BETA

2543 Amendments of Dita CHARANZOVÁ

Amendment 25 #

2019/2028(BUD)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10
10. Calls on the Commission to finance all pilot projects and preparatory actions endorsed by IMCO, including to the pilot project 'Web inclusiveness: access for all'.
2019/07/25
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 3 #

2019/0099(NLE)

Draft legislative resolution
Paragraph 1
1. Refuses to gGives its consent to Solomon Islands’ accession to the agreement;
2019/11/14
Committee: INTA
Amendment 7 #

2018/2109(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses that creating seamless customs processes across the Union through the reform of IT infrastructure is pivotal; considers that digitalisation is key to the modernisation of customs processes and has to the potential to make the exchange of information and the payment of duties more transparent and accessible, in particular for operators in third countries; Calls for the swift implementation by all parties for the new IT systems for the Customs Union before the new extended deadline of 2025; Underlines that the European Parliament will not extend the deadline further;
2018/12/10
Committee: INTA
Amendment 12 #

2018/2109(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Notes that the current divergent levels of controls and their quality, and of customs procedures and sanctions policies at points of entry into the customs union, often result in the distortion of trade flows, feeding the problem of ‘forum shopping’ and putting at risk the integrity of the single market; strongly encourages, in this context, the transfer of responsibilities from national customs authorities to EU levelcalls for the fully harmonised implementation of the Union Customs Code, in a manner that ensures that all goods entering the EU will be treated and processed the same, no matter their port of entry;
2018/12/10
Committee: INTA
Amendment 27 #

2018/2109(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
2. Points out that, while the EU is more than just an economic area, the Customs Union the Customs Union is one of the EU’s earliest achievements and can be considered one of its undeniably a success in that itmain success stories, as it has enablesd the firms established in the EU to sell their goods and invest throughout the EU, with nobut also allowed the EU to remove internal borders, and that that achievement takes on fundamental importance in the context of Brexito compete with the rest of the world. Underlines that the EU’s single market, would be impossible without the tariff-free environment provided by the Customs Union and the role the latter plays in overseeing imports and exports;
2018/11/30
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 40 #

2018/2109(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Recalls that the modernisation of customs processes, based on the development of new Information Technology (IT) systems, has enabled the improved exchange of information between actors, a more effective registration of the arrival, transit and exit of goods, a centralised customs clearance and harmonised customs controls throughout the customs territory of the Union, thereby reducing administrative costs, red tape, error fraud in customs declarations and harmful port-shopping, as well as has enhanced economic activity and growth, and increased the safety and security of the EU citizens;
2018/11/30
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 41 #

2018/2109(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Deplores that the implementation of the new IT systems for the Customs Union suffered a series of delays, so that some of the key systems will not be available at the 2020 deadline set in the UCC. Underlines that the delays are due to several factors, in particular: changing project scope, insufficient resources allocated by the EU and Member States, and a lengthy decision-making process due to the multi-layered governance structure;
2018/11/30
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 42 #

2018/2109(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 c (new)
3c. Expresses its strong disappointment after taking stock of the conclusion of the report of the Court of Auditors no 26/2018 “A series of delays in Customs IT systems: what went wrong?” which states that there is a risk that the rescheduled deadlines will also not be met and that the UCC deadline could be further extended beyond 2025, and urges therefore the Commission and the Member States to do their outmost in order to avoid such a situation;
2018/11/30
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 52 #

2018/2109(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Reminds that, according to the Court of Auditors, the Commission was aware of the delays but chose not to include this information in its official reporting, which prevented the stakeholders (such as the European Parliament, other EU institutions not represented in the governance structure of Customs 2020 as well as interested companies and citizens) from being fully informed of the risk of delays in real time; calls therefore on the Commission to regularly report on the progress made as regards to the setting-up of the customs electronic systems and inform about any possible future delays;
2018/11/30
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 58 #

2018/2109(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Underlines that continuous policy monitoring, analysis and assessment of possible impacts are essential parts of governance of the Customs Union, reminds in that respect that The Customs Union Performance tool operates by assessing the functioning of the Customs Union, on the basis of Key Performance Indicators in a range of areas such as protection of financial interests, ensuring the safety and security of EU citizens and assessing the importance of customs in contributing to the growth and competiveness of the EU, calls on the Member States to support the work in order to develop further this tool;
2018/11/30
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 60 #

2018/2109(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8b. Recalls that the Commission is developing work on an EU Customs Single Window environment that would permit an economic operator to submit data required for a wide range of regulatory purposes (e.g. veterinary, sanitary, environmental, etc.) in a standardised format to multiple recipients and via harmonised access points; calls on the Commission and the Member States to continue this important work;
2018/11/30
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 61 #

