits the Commission had to observe. On extending the deadline for issuing reasoned opinions,

he clarified that the European Commission operated according to the treaties and that it would not

be possible to unilaterally extend the deadline from eight to 12 weeks. On the timeliness and quality

of replies to national Parliaments, he mentioned the European Commission's continued efforts to

improve these.

EUU, Alm.del - 2014-15 (2. samling) - Bilag 56: Referat af COSAC-formandsmøde og Trojka-møde i Luxembourg 12-13/7-15

In addition, he stressed that solutions to problems could not only be sought through proposing new

legislation, but also through focusing on implementation of existing legislation and review of

current legislation. In this respect, he stressed the importance of cutting red tape, which was not the

same as lowering standards. He further remarked that new instruments could not be used as a means

to solve Members States' internal problems, stressing the European Commission's intention to take

into consideration and respect the different constitutional systems in Member States.

Concluding the debate, Mr ANGEL mentioned that the "green" and "yellow" cards would be further

discussed within the COSAC working group regarding which he had sent a letter, dated 29 June

2015, to COSAC delegations. Mr ANGEL concluded that there was agreement on the aspects

referred to in his letter on the working group's composition, scope, frequency of meetings, language

regime and secretariat. On the frequency of meetings, he pointed out that, following suggestions in

the Troika, his staff would examine the possibility of organising a meeting of the working group

earlier, before the COSAC meeting, or whether the meeting could be prepared on administrative

level. Mr ANGEL said the Luxembourg Presidency would be taking suggestions made during the

debate into consideration and that input from the next Bi-annual Report would be taken up in the

proceedings of the working group.