Activities of Franck PROUST related to 2014/2228(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Reiterates the great importance of the transatlantic transport sector for trade as well as economic growth and jobs; reiterates its call for the negotiations to address in a meaningful way and in the spirit of reciprocity all relevant issues,; tak~~ing into account existing EU standards~~es the view that approximation of standards should be a priority in the interest of enhancing the competitiveness of our industries, but that the level of EU standards should never be lowered;

2015/02/09
Committee: TRAN

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas an ambitious agreement with the US may support the reindustrialisation of Europe by reducing the mutually destructive competition caused in recent decades by technology transfer to other markets in which competition was detrimental to our local production and help achieve the 2020 target for an increase of the EU’s GDP generated by industry from 15 % to 20 %; whereas it has the potential to create opportunities especially for SMEs, which suffer more from non- tariff barriers (NTBs) than larger companies; whereas an agreement between the two biggest economic blocs in the world has the potential to create standards, norms and rules which will be adopted at a global level, which would serve to the advantage of third countries as well;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Encourages the American and European authorities, given the likely development of the market in transatlantic transport links, to pay close attention to compliance by service providers (carriers) with our social and fiscal standards, in order to avoid any unfair competition;

2015/02/09
Committee: TRAN

Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)

Aa. whereas nine Member States of the European Union have already signed a bilateral agreement with the USA, so allowing TTIP to take inspiration from good practice and better enable the obstacles encountered by these Member States to be overcome;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Notes that EU companies are hindered as regards market access for major transport infrastructure investments (such as railway projects) due to: (i) regulatory and standardisation barriers and dissuasive administrative constraints; and (ii) ‘Buy America’ provisions2; emphasises that this puts EU goods and services at a serious disadvantage; calls upon the Commission to address in the TTIP this protectionism by the US by pushing for the creation of a level playing field and establishing a new level of transparency in access and procurement with open and predictable procedural requirements. __________________ 2Buy America Act, American Recovery and Reinvestment Act and the Surface Transportation Assistance Act.

2015/02/09
Committee: TRAN

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas, given the growing interconnectedness of global markets – up to 40 % of European industrial products are manufactured from imported upstream products – it is crucial that negotiators and policymakers shape the way these markets interact; whereas proper trade rules are fundamental to creating added value in Europe, since industrial production takes place in global value chains; it is therefore necessary to have a clear definition of the rules on product origin, including the place of manufacture and the extent of processing of products which will circulate in the market as a result of TTIP;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Takes the view that the disputes pending before the WTO between European and American transport firms are detrimental to our mutual competitiveness; considers that the TTIP negotiations should lead the two parties to settle these disputes, particularly given the increasingly strong competition from emerging countries in the industry and transport fields;

2015/02/09
Committee: TRAN

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas we are faced with an unregulated picture of globalisation and a well-designed trade agreement could contribute to harnessing ~~liberalisation~~the opening up of markets and increases in trade; whereas such an agreement should not only focus on reducing tariffs and NTBs but should also be a tool to support the general public interest by protecting workers, consumers, business and the environment; whereas a strong and ambitious trade agreement is an opportunity to create a framework by strengthening regulation to the highest standards at a global level and developing new standards in order to prevent social and environmental dumping;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas many economic impact studies on TTIP should, unfortunately, be taken with caution as they are built on computable general equilibrium economic models with very optimistic predictions about the capacity of the EU and the US to reduce regulatory barriers to trade; whereas the TTIP alone will not resolve economic problems in the EU and no false hopes ~~and expectation~~or arguments should be raised ~~in that respect~~by interpreting the studies in that way;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas many economic impact studies on TTIP should be taken with caution as they are built on computable general equilibrium economic models with very optimistic predictions about the capacity of the EU and the US to reduce regulatory barriers to trade; whereas the TTIP alone will not resolve economic problems in the EU and no false hopes and expectations should be raised in that respect; different economic models which do not use the same criteria and with either very optimistic or very pessimistic predictions about the capacity of the EU and the US to reduce regulatory barriers to trade; whereas it is therefore regrettable that the European Commission has not decided to undertake studies of higher quality in order to improve understanding of the current trade position from a macro- and micro- economic perspective and so improve the accuracy of its public presentation of the current trade position, and that it has instead relied on assessments of the impact of the TTIP, without a great deal of transparency in relation to the authors, financing or objectives of such assessments, thus possibly misleading citizens and policymakers; whereas it should be noted that the TTIP is a means to resolve economic problems in the EU and not an end in itself;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Recital F