2018/2109(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 c (new)
8c. Believes that the cooperation between operational services on the ground, including between tax and customs administrations, could enable scarce resources to be used more efficiently;
2018/11/30
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 6 #

2018/2106(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 4 a (new)
– having regard to the European Parliament Resolution of the “Annual report on the implementation of the Common Commercial Policy” (2017/2070(INI)),
2018/10/18
Committee: INTA
Amendment 12 #

2018/2106(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A
A. whereas the Association Agreement (AA) between the European Union (EU) and Central America (CA) was the first region-to-region AA concluded by the EU and is based on three complementary parts, namely political dialogue, cooperation, and trade; whereas the trade part of the AA (Part IV) was quite broad and ambitious when it was negotiated, but retrospectively lacks updated provisions on, inter alia, gendigital trader and trade-commerce, anti- corruption or SMEs;
2018/10/18
Committee: INTA
Amendment 30 #

2018/2106(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
2. Highlights that the AA relies on a rules-based fair and predictable relationship which promotes a more secure economic environment between the trading partners; considers that such predictability fosters economic growth, the exchange of goods, the provision of services, participation in public procurement and the attractiveness of investment, even if the flows do not always evolve in a linear fashion;
2018/10/18
Committee: INTA
Amendment 33 #

2018/2106(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
3. Calls on the Commission to deliver updated and comprehensive annual reports on the implementation of the AA as requested in the relevant implementing regulations; is of the opinion that the information included in the Report on Implementation of Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) is not sufficient and, in order to adequately assess the implementation of the AA, suggests that the parties improve the provision of updated, comparable and reliable statistical data; Reiterates its call on the Commission to update and create a common methodology for evaluating the implementation of its trade agreements more coherently;
2018/10/18
Committee: INTA
Amendment 36 #

2018/2106(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
5. Takes noteRegrets that neither CA nor the EU make full use of their granted tariff rate quotas (TRQs) and therefore identifiescalls for potential sectors to be identified where further exchanges should be encouraged; regrets that figures on preference utilisation rates are only available in Costa Rica; is concerned that only 16.6 % of the eligible EU exports to Costa Rica benefited from the FTA while the rate was 92 % for Costa Rican exports to the EU;
2018/10/18
Committee: INTA
Amendment 44 #

2018/2106(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
11. Regrets the lack of a specific chapter on SMEs in the existing AA, and encourages the Commission, the EEAS, Member States and CA to place at the disposal of SMEs all the tools required tolegal and administrative support and tools required for SMEs to engage in trade and investment under this agreement, foster greater exchanges and enhance participation in order to reap the benefits of the AA; reiterates its call for action to raise awareness of the AA among stakeholders nd the support available to among stakeholders, in particular SMEs, in both regions; reiterates its call for the promotion of cooperation with appropriate technical and financial resources in strategic sectors for both regions;
2018/10/18
Committee: INTA
Amendment 65 #

2018/2106(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
15. Stresses that recent political and economic developments in some Central American countries can have a negative impact on the region as a whole and might lead to the destabilisation of the region; Is particularly alarmed at the situation in Nicaragua, and calls on the Nicaraguan authorities to cease all acts of violence and repression against its citizens, to release all political prisoners and to restart a meaningful dialogue with the opposition and relevant actors in all sectors order to seek a peaceful solution to the current socio-political crisis; Recalls that the democracy clause is an essential element of all of the Union’s agreements with third countries;
2018/10/18
Committee: INTA
Amendment 19 #

2018/2056(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital I a (new)
Ia. whereas late payments create additional costs for companies as they have to invest resources into chasing late payers or they have to pay interest on the credit contracted in order to continue business operations;
2018/10/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 23 #

2018/2056(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital O
O. whereas given the variety of factors leading to late payment (i.e.late payment is a multi- factored, complex problem caused by horizontal drivers, common across all sectors and across transactions (such as cash-flow issues, imbalances of power and size between companies, supply chain structure, administrative inefficiency, poor access to credit, lack of knowledge of invoice and credit management) and by the influence of external factors (i.e. the economic situation and national business culture), it is not possible to distinguish one solution that would solve all issues;
2018/10/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 29 #

2018/2056(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
1. BelievesConsiders that EU legislation on late payments and the Commission's follow up action on infringements since the adoption of the 2011 Late Payments Directive has brought about a change in culture in public administrations across the EU, characterised by a general decline in payment delays; believes, however, that both the Late Payment Directive and national legislation on late payment should be better enforced through measures aimed at improving rules on payment terms and discouraging unfair practices; notes that these measures can be categorised according to their nature (legal or voluntary), scope (horizontal or sector- specific) and objective (preventive, remedial or change in business culture);
2018/10/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 32 #

