Веста е од 2013 година, а предложената законска регулатива, фала му на Бога, беше повлечена во 2015 година и никогаш не беше ниту усвоена, ниту стапи на сила - ова е еден од многу ретките случаи кога евробирократите всушност не направиле нешто добро, туку одлучиле да се повлечат од намерата да направат нешто лошо.
За волја на вистината, евробирократите не ја повлекоа предложената законска регулатива поради добри намери или бидејќи така сакаа, туку бидејќи на европските парламентарни избори 2014 им се случи изборен земјотрес и од никаде десничарските и националистичките политички партии освоија пратенички места во Европскиот Парламент.
Сега е можно да им се случи нов изборен земјотрес доколку Британците гласаат на референдумот на 23 јуни 2016 за излез на Велика Британија од ЕУ. Во меѓувреме, евробирократите ги имаат паузирано речиси сите законски регулативи, или подобро кажано - корпоративни декрети, се додека не помине референдумот во Велика Британија за излез од ЕУ. Се очекува Британците да гласаат за останување на Велика Британија во ЕУ, па потоа евробирократите ќе го испратат цехот до Британците и до сите останати држави членки на ЕУ со нови бирократски регулативи.
http://www.politico.eu/article/brussels-presses-brexit-hold-button-uk-referendum-campaign-eu-legislation/
Brussels presses the hold button on Brexit
By Tara Palmeri
2/25/16, 5:30 AM CET, Updated 2/28/16, 6:15 PM CET
Ahead of referendum, EU seeks to avoid controversy.
British Prime Minister David Cameron delivers a speech on the European Union to workers and guests at the headquarters of O2 this week in Slough | Getty Images
European Union officials aren’t just determined to
keep mum during the U.K.’s referendum campaign: They are refusing to move key legislation out of fear that they might fuel support for a
Brexit.
Officials and politicians said several EU initiatives have been put on ice or pushed off the agenda in an effort to avoid stirring up controversy before the
June 23 referendum in Britain.
Among them are: a mid-term review of the bloc’s seven-year budget, which could result in a fight over a proposal to increase EU spending by €20 billion; the launch of the Commission’s labor mobility package, which would set out new guidelines for the freedom of movement of workers; and the EU’s accession to the European Convention on Human Rights, which the U.K. government strongly opposes, claiming it would infringe on the sovereignty of the British legal system.
Even as they expressed relief this week that the U.K. and other EU countries reached a deal on reforms that British Prime Minister
David Cameron said he needed in order to win the referendum vote, politicians in Brussels have resigned themselves to the fact that not much legislation will go through until after the British question is dealt with.
“These proposals can be discussed after June without creating too many difficulties” — French official.
“There’s a kind of a deflection of attention to some issues,” said Mercedes Bresso, an Italian MEP from the Socialists and Democrats group, adding that the referendum was causing a “delay in some debates,” including on the EU’s budget. “Now is not the moment to create more problems.”
A French official called the decision to hold back on some legislative measures a “reasonable” one.
“These proposals can be discussed after June without creating too many difficulties,” the official said. “In fact, it would be more problematic if we had to negotiate under the pressure of the U.K.. So, in a way, it protects the other member states as well.”
The slow lane
The Commission has until the end of 2016 to submit a review of its seven-year budget, known as the multi-annual financial framework. The European Parliament’s budgetary committee isn’t expecting to see the proposal for revisions until the autumn, to avoid a pre-referendum outcry from Euroskeptics over any proposal to give the EU more money.
“Everyone knows this is not a good time because of the problems with the U.K.,” said Pedro López de Pablo, spokesman for the center-right European People’s Party group in the Parliament. “The Commission has been very cautious on all of these things. Nowadays we’re in a public opinion environment that everyone attacks the European Union.”
“They don’t want to open the pandora’s box before the referendum” — Polish MEP Jan Olbrycht.
But some MEPs on the budgets committee say the delay will make their oversight role more difficult by not giving them enough time to consider proposed revisions submitted by the Commission. They say they need to see the proposal now — and not in September after the referendum dust has settled and the summer break is over.
“They don’t want to open the pandora’s box before the referendum,” said Polish MEP Jan Olbrycht, a member of the budgets committee. “We want the Commission to make their proposals as soon as possible. We need a serious debate about the review and the revision. There’s no time to waste.”