F. whereas the wellbeing of ordinary citizens, workers and consumers has to be the benchmark for a trade agreement; whereas TTIP should be a model for a good trade agreement responding to these requirements in order to provide a basis for future negotiations with our partner countries;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Recital G

G. whereas the secret character of negotiations as they have been conducted in the past ~~has led to deficiencies in terms of democratic control of the negotiation proces~~, coupled with a lack of communication, has led to deficiencies in terms of interpretation by the general public and by certain decision-makers of the conduct of the negotiation process; adds that negotiations at this level must not lead to openness of a kind which would imperil or sabotage the satisfactory conduct of the defence of the general interests of the European Union by the negotiators, by revealing our strategy to our partner or to other stakeholders; underlines in this respect that the publication of the confidential documents which were leaked on the Internet did not result in legal action, despite the clear breach represented by this;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Recital H

H. whereas President Juncker has clearly reiterated in his Political Guidelines that – while the EU and the US can go a significant step further in recognising each other’s product standards and working towards transatlantic standards – the EU will not sacrifice its safety, health, social, environmental and data protection standards or our cultural diversity, recalling that the safety of the food we eat and the protection of Europeans’ personal data ~~are non- negotiable;~~can be negotiable only if they reach the highest standards; (The current situation in areas such as food safety and personal data protection is not completely satisfactory, and could even be improved (eg.: endocrine disruptors, etc.))

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Recital H

H. whereas President Juncker has clearly declared that he wishes the commercial agreement with the United States to be reasonable and balanced, and whereas he reiterated in his Political Guidelines that – while the EU and the US can go a significant step further in recognising each other’s product standards and working towards transatlantic standards – the EU will not sacrifice its safety, health, social and data protection standards or our cultural diversity, recalling that the safety of the food we eat and the protection of Europeans’ personal data are non- negotiable;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Recital I

I. whereas President Juncker has also clearly stated in his Political Guidelines that he will not accept that the jurisdiction of courts in the Member States is limited by special regimes for investor disputes; whereas now that the results of the public consultation on investment protection and ISDS in the TTIP are available, a reflection process – taking account of critical and constructive contributions – is ~~needed~~currently being undertaken within and between the three European institutions whilst associating civil society and companies, particularly those which have already been involved with this mechanism, on the best way to achieve investment protection and equal treatment of investors, whilst clearly giving the States the right to regulate;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Recital J

J. whereas many critical voices in the public debate have shown the need for the TTIP negotiations to be conducted in a more transparent and inclusive manner, taking into account the concerns voiced by European citizens; whereas Parliament fully supports both the decision of the Council to declassify the negotiating directives and the Commission’s transparency initiative; considers that the current context in which the negotiations are being conducted following the revelations relating to the spying undertaken by our American commercial partner through the NSA throughout European territory has contributed to this need for transparency in order to dispel all doubts concerning its intentions;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Recital K

K. whereas since July 2013 talks between the US and the EU have been ~~going on~~continuing, but up to now no common text has been agreed; a~~nd it is now exactly the right time~~dds that it is necessary to undertake a continuing reflection on the ~~state of play;~~ conduct of these negotiations; (There is no ideal time, only favourable moments)

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point a – point i

(i) to ensure that TTIP negotiations lead to a deep, comprehensive, ambitious, balanced and high-standard trade and investment agreement that would promote sustainable growth, support the creation of high-quality jobs for European workers, directly benefit European consumers, increase ~~international~~European competitiveness, and open up new opportunities for EU companies, in particular SMEs; the content of the agreement, ists legal robustness and its monitoring and application mechanisms are much more important than the speed of the negotiations;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point a – point i

(i) to ensure that TTIP negotiations lead to a deep, comprehensive, ambitious, balanced and high-standard trade and investment agreement in a spirit of reciprocity and mutual benefit that would promote sustainable growth, support the creation of high-quality jobs for European workers, directly benefit European consumers, increase international competitiveness, and open up new opportunities for EU companies, in particular SMEs; the content of the agreement is more important than the speed of the negotiations;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Tokia SAÏFI, Marielle DE SARNEZ, Franck PROUST