2018/2056(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
2. Maintains that there is no one- size-fits-all approach to tackling the issue of late payments, as in some sectors longer payment deadlines, beyond 30 or 60 days, are in line with the needs of businesses and an accepted practice, taking into account the specificities of each sector; considers that it is also important to respect the freedom of contract between undertakings on the market;deleted
2018/10/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 38 #

2018/2056(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
3. Believes that in sectors particularly vulnerable to long payment terms, Member States cshould consider establishing stricter payment terms as a general rule; notes that some Member States have limited the standard payment term to 30 days (instead of the 60 days set out in the Late Payment Directive), while only a few Member States have introduced maximum payment terms (from which the parties cannot derogate); notes furthermore that at sector level the introduction of maximum payment terms is more common; considers that legislation setting out stricter payment terms would be effective in reducing payment terms to some extent and, provided that it is enforced, would create a level playing field between large and small companies; believes that legislation defining payment terms differentiated by category of products or services is relevant in promoting fair practices and addressing sectoral specificities;
2018/10/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 46 #

2018/2056(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
4. Points out that the introduction of the mandatory publication of information in specific databases and registries concerning payment behaviour can discourage late payment and help businesses choose reliable commercial partners; considers that the ‘name and shame’ factor, peer-pressure provisions and public access to information can be an incentive for companies to improve their payment practices and uphold their monetary obligations;
2018/10/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 61 #

2018/2056(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
8. Calls on the Member States to enforce their national legislation and to encourage and improve stricter controls, in particular among large companies, and the use of administrative sanctions (reinforced through a ‘name and shame’ provision that generates peer pressure), thus contributing to the improvement of payment behavior; maintains that direct intervention from the public authorities, since it is they who enforce administrative sanctions, could help to overcome the ‘fear factor’ and relieve creditors of the responsibility to take action against debtors, as the authorities would directly enforce the law and take discretionary action against enterprises engaged in bad payment practices; believes that the value of sanctions and their cumulative nature could deter companies from paying late, while public access to information (publication of sanctions) could directly harm the company’s image;
2018/10/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 99 #

2018/2056(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
20. Calls on theUrges Member States to improve their legislation and promote theensure proper implementation of the Late Payment Directive in all its parts by bringing their relevant legislation, including the implementing secondary provisions in line with the rules of the directive;
2018/10/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 22 #

2018/2023(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. Urges the Commission and the Member States to step up financial support for the deployment of alternative fuels infrastructure; notes the relevance of priority-setting in the next MFF; calls on the Member States to acknowledge the positive effects of fiscal incentives for the market up-take of alternative fuel vehicles, as demonstrated by the practice in the Netherlands and Norway.
2018/04/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 30 #

2018/2023(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Supports a technologically neutral approach, with a particular focus on reducing greenhouse gas emissions; states that the roll-out of digitally connected alternative fuel infrastructure should be regarded in conjunction with the actual number of alternative fuel vehicles.
2018/04/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 33 #

2018/2023(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5 b. Encourages the Commission to take advantage of the synergies between European transport, energy and digitalization policies for instance in relation to smart charging and Intelligent Transport Systems.
2018/04/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 5 #

2018/2018(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D
D. whereas Chile has been a major player in regional affairs, for example as a guarantor country in the Colombian peace process and the Santo Domingo talks between the Venezuelan Government and opposition; whereas Chile decided to suspend indefinitely its participation in the Santo Domingo talks as the minimum conditions for a democratic presidential election and an institutional normalization were not reached;
2018/03/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 26 #

2018/2018(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point c
c) to put shared values at the core of the modernisation process and to continue the practice of including a human rights clause, as it is done in all AAs; to include a joint commitment to the protection and promotion of human rights, fundamental freedoms, gender equality, and the rights of minorities such as the LGBTI community, ethnic minorities and indigenous people;
2018/03/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 38 #

2018/2018(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point e
e) to strengthen dialogue and cooperation on regional and global challenges, such as organised crime, migration, terrorism and climate change, including the implementation of Agenda 2030 for sustainable development;
2018/03/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 40 #

2018/2018(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
ea) to recall the importance of the multilateral agenda and that any bilateral negotiation must not undermine the ambition to achieve progress multilaterally;
2018/03/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 43 #

