Ósma kadencja Parlamentu Laima Liucija ANDRIKIENĖ

I voted in favour of the resolution on the European Border and Coast Guard. Two years ago, Frontex was expanded to become the European Border and Coast Guard (EBCG) Agency that it is today. The Agency’s new mandate and increased resources are a clear and strong response to the challenges faced at the EU’s external borders as a result of the migration crisis, but also relate to the difficulty in encouraging greater solidarity among Member States.
The EBCG proposal addresses the need to ensure proper control of the Schengen external borders as a precondition to managing migration effectively, to ensure a high level of security within the system while safeguarding free movement of persons within the Union. The necessary operational support has to be provided to ensure that EU solidarity is effectively delivered whenever it is needed.
I support the rapporteur that this will enhance solidarity between the Member States, reinforce integration regarding border management and contribute to preventing crisis situations at the external borders. The proposal responds to the weaknesses identified due to insufficient contributions of border guards and technical equipment by Member States and hence the lack of flexibility in redeployment by the Agency.

. ‒ I voted in favour of the resolution on market surveillance and compliance of products. Free movement of goods is the most developed of all the four fundamental freedoms. This pillar rests on consumers’ trust: European consumers must be able to trust that the products they buy are safe and compliant, irrespective of who the manufacturer is, in which Member State they may buy it, and by which means (traditional or online sale).
Growing imports to the EU, the increasing complexity of the value chains, the increased number of products circulating within the single market, and the increase in e-commerce activities, as well as the new technologies pose new challenges for Member States’ market surveillance authorities and for the EU institutions. There is a clear evidence that only proper, effective and coordinated market surveillance in the EU could respond to these challenges and ensure that only safe and compliant products are reaching the final consumers.

. ‒ I voted in favour of the resolution on promoting fairness and transparency for business users of online intermediation services. I support the rapporteur that there is an apparent need for a uniform and targeted set of mandatory rules to ensure a viable business environment in the future. In today’s online platform environment several critical imbalances exist between platforms on the one hand and business users on the other hand. These imbalances are ultimately to the detriment of the consumer as they can lead to reduced competition, which in turn leads to a narrower variety of goods and services as well as higher consumer prices.
The Commission’s proposal does in many ways adequately address the lack of transparency concerning many online platforms, but it does too little to address the issues of the lack of fairness in the same online platform environment. Therefore, it is crucial that the current deficit of fairness is addressed in greater detail than in the Commission’s proposal and that more measures are taken to better address the issue.

. ‒ I voted in favour of the resolution on better enforcement and modernisation of EU consumer protection rules. There is a clear need to find a balance between the rights afforded to consumers and the expectations then made of businesses. As we move ahead with the digital single market strategy, we also must ensure that the legislative foundations elsewhere support citizens and business as they move online. In this area in particular, the sale of goods online is facilitated by the ability of consumers to exercise the right of withdrawal simply and easily. Any shift in roles risks deterring purchasers from the online sales channel, which would be worse for all parties.

I voted in favour of the recommendations on EU accession to the Geneva Act on Appellations of Origin and Geographical Indications. The contracting parties to the agreement undertake to protect, on their territories, the appellations of origin of products of the other countries within the Special Union which are recognised and protected as such in the country of origin. Seven Member States are parties to the Lisbon Agreement, namely Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, France, Italy, Hungary, Portugal and Slovakia. Three other Member States have signed but not ratified the Lisbon Agreement, namely Greece, Spain and Romania.
I welcome the Council’s decision to approve the Union’s accession to the Geneva Act, as well as the fact that the Member States have been given the opportunity to accede to the act in the interests of the Union, with the Union retaining exclusive competence. The Union will thus enjoy voting rights, whilst being able to take proper account of the specific situation of the Member States that are already contracting parties to the Lisbon Agreement.

. ‒ I voted in favour of the resolution on the protection of persons reporting on breaches of Union law. The debate in Europe on how best to protect whistle-blowers has moved forward significantly in recent decades. In the light of numerous studies and feedback on experiences, it is now commonly accepted that whistle-blowers play a positive role in preventing and remedying acts prejudicial to the public interest. However, the potential benefits of whistle-blowing are a long way from being fully exploited since many witnesses of acts prejudicial to the public interest in a professional context do not systematically report them. The reasons for this reticence are multiple and range from lack of knowledge of the reporting options available to fear of reprisals if they speak out. This has damaging consequences for society as a whole, as a wide variety of such attacks on the public interest, whether they concern the environment, the fight against tax evasion or corruption, or public health, continue to occur, thus undermining the public’s right to information. I support the rapporteur that the reporting channels set out in the proposal for a directive present sufficient safeguards as to robustness and independence. They could, however, be improved by providing for a notification of receipt of a report.