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point a – point ii

(ii) to emphasise that while the TTIP negotiations consist of negotiations on three main areas – a~~mbitiously improving~~pplication of reciprocal market access (for goods, services, investment and public procurement at all levels of government), reducing NTBs and enhancing the compatibility of regulatory regimes, and developing common rules to address shared global trade challenges and opportunities – all these areas are equally important to be included in a comprehensive package; TTIP should be ambitious and binding on all levels of government on both sides of the Atlantic, the agreement should lead to lasting genuine market openness on a reciprocal basis and trade facilitation on the ground, and should pay particular attention to structural means of achieving greater transatlantic cooperation while upholding regulatory standards and preventing fiscal, social and environmental dumping;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point a – point ii

(ii) to emphasise that while the TTIP negotiations consist of negotiations on three main areas – ambitiously improving reciprocal market access (for goods, services, investment and public procurement at all levels of government), reducing NTBs and enhancing the compatibility of regulatory regimes, and developing common rules to address shared global trade challenges and opportunities – all these areas are equally important to be included in a comprehensive package; TTIP should be ambitious and binding on all levels of government on both sides of the Atlantic, the agreement should lead to lasting genuine market openness on a reciprocal basis and trade facilitation on the ground, and should pay particular attention to structural means of achieving greater transatlantic cooperation while upholding regulatory standards and the level of consumer protection and preventing social and environmental dumping;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point a – point iii

(iii) to keep in mind the strategic importance of the EU-US economic relationship in general and of TTIP in particular, inter alia as an opportunity to promote the principles and values that the EU and the US share and cherish and to design a common approaches to and a vision of global trade, investment and trade- related issues such as ~~high~~norms, standards~~, norms~~ and regulations, in order to develop a broader transatlantic vision applicable to all, and a common set of strategic goals;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point a – point iv

(iv) to ensure, especially given the recent positive developments in the World Trade Organisation (WTO), that an agreement with the US serves as a stepping-stone and an impetus for broader trade negotiations and is not seen as an alternative to the WTO process; ~~bilateral trade agreements are always the second-best option and must not prevent improvements on the multilateral level~~stresses generally that the multilateral solutions adopted under the WTO should be preferred to bilateral commercial agreements;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point a – point iv a (new)

(iva) considers that the notion of reciprocity must guide the European negotiators, in order to uphold, calmly but firmly, the offensive interests of the European Union in the actions to combat inequalities in respect of access to public and private markets and of treatment, in order that both parties are playing the globalisation game by the same rules;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Tokia SAÏFI, Michel DANTIN, Angélique DELAHAYE, Marielle DE SARNEZ, Franck PROUST

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point i

(i) to ensure that the market access offers in the different areas are ~~equally ambitious~~reciprocal and reflect both parties’ expectations, as market access for industrial goods, agricultural products, services and public procurement is equally important in all cases and ~~a balance is needed between~~ the different proposals for these areas must be in balance;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point i

(i) to ensure that the market access offers in the different areas are equally ambitious and reflect both parties’ expectations, as market access for industrial goods, agricultural products, services and public procurement is equally important in all cases and a balance is needed between the different proposals for these areas; to ensure also that the sensitive nature of certain products and sectors, particularly agricultural products, is taken into account; to examine and analyse whether it would be appropriate to exclude from the negotiations products judged to be sensitive, for which there is excessive divergence in standards and the conditions for fair competition cannot be ensured.

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Tokia SAÏFI, Michel DANTIN, Angélique DELAHAYE, Marielle DE SARNEZ, Franck PROUST

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point ii

(ii) to aim at the elimination of all duty tariffs, while respecting sensitive products on both sides; to agree in particular that appropriate transitional periods and tariff quotas should be negotiated and implemented for agricultural products;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point iii

(iii) to keep in mind that ~~there are important offensive interests for the EU~~as the EU is the world’s greatest trading power, it has an interest in taking the offensive throughout the negotiations and in particular in the services sector, for instance in the areas of engineering, telecommunications and transport services;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point iv

(iv) to increase market access for services according to the ‘positive list approach’ whereby services that are to be opened up to foreign companies are explicitly mentioned and new services are excluded while ensuring that possible standstill and ratchet clauses only apply to non- discrimination provisions and allow for enough flexibility both to bring services back into public control and to take account of the development of new services in the future;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point v

(v) the negotiations should meaningfully address the current US restrictions on maritime and air transport services owned by European businesses, including in relation to foreign equity shareholdings and ownership of airlines and reciprocity on cabotage, as well as maritime cargo screening and networks development;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point v a (new)

(va) asks that retaliatory measures involving prohibitions, restrictions on access to the market, or excessively high customs duties for certain food products linking them to a geopolitical context should no longer be accepted by the partners as they have been and still are, except on the basis of real and wholly unambiguous reasons; regrets the detrimental effects of what can be called a food embargo; calls for the establishment of a transparent working group involving the US, the European Commission, EU Member States, producers and other interested businesses so that products which are the subject of restrictions may be discussed regularly in order to remove all doubt as to the reasons for the restrictions; (Products such as mimolette, camembert, wine, roquefort and foie gras regularly fall foul of such measures owing to the geopolitical climate, as was the case during the 2003 Gulf War and when the EU bans imports of products such as American hormone beef.)