When it does come, that debate promises to be controversial. Siegfried Mureșan, vice chairman of the budgets committee, said MEPs are bracing for a “far reaching revision” of the remaining budget target to manage the migration crisis, which was not foreseen in 2013 when the current budget was planned.
“We’re hoping for more flexibility and money in justice and home affairs, which includes security at the borders and the migration fund,” said Mureșan.
“I’m hoping for more money in areas related to foreign policy, to improve the conditions on the ground of the origin of the refugees.”
EU budget fights can be counted on to stir up anti-Brussels sentiment in Britain. Cameron fought hard in 2013 to win a 3 percent cut in the EU budget — which he then touted back in the U.K. as a political victory against Brussels.
As part of this review, EU officials say the Commission and Parliament plan to ask for a €20 billion increase to the budget over its remaining three years, but they are not slated to make that announcement until July, after the referendum. Also in July, the budgets committee will present a report to the Commission on its needs. The Commission will then offer a counterproposal in the autumn.
Matching Cameron’s deal
A proposal for new EU guidelines on labor rules across the Union was supposed to have been introduced by Employment Commissioner Marianne Thyssen in December 2015, but was postponed while EU leaders debated measures on welfare benefits as part of the U.K. deal.
According to a Commission spokesperson, certain elements of the so-called labor mobility package, which includes rules on social security benefits, will still be kept on hold until after the referendum. As for other measures in the package not related to the U.K. deal, the spokesperson said the Commission “reserves its possibility to come forward with such proposals as soon as they are ready.”
But on this measure, too, EU parliamentarians are complaining about the implications of the delay, even as they acknowledge the reasoning behind it.
“I understand timing in politics is key, even though I’m eagerly waiting for the labor mobility package because there hasn’t been much legislative work,” said Danish MEP
Ulla Tørnæs, from the ALDE group.
Measures in the package related to social security will have to be brought into line with the terms of the U.K. deal reached last week, which include new restrictions on payments to EU migrants and their children living abroad.
On some measures, the EU is under pressure to speed up, rather than slow down. Cameron made a focus on competitiveness one of his key
renegotiation demands, and the Commission has in recent months already worked to accommodate it with proposals to cut regulatory red tape and improve rules for capital markets.
That effort is now continuing. Sources said the U.K.’s ambassador to the EU, Ivan Rogers, has been putting pressure on leaders to finish trade deals like the EU-Canada trade agreement and to make progress on the EU-U.S. Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership before the referendum — to show that the EU works.
“Part of their ask is that you use the trade power that you’ve been given,” said
Emma McClarkin, a Conservative MEP on the international trade committee. “David Cameron is for making sure we deliver Canada as quickly as possible. It’s been a bit slow.”
Off the agenda altogether
Another topic that’s been put on the back burner is the EU’s accession to the European Convention of Human Rights, an international treaty on human rights that includes several European countries but not the EU as a whole.
The process of signing up to the Convention has been contentious in the U.K., where conservatives say its European Court of Human Rights would infringe on the sovereignty of the British legal system.
The court, which rules on complaints from individuals or countries alleging violations of the treaty, has previously held against the U.K. on such questions as banning voting rights for prisoners and the ability to deport non-EU criminals with family members living in Britain.
Cameron has pledged to make sure the U.K. is exempt from the court’s rulings, so re-examining the issue has been pushed off the EU agenda for now. A Commission spokesperson said the EU was currently in a “period of reflection” over how to proceed with the accession.
But some in the Parliament’s committee on human rights are eager to see the issue debated.
“The agreement has to be negotiated again,” said
Cristian Preda, a Romanian MEP on the committee. “The accession of the EU to the Convention was seen from the very beginning as a very long process.”
https://www.arche-noah.at/english/seed-policy/eu-seed-law
The EU Commission withdraws the EU seeds regulation
In the end of February '15 the EU Commission finally formally withdrew the draft seed marketing regulation, one year after the Parliament rejected it. "I am very pleased that our joint efforts have led to this success and thank all supporters very much," says Christian Schrefel, chairman of ARCHE NOAH. "This result shows that civic engagement can lead politicians and authorities to reason." Should the EU Commission draw up a new proposal, ARCHE NOAH would actively support a fundamental reorientation of the EU legislation on the marketing of seeds and other plant propagating material.
See our comment.