. ‒ I voted in favour of the resolution on European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) investigations and cooperation with the European Public Prosecutor’s Office. The creation of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) is one of Parliament’s key achievements during the current legislature. We expect that it will be a game changer in terms of protecting the EU’s financial interests. It will also have a far-reaching impact on the EU’s institutional set-up for combating fraud and irregularities, with OLAF being the body most affected.
I support the Commission’s proposal. However, as indicated by the rapporteur in the resolution, further measures need to be taken to prepare the ground better for the EPPO. Furthermore, the work done by OLAF with its current legal basis has shown several severe shortcomings. The evaluation report underlines how efficiency in fighting fraud and irregularities is hampered by problems inherent in the regulation. Moreover, in 2014 the Commission put forward a legislative proposal to create a controller of procedural guarantees, which has not been taken up yet.

. ‒ I voted in favour of the resolution on establishing the instrument for financial support for customs control equipment. The proposed instrument, as a part of a new Integrated Border Management Fund (IBMF) in the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) for 2021-2027, aims to reinforce controls on goods entering and exiting the Union’s borders by providing funding for the purchase, maintenance and upgrade of customs control equipment. This includes, for example, new scanners, automated number-plate detection systems and mobile laboratories for sample analysis.
The instrument is a new financial tool developed in response to requests from Member States and it is therefore based on their needs as regards better management of external and internal borders. The Commission proposal is useful and well set out. Nevertheless, I support remarks and recommendations in the resolution which seek to make the text clearer and more coherent.

. ‒ I voted in favour of the resolution and I welcome the proposals by the Commission on establishing a framework for interoperability between EU information systems. European Union citizens expect the EU to deliver on effective asylum and migration management, on proper external border management and on addressing ongoing threats to internal security. The refugee crisis and the series of terrorist attacks over the past years have shown the urgency of enhancing relevant information sharing. Delivering on these issues is important in order to maintain public trust in the Union migration and asylum system, Union security measures and the Union capabilities to manage the external borders.
I support the rapporteur’s contention that the opportunities offered by interoperability, as a measure to enhance security and external border protection, need to be balanced with the obligation to ensure that interferences with fundamental rights, which may derive from the new interoperability environment, are limited to what is strictly necessary genuinely to meet the objectives of general interest pursued, subject to the principle of proportionality. Interoperability components offer an opportunity to increase the protection of fundamental rights.

. ‒ I voted in favour of the resolution. This legislative initiative is part of the third ‘Europe on the Move’ mobility package and proposes a revision of the current framework to adapt it to changes in mobility resulting from societal trends (e.g. more cyclists and pedestrians, an aging society) and technological developments. The integration of technical progress is at the basis of the proposal, particularly in the areas of tyre-pressure monitoring systems and intelligent speed assistance.
In 2017 the number of fatalities on EU roads reached 25 300 people. An additional 135 000 people were seriously injured. I support the rapporteur that these frightening figures need to be reduced significantly. The fatalities on EU roads decreased by over 40% during the years 2001-2010. However, reaching the EU target for 2020, to halve the number of road deaths in the EU by 2020 from the 2010 baseline, will be extremely difficult to achieve without further decisive action. Therefore, there is an urgent need to reduce the number of fatalities and casualties on EU roads, and specific focus should be put on protecting pedestrians, cyclists and other vulnerable road users, who accounted for almost half of road victims in 2017.

I voted in favour of the resolution on common rules for access to the international market for coach and bus services. Buses and coaches are one of the most accessible and most important modes of transport in the EU. They connect rural and urban areas of Member States, often being the only means of public transportation available in certain regions. It is therefore vital that passengers receive the best service possible. Fair and healthy competition is the best way to achieve that.

I voted in favour of this resolution. The schedule of commitments of the EU and its Member States in the GATS (General Agreement on Trade in Services) dates back to 1994 and covers only those 12 Member States that were members of the EU at that time. The 13 Member States that have joined the EU since, i.e. in 1995 and in 2004, continued to maintain their own individual GATS commitments, which were adopted prior to their accession to the EU. In accordance with the terms of Article XXI of the GATS, the European Communities and its Member States submitted a communication pursuant to Article V of the GATS, whereby it notified its intention to modify the specific commitments in order for it to cover the 13 Member States that joined the European Union in 1995 and 2004. I support the rapporteur that the schedule is needed to enter into force to ensure that all the Member States concerned are covered by the same horizontal limitations, that their commitments are not in breach of the acquis communautaire and to advance in further consolidation processes.

I voted in favour of the resolution on the agreement to prevent unregulated high seas fishing in the Central Arctic Ocean. The joint programme of scientific research and monitoring which will be established within two years of entry into force of this agreement will have as its objective to increase knowledge of the living marine resources of the Central Arctic Ocean and its ecosystems. The joint programme will be developed and implemented by the parties and has to take into consideration the scientific information provided by other bodies and programmes, as well as indigenous and local knowledge. It is important to underline that this agreement has a twofold objective, firstly to further explore and better understand the biodiversity and ecosystem of the Central Arctic Ocean and secondly to fight and prevent unregulated fishing in that area. These two objectives were of the utmost importance for the European Parliament, together with a moratorium on commercial fishing. Considering the melting of the ice cap and the ever growing areas available for exploration in the Arctic Ocean, signing this agreement will postpone and prevent any unilateral commercial fishing licensing.