2018/2018(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point g
g) to encourage Chile to continue supporting regional integration and cooperation schemes, most importantly the Pacific Alliance taking into consideration its encouraging results as a real and active driver of economic integration between the members of the region, as well as, UNASUR, and the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC); to examine the possibility of the EU gaining an observer status in the Pacific Alliance;
2018/03/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 53 #

2018/2018(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point k a (new)
ka) to recall that corruption undermines human rights, equality, social justice, trade and fair competition, impeding economic growth; to include specific sections outlining clear and strong commitments and measures to combat corruption in all its forms and to implement international standards and multilateral anti-corruption conventions;
2018/03/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 69 #

2018/2018(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point t
t) to delaensure that any provisional application of the new agreement until Parliament has given itsshould be subject to the Parliament giving its prior consent;
2018/03/07
Committee: AFET
Amendment 20 #

2018/2008(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Fa. whereas to fully reap the benefits of the internal market, the better application of existing EU food and consumer legislation to identify and address unjustified dual standards and thus protect the consumers against misleading information and commercial practices is crucial;
2018/04/18
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 22 #

2018/2008(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital F b (new)
Fb. whereas there is a continuous need to strengthen the role of consumer associations in this regards; whereas consumer associations play an unique role in guaranteeing consumers 'confidence and need to be further supported through additional legal and economic measures and capacity building;
2018/04/18
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 26 #

2018/2008(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
1. Underlines that results of varinumerous tests and surveys conducted in several Member States have proven that there are differences, inter alia in composition and ingredients or substances used, between products which are advertised and distributed in the single market under the same brand and with the sameidentical packaging;
2018/04/18
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 31 #

2018/2008(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Recalls that based on these findings, consumers are concerned about discrimination between different Member States markets; underlines that any type of such discrimination is not acceptable and all EU consumers should enjoy access to the equivalent level of quality of products;
2018/04/18
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 33 #

2018/2008(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
2. Highlights that the cases when such significant differences were reported concern not only food products but frequently also non-food products, including detergents, cosmetics, toiletries and products intended for babies;
2018/04/18
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 49 #

2018/2008(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
5. Takes note of the mandate given to the High Level Forum for a Better Functioning Food Supply Chain to address the issue of dual quality; encourages Member States and their competent authorities to actively participate in ongoing initiatives, including the development of a common methodology and collection of further evidence; emphasizes that the key for tackling this problem in practice is an effective and swift cross-border cooperation of relevant authorities including information exchange on potentially non-compliant products;
2018/04/18
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 82 #

2018/2008(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
10. Considers that the Notice is perceived as primarily intended for foodstuffs; believes that provisions on the application of consumer protection law should be applied to all products available in the single market in general;
2018/04/18
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 113 #

2018/2008(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
16. Points out that national competent authorities can select samples and perform tests only on the territory of their Member State; stresses the importance, therefore, ofhighlights the need for enhanced, effective and transparent cooperation between national consumer protection and food authorities, consumers associations and the Commission; welcomes the adoption of the revised Consumer Protection Cooperation Regulation11 in this regard; _________________ 11 Regulation (EU) 2017/2394; OJ L 345, 27.12.2017, p. 1.
2018/04/18
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 120 #

2018/2008(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
17. Emphasises the value of public debate that leads to increased consumer awareness about products and their characteristics; notes that some manufacturers and owners of private labels have already announced changes to recipes; highlightsstresses the importance of the role of industry in improving transparency with regard to product composition; calls for even stronger involvement of both producers and retailers which will help to find effective remedy to the current situation without triggering enforcement procedures;
2018/04/18
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 129 #

2018/2008(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Believes that it is in the interest of all relevant stakeholders, both private and public, to identify as soon as possible workable solutions which would enable European consumers to access same quality products within the entire single market; recalls that consumers´ confidence in suppliers and retailers and, above all, in the functioning of the EU internal market is at stake;
2018/04/18
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 135 #

2018/2008(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
18. Invites consumer organisations to play an active role in the public debate and in informing consumers; calls on the Commission and the Member States to promote and strengthen through financial and legal mechanism the role of consumers associations and to establish regular communication on this issue; believes that enhanced cross- border exchange of information between consumers associations, but also relevant authorities should be promoted;
2018/04/18
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 147 #

2018/2008(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
19. Believes that the experiences of competent authorities thus far suggest that they have been unable individually to tackle effectively any specific cases of dual quality at national level; reiterates therefore the need for an effective cross- border cooperation and calls on the Commission and Member States to engage in it more intensively;
2018/04/18
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 169 #

