8ª legislatura Nathan GILL

I voted against this report because while there is a lot of talk, there is little in the way of proposed action or recognition of why terror threats exist in the EU. This report fails to recognise that the Schengen area has facilitated terrorist activity and fails to recognise that the migration crisis led to a rise in terrorists moving to the EU.

I voted against this report, as I disagree that the EU should be harmonising foreign policy and security. I believe that Member States are best placed to secure their own borders and negotiate their own foreign policies.

I voted against this report as I disagree that the EU should be harmonising foreign policy and defence security. I believe that Member States are best placed to secure their own borders and negotiate their own foreign policies.

I voted against this report. Of course I believe that education and national curricula should equip students for the digital age, but this is best done at Member State level. The UK Government already has a Digital Strategy and various investment funds.

. ‒ I voted against this report as I disagree with the EU’s expensive and unreliable energy policy.

. ‒ I abstained on this vote because while I believe such employment protections are important, it should be up to national governments to pass this kind of legislation, not the EU.

I abstained on this vote because, while I believe transparency and sustainability in food chains are important, I disagree with the massive 80% proposed increase in the ESFA’s budget and further EU harmonisation in this policy area.

I voted against this report as I disagree with EU harmonisation in health and safety standards.

. ‒ I voted against this report as I disagree with EU harmonisation in the policy areas of health and safety standards.

. ‒ I voted against this report. I understand the rationale behind implementing these visas, but they will not deter people from making the dangerous crossing over the Mediterranean. Furthermore, due to freedom of movement, there is no way of ensuring recipients of this visa will reside in the EU Member State that has granted the visa. Moreover, Member States should be able to manage their own borders and visa regimes.

. ‒ I voted against this report. Member States should be able to control their own borders and implement visas which reflect the demands and requirements of their economies. The EU should not be implementing a common, EU-wide visa system.

. ‒ I voted against this report as I do not believe that the Schengen area policy has been successful and EU enlargement is not necessary. I believe individual European countries should be able to protect their borders.

. ‒ I voted against this report as I don’t believe there should be any attempt to harmonise EU Member States in terms of defence policy. The groundwork for an EU army is well and truly underway and I completely oppose such a move by the EU.

I abstained on this report because, whilst I believe that it is important to ensure that the rights of disabled passengers or those who experience mobility difficulty are always safeguarded, this should be done at Member State level.

I voted against this legislative report, as I am against existing EU laws on chemicals and I reject the role of ECHA.

I voted against this non—legislative, non—binding report. Although I fully support the aiding of care services, as well as encouraging men and women to enter labour market, his report called for the implementation of more EU directives and legislation, more EU investment and more harmonised definitions. It further suggested that social security contributions ought to be borderless, so that contributions made in a Member State of origin, could be utilised by the same person in another Member State.

I abstained on the resolution on Lyme disease as I am concerned about the rising number of cases of Lyme borreliosis in Europe, but I don’t think that the EU should be dictating policy and spending Member States’ money.

. ‒ I voted against this non-legislative report setting out Parliament’s position on the MFF negotiations. The Commission proposal is to set the future MFF at EUR 1.2 trillion, with increases for defence spending and EU administration budgets. Parliament’s proposal is to increase this further to over EUR 1.4 trillion. As it is likely that the UK will still be making contributions towards the future MFF, I voted against this as I oppose unaccountable EU institutions spending British taxpayers’ money.

I voted against this non-legislative and non-binding report. I am opposed to the EU Common Position as it has an undue influence on the foreign policy and industry of the United Kingdom. I am also concerned by proposals to increase the use of qualified majority voting in more foreign affairs matters. The UK has its own standards for arms exports and ultimately decisions of foreign policy and industry must be made by our own democratically elected government.

I voted against this legislative report as I believe this issue should be independently managed by national authorities and parliaments.