12 March 2015
Historical Chance
for Diversity
In the end of February, the European Commission withdrew the proposed EU seeds regulation, thus clearing the way for a new orientation for seed-marketing policy. Should the EU Commission champion this change, civil society would provide strong support.
By Iga Niżnik, ARCHE NOAH Seed Policy
It could hardly be less spectacular. In its last assembly in end of February the EU-Commission withdrew 73 legislative initiatives. The EU Seed Marketing Regulation, which was among them, is now formally history. A sober press release – and that’s it. Withdrawing a proposal is tantamount to making an open acknowledgement of fault. But it’s also new beginning. Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker apparently does not know much about seed marketing, but one thing is clear since the May 2014 EU parliamentary elections: now that radical parties are
on the rise, critical voices are getting louder. Political initiatives like the EU Seed Regulation Policy are to blame for citizens turning their backs on a common European mindset. Jean-Claude Juncker would like to avoid this.
This could signify two things for the European Seed Marketing Law; either everything stays the same, or the EU-Commission give itself a second chance. ARCHE NOAH would welcome a fresh, new beginning for
the reform. Admittedly, we got used to living with the existing legal environment. Compared to other EU member states, agro-biodiversity in Austria is, relatively-speaking, not so bad off (keyword: relatively). Considering how many changes would be necessary in order to allow agro-biodiversity to freely develop, the need for reform is huge.
Variety as mainstream
Suppliers of plant genetic material or of seeds of varieties in need of conservation face an oppressive amount of bureaucracy. The fundamental idea behind the existing seed legislation is that rare varieties should be restricted to a limited usage: the amount of rare seeds that can be sold is constrained by rules dictating small quantities or small packaging or through a so-called “region of origin” rule. A forward-looking legislation must abandon this “niche” mentality. Variety must be allowed to become mainstream. A political turn in this direction would offer an alternative to the dominance of agri-business and would benefit agricultural biodiversity, especially in those countries which suffer strong limitations. The positive impact would reach beyond EU borders: the global South would suffer from less external pressure to enact repressive EU-inspired laws that criminalize traditional seeds.
Biodiversity has a lot to win. If the EU-Commission finds the courage to change their policies, it could count on civil society’s active support. A new proposal is expected at the earliest in 2017. And it will be anything but unremarkable.
iga.niznik@arche-noah.at
www.arche-noah.at
Yes, we can!
Commentary by Christian Schrefel,
Chairman of ARCHE NOAH
“Together we have accomplished something that makes me proud:
Not only have we prevented a terrible worsening of EU seed marketing policy, but we have also paved the way to making this policy much more ecological.
Civil society has played a crucial role in this process. Public outrage has forced Brussel’s gates open for NGOs. This proves it: “Yes, we can!” Civil society engagement and influence can indeed bring politicians and authorities to reason. This is easier said than done: political opponents try to defame civic actors, portraying them as dilettantes. Expertise and credibility are necessary in order to counteract this denigration and make this issue relevant in the minds of decision-makers. Public support is equally important. Our petition co-launched with Global 2000, “Freedom for Diversity”, has been supported by hundreds of thousands of people. It is however mistaken to believe that the world can be changed with a few mouse clicks. Politicians do not fear mouse clicks, but they do fear crowds taking to the streets. Hundreds of seed packages delivered by mail put more pressure on a relevant actor than do emails, however many they may be. Strengthened by these positive experiences, my wish is that we continue powerfully on this path towards an agroecological turnaround for seed policy.
Industrial crops by law?
On May 6, 2013 the draft for a new EU seed regulation was launched despite huge public protest. If the new EU seed regulation had been adopted, it would have meant huge administrative hurdles and strong biological limitations. It would have threatened local varieties, ignored the costumers' freedom of choice and forced the interests of the agribusiness. The seed regulation was tailored to serve corporate interests and restricted non industrial plants to tiny and bureaucratic niches. The message was clear: Diversity and farmers’ seeds must be an exception; industrial crops must be the rule.
Gardeners, farmers and growers exchange their seeds because of their interest in old, rare or particular varieties of vegetables and crops. Some seed swaps and seed exchange would have become illegal with the now rejected seed regulation. It was planned that growers who want to pass on their own seeds or other propagating material would have to register as “operators”. Also, the plants would have to undergo "registration". These tests had been designed for industrial varieties; most old and rare varieties are not able to fulfil the registration criteria for biological reasons.
