• Marian   HARKIN  

Marian HARKIN : Kirjalikud selgitused hääletuse kohta - Kaheksanda koosseisu ametiaeg 

Parlamendiliikmed võivad anda täiskogu hääletuse kohta kirjalikke selgitusi. Kodukorra artikkel 194

Liikmesriikide tööhõivepoliitika suunised (A8-0177/2019 - Miroslavs Mitrofanovs) EN  
 

. ‒ The EU defines the key proposals on the labour market strategy for the Member States in the Employment Guidelines (EGs). The EGs are decided by the Council only, and therefore need to be reviewed each year. This year, the revised guidelines for the employment policies of the Member States have been amended to align the text with the principles of the European Pillar of Social Rights, with the overall aim to improve Europe’s competitiveness and make it a better place to invest, create jobs and foster social cohesion. Essentially the revised EG’s are the following: Guideline 5 - Boosting the demand for labour, Guideline 6 – Enhancing labour supply, the access to employment, skills and competences, Guideline 7 – Enhancing the functioning of labour markets and the effectiveness of social dialogue and, Guideline 8 – Promoting equal opportunities for all, fostering social inclusion and combatting poverty. I voted in favour of this report, as it is important that the EG is moderated to reflect the goals of the European Pillar of Social Rights.

Täitmise tagamise nõuded ja konkreetsed õigusnormid sõidukijuhtide lähetamiseks autoveosektoris (A8-0206/2018 - Merja Kyllönen) EN  
 

I voted against this report, as this legislation will have a massively negative impact on Irish road hauliers. Although I am not a member of the TRAN Committee, I have followed this file closely for the last 18 months. The Irish Road Haulage Association has always been advocating a reasonable Mobility Package. However, too many contradicting amendments went through the TRAN Committee filtering process (prior to the vote in Plenary) by a relatively small majority. Some of them encompass huge threats to the internal market. The Irish road haulage sector cannot afford these. I also voted to have these files taken off the agenda because it is possible that the next Parliament will take a more understanding position on posting, cabotage or driving and rest time. Unfortunately, the files remained on the agenda. With the ongoing issues surrounding Brexit, it is still possible that we will end up with a hard Brexit by accident; we now might end up with unaffordable social rules for Irish hauliers because these files passed through this Parliament.

Maksimaalne ööpäevane ja iganädalane sõiduaeg, minimaalsed vaheajad ja puhkeperioodid ning sõidumeerikute abil positsioneerimine (A8-0205/2018 - Wim van de Camp) EN  
 

I voted against this report, as this legislation will have a massively negative impact on Irish road hauliers. Although I am not a member of the TRAN Committee, I have followed this file closely for the last 18 months. The Irish Road Haulage Association has always been advocating a reasonable Mobility Package. However, too many contradicting amendments went through the TRAN Committee filtering process (prior to the vote in Plenary) by a relatively small majority. Some of them encompass huge threats to the internal market. The Irish road haulage sector cannot afford these. I also voted to have these files taken off the agenda because it is possible that the next Parliament will have a more understanding position on posting, cabotage or driving and rest time. Unfortunately, the files remained on the agenda. With the ongoing issues surrounding Brexit, it is still possible that we will end up with a hard Brexit by accident; we now might end up with unaffordable social rules for Irish hauliers because these files passed through this Parliament.

Autoveosektori muutustega kohanemine (A8-0204/2018 - Ismail Ertug) EN  
 

I voted against this report, as this legislation will have a massively negative impact on Irish road hauliers. Although I am not a member of the TRAN Committee, I have followed this file closely for the last 18 months. The Irish Road Haulage Association has always been advocating a reasonable Mobility Package. However, too many contradicting amendments went through the TRAN Committee filtering process (prior to the vote in Plenary) by a relatively small majority. Some of them encompass huge threats to the internal market. The Irish road haulage sector cannot afford these. I also voted to have these files taken off the agenda because it is possible that the next Parliament will have a more understanding position on posting, cabotage or driving and rest time. Unfortunately, the files remained on the agenda. With the ongoing issues surrounding Brexit, it is still possible that we will end up with a hard Brexit by accident; we now might end up with unaffordable social rules for Irish hauliers because these files passed through this Parliament.