2018/2008(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
21. Recalls that Annex I to the UCPD was drawn up to enable the identification of certain unfair practices and the provision of a more immediate response; agrees with the Commission that listing a practice in Annex I leads to greater legal certainty;
2018/04/18
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 179 #

2018/2008(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
22. Calls on the Commission, therefore, to amend Annex I to the UCPD by introducing another item onto the ‘blacklist’dual quality of products into its scope;
2018/04/18
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 183 #

2018/2008(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
23. Calls on the Commission to extend the mandate given to the Joint Research Centre to work on a harmonised methodology for comparing characteristics of non-food products in the near future; JRC should also reach out for a cooperation to Member States authorities which has already undertaken their own testing of products for exchange of best practices in this area;
2018/04/18
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 33 #

2018/0358M(NLE)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that the agreement will ensure a high level of investment protection and legal certainty while safeguarding the right of the Parties to regulate and pursue legitimate public policy objectives, such as public health and environmental protection; emphasises that the agreement will ensure transparency and accountability; asks the Commission to further take into account the fight against climate change and the respect of the Paris Agreement in safeguarding the right of the parties to regulate, as it has been done with CETA;
2019/11/13
Committee: INTA
Amendment 56 #

2018/0358M(NLE)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
10. Notes that the EU-Vietnam Investment Protection Agreement (EVIPA) does not contain a separate trade and sustainable development (TSD) chapter, as the latter applies to investment by virtue of the EU-Vietnam Free Trade Agreement (EUVFTA) that liberalises it; stresses that the EVIPA also contains a provision establishing a legal link to the PCA, as well as specific references in its preamble to the TSD values and principles as enshrined in the EUVFTA and to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights; points out that the provisions of the EVIPA and the EUVFTA must be implemented in a complementary manner, especially with regard to human, environmental and social rights and sustainable development;
2019/11/13
Committee: INTA
Amendment 61 #

2018/0358M(NLE)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 b (new)
10 b. Points out that a new Vietnamese Cyber Security Law, that entered into force at the beginning of 2019, has attracted a lot of criticism, as an intensified crackdown on human rights activists in the country has been documented, linked to the provisions of this new law which gives the authorities licence to censor content, control information and silence online dissidents; notes with regret that the legislation also raises concerns for EU economic interests, including forced data localisation provisions which are at odds with the EU's liberalisation agenda in this respect; calls on Vietnam to revise this law in line with international standards and welcomes the European Union's assistance in this respect;
2019/11/13
Committee: INTA
Amendment 62 #

2018/0358M(NLE)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 c (new)
10 c. Underlines the need for close monitoring of the implementation of the agreement and the human rights developments in Vietnam; Calls for a joint parliamentary scrutiny board, basing itself on the monitoring Group for Vietnam in the European Parliament and its equivalent in the Vietnamese National Assembly, which will be tasked to monitor the implementation of the agreement and the human rights developments in Vietnam;
2019/11/13
Committee: INTA
Amendment 67 #

2018/0358M(NLE)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
13. ECalls on the Commission to take accompanying measures for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) with this agreement in order to make it transparent and accessible; encourages the Commission to continue its work on making the ICS more accessible to small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs);
2019/11/13
Committee: INTA
Amendment 70 #

2018/0358M(NLE)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13 a. Calls on both Parties to undertake to develop programmes of cooperation activities to improve capacity and conditions for women to benefit from opportunities created by the agreement, including encouraging capacity building and skills enhancement of women at work and in business, fostering women's representation in decision making and positions of authority; improving women's access to, and participation and leadership in, science, technology and innovation; conducting gender-based analysis and gender-focused statistics relating to investments;
2019/11/13
Committee: INTA
Amendment 75 #

2018/0358M(NLE)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14 a. Welcomes the agreement which will create more free and fair trade opportunities between the EU and Vietnam; urges the European Parliament to give it consent to the agreement, given that Vietnam takes steps to improve the civil and labour rights situation as to move in the direction of its commitments;
2019/11/13
Committee: INTA
Amendment 1 #

2018/0356M(NLE)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 5 a (new)
– having regard to the Framework Participation Agreement, signed on 17 October 2019, which will facilitate Vietnam's participation in European Union-led civilian and military crisis management operations and show strong commitment from both sides to a rules- based multilateral approach to international peace and security
2019/11/13
Committee: INTA
Amendment 19 #

2018/0356M(NLE)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 20 a (new)
– having regard to the 2019 Universal Periodic Review on Vietnam undertaken by the UN Human Rights Council
2019/11/13
Committee: INTA
Amendment 30 #