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point v b (new)

(vb) in the context of foreseeable developments in transatlantic air travel, encourages the US and European authorities to ensure that service providers (airlines) comply with social and fiscal standards in order to avoid any unfair competition;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point vi

(vi) ~~to ensure an adequate carve-out of~~undertakes to authorise an unambiguous carve-out in line with requests from the Member States for sensitive services such as public services and public utilities (including water, health, social security systems and education) allowing national and local authorities ~~enough room for manoeuvre~~the right to legislate in the public interest; ~~a joint declaration reflecting negotiators’ clear commitment to exclude these sectors from the negotiations would be very helpful in this regard;~~

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point vi

(vi) to ensure an adequate carve-out of sensitive services such as public services and public utilities (including water, health systems, social security systems and education) and services of general interest as defined in protocol 26 of the TFEU, allowing national and local authorities enough room for manoeuvre to legislate in the public interest; ~~a joint declaration reflecting negotiators’ clear commitment to exclude these sectors from the negotiations would be very helpful in this regard;~~

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Franck PROUST, Marc JOULAUD, Tokia SAÏFI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point vi a (new)

(via) calls for the protectionist measures in the Buy American Act, Buy America and American Job Act to be challenged in relation to European products within the scope of TTIP; authorises the European Commission to consider the development of an equivalent system to favour European products in public procurement at the expense of American products if no progress has been made by the end of the negotiations;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point x

(x) to keep in mind, as is clearly set out in the negotiating mandate, that the agreement should not risk prejudicing the Union’s cultural and linguistic diversity, including in the audiovisual and cultural services sector, and that existing and future provisions and policies in support of the cultural sector, ~~in particular in the digital world, are kept out of the scope of the negotiation~~such as the digitisation of European cultural heritage in the digital world, or the system for fixing book prices in publishing are kept out of the scope of the negotiation; adds that these provisions should be the subject of articles in the legal body of the agreement and should not be mentioned only in the preamble or in an annex;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Tokia SAÏFI, Marielle DE SARNEZ, Franck PROUST

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point xi

(xi) to ensure that ~~account is taken of~~ the discrepancies in the openness of public procurement markets on both sides of the Atlantic ~~and~~should be eliminated in order to achieve access to public procurement markets based on reciprocity, given in particular the huge interest on the part of European companies in obtaining access to public contracts in the US both at federal and federated state level, for example for construction services, road and rail traffic infrastructure and goods and services while respecting sustainability criteria for procurement on both sides, inter alia the new EU procurement and concession package entering into force in 2016

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point xiii a (new)

(xiiia) to ensure a carve-out for the sensitive areas of defence and security from negotiations on access to public contracts, given the risk of creating conditions of unequal competition for the European defence industry, which would run counter to the objectives set by heads of State and Government at the 2013 ‘Defence’ Council

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Franck PROUST, Michel DANTIN, Angélique DELAHAYE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point xiv

(xiv) to ensure that the negotiations on rules of origin aim at reconciling the EU and US approaches, in order to avoid the risk that the rules on the place of manufacture or processing of products could be undermined by means of other agreements entered into; given the conclusion of the negotiations for the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) between EU and Canada and the potential upgrade of the EU-Mexico free trade agreement, and the bilateral agreements currently under negotiation by the US in the context of the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP), the possibilityies and scope of cumulation will need to be considered;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point xiv a (new)

(xiva) adds that, in addition to product origin, the EU should highlight the know- how and tradition protected by European Geographical Indications (GI) so that full recognition of the scheme on both sides of the Atlantic allows its continued existence alongside brands; emphasises that these concerns could extend to Geographical Indications of non-agricultural products; draws attention to the need to find a solution during the negotiations to the issue of the counterfeiting and misuse of brand awareness of prestige products, so as to end these abuses in relation to the access of such products to the market;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point c – point i