Euroopa Merendus- ja Kalandusfond (A8-0176/2019 - Gabriel Mato) EN  
 

. ‒ The purpose of the Commission’s proposal is the establishment of the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF) for the 2021-2027 period. The aim is to target funding from the Union budget to support the common fisheries policy (CFP), the Union’s maritime policy and its international commitments in the field of ocean governance. Such funding is a key enabler for sustainable fisheries and the conservation of marine biological resources, for food security through the supply of seafood products and for healthy, safe, secure, clean and sustainably managed seas and oceans.
I voted in favour of a number of amendments that will strengthen the Commission’s proposal, including Amendment 269 allowing the EU to co-finance 85% of operations to the Irish islands under the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund. This amendment is important because, post Brexit, Ireland will be the most remote Member State in the EU, it will be hit hard and its rural areas, which already struggle, will be hit particularly hard. No other Member State will be so geographically and economically isolated. Furthermore, Irish islands are continually depopulating and suffer from a serious lack of investment. This amendment is a critical step in addressing those issues.

Lapsevanemate ja hooldajate töö- ja eraelu tasakaal (A8-0270/2018 - David Casa) EN  
 

This legislation aims to focus on targeting measures to address the under-representation of women in employment by improving the conditions of reconciling working and private duties, but also their unequal treatment and opportunities in the labour market. Furthermore, it encourages the strengthening of men’s roles as carers in the family, which will also benefit children. It is well documented that the use of work-life balance arrangements by fathers, has demonstrated that they have a positive impact in reducing the relative amount of unpaid family work undertaken by women and leaving them more time for paid employment. It thereby promotes non-discrimination and fostering gender equality.
It seeks to introduce a number of new or higher minimum standards for parental, paternity and carers’ leave, which are geared at helping to address the anomalies that exist in achieving a work life balance for both parents and carers. Finally, that the availability of quality, accessible, and affordable childcare infrastructure has proven to be a crucial aspect to work-life balance policies in the Member States and facilitates the rapid return of women to work and their increased participation in the labour market.

Aktsiisikauba liikumise ja jälgimise arvutistamine (A8-0010/2019 - Kay Swinburne) EN  
 

The objective of the proposal is to extend the Excise Movement and Control System to intra—EU movements of excise goods that are released for consumption, in order to simplify the procedure and allow for proper monitoring of such movements, and to provide a base for the governance of further automations of processes defined by Union excise legislation, where such automation is considered beneficial. In the absence of this proposal, the coordinated planning of the automation of the intra—EU movement of excise goods that are released for consumption will not be possible. I voted in favour.

Pensionitoodete, sealhulgas üleeuroopalise personaalse pensionitoote käsitamine maksustamisel (A8-0481/2018 - Sophia in 't Veld) EN  
 

I voted in favour of this resolution on tax treatment of pension products, including the pan-European Personal Pension (PEPP). This resolution calls on the Council, with a view to enhance the uptake of the PEPP, to elaborate proposals regarding incentives for PEPP savers. The rapporteur makes a number of suggestions including analysing existing tax incentives for personal pension products and assessing their costs, effectiveness and redistributive effects, and, where applicable, addressing inefficiencies and regressive effects. Furthermore, it suggests granting the same tax relief to PEPP as that granted to national personal pension products, even in cases where PEPP features do not fully match all the national criteria. Finally, it suggests granting specific tax relief to PEPP, harmonised at Union level, to be laid down in a multilateral tax agreement between Member States. I also voted in favour of this resolution because added to these suggestions, the resolution stresses that tax is a Member State competence and that any decision to grant special tax relief to the PEPP therefore remains with each Member State.

Piiriüleste õiguslike ja haldustakistuste lahendamise mehhanism (A8-0414/2018 - Matthijs van Miltenburg) EN  
 

. ‒ Often isolated, and with generally poorer access to public services, the EU’s border regions face a unique set of challenges. This has been recognised under Article 174 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, which provides that particular attention should be paid to cross-border regions when developing action to strengthen the EU’s economic, social and territorial cohesion. The aim is to create a mechanism for a common cross-border region in a given Member State to apply the legal provisions from the neighbouring Member State, if applying its own laws would present a legal obstacle to implementing a joint project.
I voted in favour of this report, as it allows Member States to remove legal obstacles to the implementation of a joint project in cross-border regions. As this is a voluntary tool, which Member States may decide to activate themselves, it does not hinder Member States that wish to apply other mechanisms to cross-border challenges.

Eurojusti ja Gruusia vahelise koostöölepingu projekt (A8-0065/2019 - Sylvia-Yvone Kaufmann) EN  
 

Eurojust was created by a Council decision in 2002 to improve cooperation between Member States’ judicial authorities to help provide a pan-European response to fight organised crime. Decision 2002/187/JHA provides that Eurojust may conclude agreements with third countries and organisations. Such agreements may cover the exchange of information, including personal data, and the secondment of liaison officers or magistrates to Eurojust.
To strengthen its capacity to work with Georgia, Eurojust has negotiated an agreement on cooperation between Eurojust and Georgia. Ireland, the United Kingdom and Denmark are participating in the adoption and implementation of the Decision. I voted in favour of this report as the cooperation will help the judicial authorities work together to fight cross-border organised crime. Together with the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, it will improve the action taken to prosecute criminals who defraud the EU budget and EU taxpayers.