. ‒ I voted in favour of the resolution on the Multiannual plan for stocks fished in the Western Waters and adjacent waters, and for fisheries exploiting those stocks. The multiannual plans for a regionalised approach to fisheries management and conservation that have been formulated by the Commission and co-legislators, in particular, for the Baltic Sea and the North Sea, provide a good starting point for the multiannual Western Waters management plan. The Baltic Sea plan has adopted a multiannual approach to fisheries management on the basis of reference points for fishing mortality and biomass of stocks. These reference points, as quantified by the co-legislators on the basis of regularly updated scientific advice are set down in the regulation and should be promptly and regularly updated by the co-legislators accordingly. I support the Rapporteur that fisheries management should be based on the best scientific advice available. At the same time, the European Parliament must have a greater scope to oversee this process and to preserve its role as co-legislator for the purposes of multiannual fisheries management.

. ‒ I voted in favour of the resolution on the Union Civil Protection Mechanism. Natural disasters in Europe and worldwide are increasing significantly, both because of the frequency with which they occur and their intensity, and pose a serious threat to our societies, economies and ecosystems. I support the Rapporteur that the future mechanism should acquire further capacities compared to those currently existing in the Member States, in addition to having its own capacities. A genuine European Civil Protection Capacity should be established. This new Capacity will fill the gaps identified in the national response systems. The intention is not to take over or duplicate the work of the Member States, but to complement it where necessary.

. ‒ I voted in favour of the Resolution on the accession of Ecuador and Ukraine to the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. The Hague Convention of 25 October 1980 on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction is a vitally important instrument. It has been ratified by all EU Member States.
As the matter of international child abduction falls within the exclusive external competence of the European Union, the decision whether to accept the accession of Ecuador and Ukraine has to be taken at EU level by means of a Council decision. I support the rapporteur’s view that the accession of Ecuador and Ukraine to the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction is to be welcomed. It is particularly important for settling cases of international child abduction that arise when a couple has separated. If the mother and father are from different states, there is a temptation to exploit the lack of cooperation between those states in order to secure custody of the child.

. ‒ I voted in favour of the Resolution on the accession of Belarus and Uzbekistan to the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. The Hague Convention of 25 October 1980 on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction is a vitally important instrument. It has been ratified by all EU Member States.
As the matter of international child abduction falls within the exclusive external competence of the European Union, the decision whether to accept the accession of Belarus and Uzbekistan has to be taken at EU level by means of a Council decision. I support the rapporteur’s view that the accession of Belarus and Uzbekistan to the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction is to be welcomed.

I voted in favour of the resolution on the Association of the Overseas Countries and Territories with the European Union including relations between the EU, Greenland and Denmark. Overseas Countries and Territories (OCTs) have been associated with the European Union (EU) since the entry into force of the Treaty of Rome. I agree with the Rapporteur that it is important to strengthen the political dimension of the association between the EU and the OCTs and increase dialogue between the EU and the OCTs on cooperation and regional integration issues. In order to make dialogue and cooperation more effective, the Commission should, if necessary, provide for specific measures to ensure the OCTs’ participation in Union programmes and facilitate access for such participation by establishing an up-to-date, dedicated gateway for the OCTs.

I voted in favour of the resolution on the Annual report 2017 on the protection of the European Union’s financial interests – fight against fraud. Sound public spending and the protection of the EU’s financial interests should be key elements of EU policy in order to increase the confidence of citizens by ensuring that their money is used properly and effectively. We can note with satisfaction that the total number of fraudulent and non-fraudulent irregularities reported in 2017 (15 213 cases) was 20.8% lower than in 2016 (19 080 cases) and that their value had decreased by 13% (from EUR 2.97 billion in 2016 to EUR 2.58 billion in 2017). Regarding the fight against corruption, I support the Rapporteur deploring the fact that the Commission no longer deems it necessary to publish the anti-corruption report. It is regretful that further reduced monitoring by the Commission, with data available for only very few countries, concentrates mostly on the economic impact of corruption and almost completely overlooks the other dimensions corruption can affect, such as the trust of citizens in public administration and even the democratic structures of the Member States.

I voted in favour of the resolution on the situation in Venezuela. The elections held on 20 May 2018 were conducted without complying with the minimum international standards for a credible process and failed to respect political pluralism, democracy, transparency and the rule of law. The EU, together with other regional organisations and democratic countries, recognised neither the elections nor the authorities put in place by this illegitimate process and has repeatedly called for ‘the restoration of democracy and the rule of law in Venezuela through a credible political process’.
However, on 10 January 2019 Nicolás Maduro illegitimately usurped presidential power before the Supreme Court of Justice, in breach of the constitutional order. The EU cannot be silent when Venezuelan people are being deprived of their fundamental rights and freedoms, when rule of law and democracy are undermined by the clear dictatorship. I support the resolution which recognises Mr Guaidó as the legitimate interim president of Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela in accordance with the Venezuelan Constitution, as stated in Article 233 thereof, and expresses its full support for his roadmap.