2018/0356M(NLE)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C
C. whereas 90 % of future world economic growth is predicted to be generated outside Europe, and notablya significant part of this occurs in Asia;
2019/11/13
Committee: INTA
Amendment 34 #

2018/0356M(NLE)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E
E. whereas Vietnam is a founding member of the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) and a party to the ongoingrecently concluded negotiations on the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP);
2019/11/13
Committee: INTA
Amendment 40 #

2018/0356M(NLE)

Motion for a resolution
Recital H a (new)
Ha. whereas it is important to maximise the opportunities offered by this agreement in the most inclusive manner for businesses, in particular SMEs;
2019/11/13
Committee: INTA
Amendment 74 #

2018/0356M(NLE)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses the economic and strategic importance of this agreement, as the EU and Vietnam share a common agenda and common values – to stimulate growth and employment, boost competitiveness, fight against poverty and make progress towards achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs); and champion a rules-based multilateral international trade system;
2019/11/13
Committee: INTA
Amendment 85 #

2018/0356M(NLE)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
4. Is convinced that the agreement will make further strides towards setting high standards and rules in the ASEAN region, helping to pave the way for a future region-to-region trade and investment agreement; stresses that the agreement also sends a strong signal in favour of open and free trade at times of protectionist tendencies and the questioning of multilateral rules-based trade; highlights that the agreement helps the EU to strengthen its presence in the ASEAN region, and allows the EU to promote its standards and values in the region; recalls its full support to multilateralism and the importance to achieve a sustainable and ambitious reform of the WTO able to ensure a rules-based international trade;
2019/11/13
Committee: INTA
Amendment 110 #

2018/0356M(NLE)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Welcomes the strong SPS chapter which will set up a single and transparent procedure for the approval of EU exports of food products into Vietnam in order to accelerate the approval of EU export applications and avoid discriminatory treatment; commends Vietnam's commitment to applying the same import requirements to like products coming from all EU member states;
2019/11/13
Committee: INTA
Amendment 131 #

2018/0356M(NLE)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
11. Underlines that the EVFTA includes a robust, comprehensive and binding chapter on Trade and Sustainable Development (TSD) dealing with labour and environmental matters; stresses that the TSD chapter is designed to contribute to broader EU policy objectives, notably on inclusive growth, the fight against climate change and more generally in upholding EU values; emphasises that it is also an instrument for development and social progress in Vietnam to support Vietnam in its efforts to improve labour rights and to enhance protection at work and protection of the environment; calls on the EU to offer its support where necessary to help Vietnam advance in this regard; stresses the importance to ensure a specific and adequate monitoring of the TSD chapter in order to see it respected and implemented;
2019/11/13
Committee: INTA
Amendment 134 #

2018/0356M(NLE)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Points out that a new Vietnamese Cyber Security Law, that entered into force at the beginning of 2019, has attracted a lot of criticism, as an intensified crackdown on human rights activists in the country has been documented, linked to the provisions of this new law which gives the authorities licence to censor content, control information and silence online dissidents; notes with regret that the legislation also raises concerns for EU economic interests, including forced data localisation provisions which are at odds with the EU's liberalisation agenda in this respect; calls on Vietnam to revise this law in line with international standards and welcomes the European Union's assistance in this respect;
2019/11/13
Committee: INTA
Amendment 158 #

2018/0356M(NLE)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Welcomes the envisaged cooperation on the trade/related aspects of the ILO Decent Work Agenda, in particular the inter-linkage between trade and full and productive employment for all, including youth, women and people with disabilities; calls for a swift and meaningful start of this cooperation;
2019/11/13
Committee: INTA
Amendment 167 #

2018/0356M(NLE)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
14. Welcomes the commitment to effectively implement multilateral environmental agreements such as the Paris Agreement on climate change, and to act in favour of the conservation and sustainable management of wildlife, biodiversity and forestry; recalls that the Agreement provides for specific measures to fight against Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated fishing (IUU) and to promote a sustainable and responsible fishery sector, including aquaculture; stresses that it is crucial for the EU and Vietnam to ensure full respect and implementation of the Paris Agreement, notably through the EVFTA;
2019/11/13
Committee: INTA
Amendment 182 #

2018/0356M(NLE)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
16. Underlines the crucial importance of effectively implementing all provisions and chapters of the agreement, ranging from market access to sustainable development and enforcement of all commitments; considers that all of the TSD provisions should be read as providing for legal obligations in international law; highlights in this context the new post of Chief Trade Enforcement Officer, who will work directly under the guidance of the Trade Commissioner; underlines that European companies, especially SMEs, should be encouraged to make full use of the benefits of the agreement and that any hurdle regarding the implementation should be remediated immediately;
2019/11/13
Committee: INTA
Amendment 189 #