(i) to ensure that the regulatory cooperation chapter promotes an effective, pro- competitive economic environment through the facilitation of trade and investment while developing and securing the highest levels of protection of human and animal health and safety, consumer, labour and environmental legislation, the highest sanitary and phytosanitary standards and of the cultural diversity that exists within the EU; negotiators on both sides need to identify and to be very clear about which regulatory measures and standards are fundamental and cannot be compromised, which ones can be the subject of a common approach, which are the areas where mutual recognition based on a common high standard and a strong system of market surveillance is desirable and which are those where simply an improved exchange of information is possible, based on the experience of one and a half years of ongoing talks;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point c – point ii

(ii) to base negotiations on SPS and TBT measures on the key principles of the multilateral SPS and TBT agreements; to aim in the first place at increasing transparency and openness, strengthening dialogue between regulators and strengthening cooperation in international standards-setting bodies; to recognise, in negotiations on SPS and TBT measures, the right of both parties to manage risk in accordance with the level either deems appropriate in order to protect human, animal or plant life or health; to respect and uphold the sensitivities and fundamental values of either side, such as the EU’s precautionary principle and the defence of its general interest;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point c – point iv

(iv) to define clearly, in the context of future regulatory cooperation, which measures concern TBT and duplicated or redundant administrative burdens and formalities and which are linked to fundamental standards and regulations and should not be altered;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point c – point v

(v) to fully respect the established regulatory systems on both sides of the Atlantic, as well as the European Parliament’s role within the EU’s decision- making process and its democratic scrutiny over EU regulatory processes when creating the framework for future cooperation while at the same time being vigilant about a balanced involvement of stakeholders within the consultations included in the development of a regulatory proposal; proposes as such that the updates made to correct certain aspects concerning the limits of the partnership be placed, if necessary, under democratic and parliamentary scrutiny;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point d – point iv

(iv) to ensure that labour and environmental standards are made enforceable, by building on ~~the good~~all experience ~~of the EU-Korea free trade agreement and good and effective practices in the US’s free trade agreement~~judged to be good by the European institutions, Member States and national ~~legislation~~parliaments;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point d – point v

(v) to ensure that employees of transatlantic companies have access to information and consultation in line with the European works council directive; and that whistle-blowers within companies have legal protection for their activities on both sides of the Atlantic;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Franck PROUST, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Angélique DELAHAYE, Michel DANTIN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point d – point vi

(vi) to ensure that the economic, social and environmental impact of TTIP is examined through a ~~thorough~~ trade sustainability impact assessment with clear involvement of stakeholders and civil society, while recognising that such an exercise will be extremely difficult, due to the multiplicity of criteria and external factors;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point d – point vii

(vii) to ensure that in course of the negotiations the two sides examine ways to facilitate natural gas and oil exports, so that TTIP would abolish any existing export restrictions on energy between the two trading partners, thereby supporting a diversification of energy sources, while encouraging research to improve the environmental impact of new energy extraction methods;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point d – point ix

(ix) to ensure that TTIP supports the use and promotion of green goods and services, thereby tapping into the considerable potential for environmental and economic gains offered by the transatlantic economy, particularly for the purpose of combatting global warming;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point d – point xi

(xi) to ensure that TTIP includes a specific chapter on SME’s and aims at creating new opportunities in the US for European SMEs, on the basis of SME exporters’ actual reported experience, for instance by eliminating double certification requirements, by establishing a web-based information system about the different regulations, by introducing ‘fast- track’ procedures at the border or by eliminating specific tariff peaks that continue to exist; it should establish mechanisms for both sides to work together to facilitate SMEs’ participation in transatlantic trade, for instance through a common SME ‘one-stop shop’ which would provide specific information on each US state, potential contacts and support available in the event of litigation based on the e-justice portal;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point d – point xi

(xi) to ensure that TTIP includes a specific chapter on SME’s and aims at creating new opportunities in the US for European SMEs, for instance by eliminating double certification requirements, by establishing a web-based information system about the different regulations, by introducing ‘fast- track’ procedures at the border or by eliminating specific tariff peaks that continue to exist; it should establish mechanisms for both sides to work together to facilitate SMEs’ participation in transatlantic trade, through the implementation of technical assistance, for instance ~~through~~, a common SME ‘one-stop shop’;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point d – point xii

(xii) to ensure that TTIP contains a comprehensive chapter on investment including provisions on both market access and investment protection, which has become necessary as a result of the increased importance of short-term shareholding which reduces the funds available for investment; the investment chapter should aim at ensuring non- discriminatory treatment for the establishment of European and US companies in each other’s territory, while taking account of the sensitive nature of some specific sectors; seeks a consensus on the definition of the term ‘discrimination’, and its acceptance by the states within the USA, as the lack of clarity surrounding this term already entails a distortion of competition, with European businesses unable to prove cases of potential discrimination before some local US courts;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point d – point xiii