Euroopa Liitu tehtavate välismaiste otseinvesteeringute taustauuringute raamistik (A8-0198/2018 - Franck Proust) EN  
 

Foreign direct investment contributes to the Union’s growth by enhancing its competitiveness, creating jobs and economies of scale, bringing in capital, technologies, innovation, expertise, and by opening new markets for the Union’s exports. It supports the objectives of the Investment Plan for Europe and contributes to other Union projects and programmes. The EU needs to and will remain open for foreign direct investment (FDI). A framework for screening FDI into the Union allows Member States to better coordinate and exchange information when necessary in relation to foreign investments that can affect national security or public order. It is important to underline that this framework is by no means a protectionist tool. Equally important to stress is that the final decision on whether to set up a screening mechanism or allow an investment rests with the Member State. On the other hand, to establish a framework and coordinate information in an expert group helps to raise awareness and keep an eye on our common EU project and programmes. I voted in favour of this report.

Euroopa Kalanduskontrolli Amet (A8-0037/2019 - Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg) EN  
 

. ‒ In July 2018, the Commission put forward a proposal that the existing rules of the European Fisheries Control Agency should go through codification and therefore circulated a draft codification regulation. Codification is the process in which one or more legislative acts and all their amendments are brought together in a new legally binding act. This would be without making any changes to the substance of the original acts and any of their amendments. The Consultative Working Group of Legal Services (including representatives from Parliament, the Council and the Commission), came to the conclusion in October 2018 that the Commission proposal encompassed an entirely straightforward process of codification with regard to the rules of the Fisheries Control Agency, with no change to the substance of the existing texts. Therefore, the Economic and Social Committee within Parliament accepted and endorsed the proposal in November 2018. The vote on this proposal was put to the entire Parliament then with no amendments tabled. I voted in favour of this proposal, as there were no issues of contention pointed out and the process was deemed to be uncomplicated.

Aktsiisikauba liikumise ja jälgimise arvutistamine (A8-0010/2019 - Kay Swinburne) EN  
 

. ‒ This proposal involves a Commission recasting of a previous Decision (No 1152/2003/EC) which founded the computerised system for the movement and surveillance of excise goods (Excise Movement and Control System (EMCS)). At present, this Decision only covers the movement of excise goods under excise duty suspension. The objective of this proposal is to extend the EMCS to cover intra—EU movements of excise goods which are released for consumption, particularly alcohol. The aim is to simplify the procedure and allow for the proper monitoring of these movements, as well as providing a base for the governance of further automation of processes defined by EU excise legislation. This proposal reaffirms that this computerised system is intended to permit the electronic transmission of any accompanying documents and improvement of checks, and improve how the internal market functions by simplifying the movement of excise goods between Member States. I voted in favour of this proposal, as it is necessary that the procedure for the movement of excise goods becomes simplified. As the Commission proposal simply updates the former legislation, it was not a contentious file within Parliament.

Õigus, mida kohaldatakse nõuete loovutamise kehtivusele kolmandate isikute suhtes (A8-0261/2018 - Pavel Svoboda) EN  
 

. ‒ As part of the Capital Markets Union Plan, the Commission announced a number of targeted actions on the rules governing ownership of securities and third-party effects of the assignment of claims aimed at reducing legal uncertainties for cross-border transactions. The overall objective of the proposal is to remove barriers to cross-border investment and reduce the costs of funding through the adoption of uniform conflict-of-laws rules at the EU level. The assignment of claims is a source of liquidity for companies and is mainly used by the SME sector through factoring and collateralisation or by banks and larger companies through securitisation. In the transfer of claims, ensuring the acquisition of legal title is important for the purchaser or assignee to prevent a third party from claiming legal title over the same claim. This remains a complex and technical legal issue. I voted in favour of this text as I am supportive of the principle behind it, in that it will provide certainty for cross-border transactions.

Vahetus-, abi- ja koolitusprogrammi loomine euro kaitsmiseks võltsimise eest perioodil 2021–2027 (programm „Perikles IV“) (A8-0069/2019 - Dennis de Jong) EN  
 

. ‒ In the context of the preparation of the next multiannual financial framework (MFF), the Commission proposes the establishment of the Pericles IV programme to prevent and combat counterfeiting and related fraud, thus enhancing the competitiveness of the Union’s economy and securing the sustainability of public finances. Throughout its existence, this proposal has appeared to be extremely uncontroversial, with only a few minor issues raised by Member States. These involve formatting issues with the documents and that the conditions for the co-financing rate be implemented for 90% instead of the standard 75%. Currently, the programme has been successful, including within Ireland, with its implementation considered a success throughout all Member States. Therefore, I voted in favour of this proposal as it does not represent any contentious changes to the as of now successful Pericles IV programme.

ELi–Singapuri vabakaubandusleping (A8-0053/2019 - David Martin) EN  
 

I abstained on the final vote on the EU-Singapore Trade Deal. There are positive aspects to the Singapore Trade Deal which for example will benefit our Agricultural Sector. However, I could not in conscience support the deal because it contained the provisions on Investor Courts. I voted against the Canadian Trade Deal in its entirety because of Investor Courts. But once Ireland ratified that deal it now means we are in that system as it were and any companies in Canada or that set up in Canada can use that system. I support free and fair trade but I believe that Investor Courts are a relic of past times and no longer necessary and that the rights of investors should not have any special priority in comparison to workers’ rights environmental protection etc. These are very difficult decisions for me, as Ireland basically depends on trade and the EU also needs to be part of the trading system. Indeed many of the proposals in our trade deals are far from perfect, they are the most progressive globally. The EU can have a positive impact on world trade.

ELi–Singapuri vabakaubandusleping(resolutsioon) (A8-0048/2019 - David Martin) EN  
 

I abstained on the final vote on the Singapore Trade Deal. There are positive aspects to the Singapore Trade Deal which for example will benefit our Agricultural Sector. However, I could not in conscience support the deal because it contained the provisions on Investor Courts. I voted against the Canadian Trade Deal in its entirety because of Investor Courts. But once Ireland ratified that deal it now means we are in that system as it were and any companies in Canada or that set up in Canada can use that system. I support free and fair trade but I believe that Investor Courts are a relic of past times and no longer necessary and that the rights of investors should not have any special priority in comparison to workers’ rights environmental protection etc. These are very difficult decisions for me, as Ireland basically depends on trade and the EU also needs to be part of the trading system. Indeed many of the proposals in our trade deals are far from perfect, they are the most progressive globally. The EU can have a positive impact on world trade.

ELi–Singapuri investeeringute kaitse leping (A8-0054/2019 - David Martin) EN  
 

I voted against all the provisions on Investor Courts. There are positive aspects to the Singapore Trade Deal, which for example will benefit our Agricultural Sector. However, I could not in conscience support the deal because it contained the provisions on Investor Courts. I voted against the Canadian Trade Deal in its entirety because of Investor Courts. But once Ireland ratified that deal it now means we are in that system as it were and any companies in Canada or that set up in Canada can use that system. I support free and fair trade but I believe that Investor Courts are a relic of past times and no longer necessary and that the rights of investors should not have any special priority in comparison to workers’ rights environmental protection, etc.

ELi–Singapuri investeeringute kaitse leping (resolutsioon) (A8-0049/2019 - David Martin) EN  
 

I voted against all the provisions on Investor Courts. There are positive aspects to the Singapore Trade Deal, which for example will benefit our Agricultural Sector. However, I could not in conscience support the deal because it contained the provisions on Investor Courts. I voted against the Canadian Trade Deal in its entirety because of Investor Courts. But once Ireland ratified that deal it now means we are in that system as it were and any companies in Canada or that set up in Canada can use that system. I support free and fair trade but I believe that Investor Courts are a relic of past times and no longer necessary and that the rights of investors should not have any special priority in comparison to workers’ rights environmental protection, etc.

ELi–Singapuri partnerlus- ja koostööleping (A8-0020/2019 - Antonio López-Istúriz White) EN  
 

I abstained on the final vote on the Singapore Trade Deal. There are positive aspects to the Singapore Trade Deal which for example will benefit our Agricultural Sector. However I could not in conscience support the deal because it contained the provisions on Investor Courts. I voted against the Canadian Trade Deal in its entirety because of Investor Courts. But once Ireland ratified that deal it now means we are in that system as it were and any companies in Canada or that set up in Canada can use that system. I support free and fair trade but I believe that Investor Courts are a relic of past times and no longer necessary and that the rights of investors should not have any special priority in comparison to workers’ rights environmental protection etc. These are very difficult decisions for me, as Ireland basically depends on trade and the EU also needs to be part of the trading system. Indeed many of the proposals in our trade deals are far from perfect, they are the most progressive globally. The EU can have a positive impact on world trade.