2018/0356M(NLE)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
17. Calls for enhanced monitoring of the agreement and efforts to ensure that shortcomings are addressed rapidly with our trading partner; calls for specific technical assistance in order to help Vietnam implement some of their commitments via projects and expertise, notably linked to environmental and labour provisions;
2019/11/13
Committee: INTA
Amendment 200 #

2018/0356M(NLE)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Calls on both Parties to undertake to develop programmes of cooperation activities to improve capacity and conditions for women to benefit from opportunities created by the agreement, including encouraging capacity building and skills enhancement of women at work and in business, fostering women's representation in decision making and positions of authority; improving women's access to, and participation and leadership in, science, technology and innovation; conducting gender-based analysis and gender-focused statistics relating to trade;
2019/11/13
Committee: INTA
Amendment 202 #

2018/0356M(NLE)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 b (new)
18b. Underlines the need for close monitoring of the implementation of the agreement and the human rights developments in Vietnam; Calls for a joint parliamentary scrutiny board, basing itself on the monitoring Group for Vietnam in the European Parliament and its equivalent in the Vietnamese National Assembly, which will be tasked to monitor the implementation of the agreement and the human rights developments in Vietnam;
2019/11/13
Committee: INTA
Amendment 210 #

2018/0356M(NLE)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19a. Welcomes the agreement, which will create more free and fair trade opportunities between the EU and Vietnam; urges the European Parliament to give it consent to the agreement, given that Vietnam takes steps to improve the civil and labour rights situation as to move in the direction of its commitments;
2019/11/13
Committee: INTA
Amendment 12 #

2018/0258(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
(2) There is currently an imbalance in the performance of customs control by Member States. This imbalance is due both to geographic differences between Member States and in their respective capacities and resources. The ability of Member States to react to challenges generated by the constantly evolving global business models and supply chains depend not only on the human component but also on the availability of modern and reliable customs control equipment. The provision of equivalent customs control equipment is therefore an important element in addressing the existing imbalance. It will improve equivalence in the performance of customs controls throughout Member States and thereby avoid the diversion of the flows of goods towards the weakest points. To ensure that the overall strength is increased as well as convergence in the performance of customs control by Member States, a clear definition of and strategy related to the weakest points is required.
2018/11/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 15 #

2018/0258(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2 a (new)
(2 a) An inventory and equipment assessment at the EU land border by CELBET, the Central and South-Eastern Land Border Expert Team, took two years to complete. Whereas a similar assessment of EU’s ports, airports and postal hubs is not yet launched and its findings cannot be used as a basis for a standardisation for other types of customs control points.
2018/11/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 17 #

2018/0258(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
(3) A number of Member States have repeatedly expressed the need for financial support and requested an in-depth analysis of the equipment needed. In its conclusions18 on customs funding on 23 March 2017, the Council invited the Commission to "evaluate the possibility of funding technical equipment needs from future Commission financial programmes and improve coordination and (…) cooperation between Customs Authorities and other law enforcement authorities for funding purposes".
2018/11/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 22 #

2018/0258(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
(6) It is therefore opportune to establish a new Instrument for financial support for customs control equipment. Already existing formulas of financial support should be considered.
2018/11/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 23 #

2018/0258(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
(7) As customs authorities of the Member States have been taking up an increasing number of responsibilities, which often extend to the field of security and take place at the external border, ensuring equivalence in carrying out border control and customs control at the external borders needs to be addressed by providing adequate Union financial support to the Member States. It is equally important to promote inter-agency cooperation, including on cybersecurity, at Union borders as regards controls of goods and controls of persons among the national authorities in each Member State that are responsible for border control or for other tasks carried out at the border.
2018/11/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 25 #

2018/0258(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
(11) This Regulation lays down a financial envelope for the Instrument, which is to constitute the prime reference amount, within the meaning of point 17 of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 2 December 2013 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline, on cooperation in budgetary matters and on sound financial management21 , for the European Parliament and the Council during the annual budgetary procedure. To secure budgetary discipline, the conditions for how the grants will be prioritized should be clear, defined and based on identified needs for the tasks performed by Customs Points.
2018/11/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 26 #

2018/0258(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11 a (new)
(11 a) It should be noted that the financial envelope for this instrument was established prior to the finalisation of an assessment of needs.
2018/11/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 33 #