(xiii) to ensure that investment protection provisions are limited to post- establishment provisions and focus on non- discrimination and fair and equitable treatment; standards of protection and definitions of investor and investment should be drawn up in a precise manner; free transfer of capital and security of trade should be in line with the EU treaty provisions and should include a prudential carve-out in the case of financial crises;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point d – point xiv

(xiv) to ensure that foreign investors are treated in a non-discriminatory fashion, are protected and have a fair opportunity to seek and achieve redress of grievances, which cannot be achieved without the inclusion of a~~n ISDS~~ mechanism~~; such a mechanism is not necessary in TTIP given the EU’s and the US’ developed legal systems;~~ for dispute resolution, which needs to be improved to take account of requirements for transparency, clear and precise definitions of legal concepts such as ‘indirect expropriation’ and ‘fair and equitable treatment’, an appeals mechanism, rules on ethics, good practice and prevention of conflicts of interest, to tackle the abuse constituted by multiple recourse; provide arrangements to ensure accessibility for SMEs, guarantee the right of states to regulate; such a mechanism is necessary in TTIP as even though a state-to- state dispute settlement system and the use of national courts arcould be the most appropriate tools to address investment ~~disputes~~, this is not the case at present as SMEs do not get the same hearing from States as multinational companies and, even though the EU and US have developed legal systems, European businesses which are the victims of discrimination cannot obtain their rights from some local courts in the US and priority should be given in combatting election of jurisdiction (forum shopping); to ensure that the dispute resolution mechanism is part of long-term thinking on the establishment of an international organisation responsible for such questions in relation to investment;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point d – point xiv a (new)

(xiva) calls for the establishment of an early warning system with regular consultation with chambers of commerce and business in order to resolve any potential disputes in the first instance by prevention and mediation;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Franck PROUST, Alain LAMASSOURE, Tokia SAÏFI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point d – point xvi a (new)

(xvia) calls for increased transparency in relation to state aids and their allocation; hopes accordingly for a rapid and favourable outcome to the disputes between Boeing and the Airbus Group, particularly the cases currently before the WTO such as the question of the Boeing 777X, as these transport-related disputes between European and US companies are damaging to the competitiveness of both parties; notes in addition that the negotiations on TTIP should lead the two parties to resolve the position, particularly as they are faced with increasingly strong competition from emerging countries in the transport industry;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point d – point xvi b (new)

(xvib) to ensure that European and North American companies comply with their fiscal duties when exercising their rights under the Treaty, in particular by realigning the rules on taxation of economic substance and by ensuring transparency of capital movements and sharing of financial information in line with the OECD’s Action Plan on Base Erosion and Profit Shifting, as presented to the G20 Finance meeting on 21 September 2014;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point e – point i

(i) recognises the efforts the Commission has made in relation to transparency, in terms of publication of the negotiating mandate, distribution of papers and information sessions, and encourages it to continue ongoing efforts to increase transparency in the negotiations ~~by making more negotiation proposals available to the general public~~;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point e – point ii

(ii) to translate these transparency efforts into meaningful ~~practical~~ results, inter alia by reaching meaningful arrangements with the US side to improve transparency, including access to all negotiating documents, in order to allow Members of Parliament and the Member States to develop constructive discussions with stakeholders and the public, without revealing European negotiating strategies or putting them at risk by inappropriate disclosures;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point e – point ii a (new)

(iia) regrets the poor quality of studies on TTIP’s potential, which has led to contradictory positions and interpretations; considers that better assessments of internal and external impact should be undertaken to refine the general and if possible sectoral, scope of TTIP;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point e – point iii

(iii) to promote an even closer engagement with the Member States with the aim of forging their active involvement in better communicating the scope and the possible benefits of the agreement for European citizens and in order to ensure a broad, fact-based public debate on TTIP in Europe with the aim of exploring the genuine concerns surrounding the agreement; ;suggests that Member States should draw on the support available from European networks such as Europe Direct to organise events and targeted public consultation meetings.

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point e – point iv a (new)

(iva) suggests that members of the European and national parliaments should participate in future rounds of negotiation as non-speaking observers, so that they can better report back, particularly on negotiating methods, without creating a risk to the continuing discussion;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA