The European Parliament adopted by 297 votes to 13, with 7 abstentions, a resolution on the 25th annual report from the Commission on monitoring the application of Community law (2007).
MEPs regret that, unlike in the past, the Commission has not responded in any way to the issues raised by Parliament in its previous resolutions, in particular the resolution of 21 February 2008 on the Commission's 23rd Annual report on monitoring the application of Community law (2005). They note the lack of significant improvement with regard to the three fundamental issues of transparency, resources and the length of procedures.
The Parliament reminds the Commission of requests made in previous years, namely:
The resolution calls on the Commission to:
The Parliament notes that, of the new cases of infringement in 2007, 1 196 concerned a failure to notify national measures relating to the transposition of Community directives. It considers it unacceptable that the Commission should grant itself 12 months to deal with simple cases of non-communication of transposition measures by a Member State, and calls on the Commission to take automatic and immediate action in respect of cases of this kind which do not require any analysis or assessment.
Furthermore, MEPs consider that there are still no clear procedures in place to pursue a Member State before the Court of Justice for an infringement of Community law which has since been remedied and to obtain reparation for previous failures and omissions. They urge the Commission to come forward with new proposals (by the end of 2010) to complete the current infringement procedure in such a way as to take account of this inequitable situation.
On the “EU Pilot” project to test the new working method in several Member States, the Parliament points out that this project is operating on a voluntary basis, the features of which have already raised some doubts and specific questions. It asks the Commission in particular whether the lack of resources in the Member States is not a worrying sign that there may be genuine problems in monitoring the application of Community law. The Commission is called upon to check the following issues and report to Parliament on them:
MEPs note with disappointment that during this parliamentary term no significant progress has been made with regard to the vital role that Parliament should play in monitoring the application of Community law. They consider that the prioritisation of infringement procedures by the Commission involves political and not merely technical decisions which are currently not subject to any form of external scrutiny, control or transparency.
Lastly, the Commission is called upon to ensure that greater priority is given to the application of Community law relating to the environment, bearing in mind the worrying trends revealed in its report and the many petitions received in this area.