2018/0258(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
(15) Most customs control equipment may be equally or incidentally fit for controls of compliance with other legislation, such as provisions on border management, visa or police cooperation. The Integrated Border Management Fund has therefore been conceived as two complementary instruments with distinct but coherent scopes for the purchase of equipment. On the one hand, the instrument for border management and visa established by Regulation [2018/XXX]25 will exclude equipment that can be used for both border management and customs control. On the other hand, the instrument for financial support for customs control equipment established by this Regulation will not only support financially equipment with customs controls as the main purpose but will also allow its use as well for additional purposes such as border controls and security. This distribution of roles will foster inter-agency cooperation as a component of the European integrated border management approach, as referred to in Article 4(e) of Regulation (EU) 2016/162426, thereby enabling customs and border authorities to work together and maximising the impact of the Union budget through co-sharing and inter-operability of control equipment. To ensure that any instrument or equipment financed by the fund is in permanent custody of the designated customs point that owns the equipment, a clear definition of co- sharing and interoperability between customs and border authorities shall be prepared.
2018/11/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 36 #

2018/0258(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
(16) By way of derogation from the Financial Regulation, funding of an action by several Union programmes or instruments should be possible in order to allow and support, where appropriate, cooperation and interoperability across domains. However, in such cases, the contributions may not cover the same costs in accordance with the principle of prohibition of double funding established by the Financial Regulation. If a Member State has already been awarded or has received contributions from another Union programme or support from an EU fund for the acquisition of the same equipment, that contribution or support shall be listed in the application.
2018/11/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 38 #

2018/0258(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
(19) Although central implementation is indispensable in order to achieve the specific objective of ensuring equivalent customs controls, given the technical nature of this Instrument, preparatory work is required at technical level. Therefore, implementation should be supported by assessments of needs that are dependent on national expertise and experience through the involvement of customs administrations of the Member States. Those assessments of needs should be based on a clear methodology including a minimum number of steps ensuring the collection of the required information. When the customs administrations and customs points of the Member States are requested to assist with assessment it should be considered that digitalization requirements already are imposing an increasing amount of work for these administrations.
2018/11/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 44 #

2018/0258(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2
2. The Instrument has the specific objective of contributing to adequate and equivalent customs controls through the purchase, maintenance and upgrade of relevant, state-of-the-art and reliable customs control equipment. An additional objective is to improve equivalence in the performances of customs controls throughout Member States to avoid the diversion of goods towards weaker points in the EU.
2018/11/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 51 #

2018/0258(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 4
4. Customs control equipment financed under this Instrument should primarily be used for customs controls, but may be used for purposes additional to customs controls, including for control of persons in support of the national border management authorities and investigation.
2018/11/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 56 #

2018/0258(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
(a a) Costs relating to training or the upgrading of skills necessary for the use of the equipment;
2018/11/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 60 #

2018/0258(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
The preparation of the work programmes referred to in paragraph 1 shall be supported by an assessment of needs, which shall consist of the following at a minimum:
2018/11/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 63 #

2018/0258(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point c
(c) a common definition of a minimum and an optimal standard of customs control equipment by reference to the category of border crossing points and
2018/11/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 39 #

2018/0254(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital -1 (new)
(-1) The EU’s geopolitical context has changed dramatically in the last decade. The situation in Europe's neighbouring regions is unstable and the EU faces a complex and challenging environment combining the emergence of new threats like hybrid and cyber-attacks and the return of more conventional challenges. Faced with this context both European citizens and their political leaders share the view that more has to be done collectively to defend ourselves. 75% of Europeans support a common defence and security policy. In the joint declaration of 25 March 2017 in Rome, leaders of 27 Member States and the European Council, the European Parliament and the European Commission stated that the Union will strengthen its common security and defence and foster a more competitive and integrated defence industry.
2018/10/11
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 43 #

2018/0254(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1 a (new)
(1 a) On 7 June 2017, the Commission adopted a Communication launching the European Defence Fund. A two-step approach was proposed: firstly, to test the approach, initial financing for both research and development has been made available under the 2014-2020 Multi- Annual Financial Framework ('MFF') by the adoption of Regulation (EU) 2018/10921a; secondly, a dedicated Fund would be established under the MFF 2021-2027 scaling up the funding for collaborative research in innovative defence products and technologies and for subsequent stages of the development cycle, including the development of prototypes. There should be a consistent and coherent approach between those two steps. _________________ 1a Regulation (EU) 2018/1092 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 July 2018 establishing the European Defence Industrial Development Programme aiming at supporting the competitiveness and innovation capacity of the Union's defence industry
2018/10/11
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 44 #

2018/0254(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1 b (new)
(1 b) The defence sector is characterised by increasing costs of defence equipment and by high R&D costs that limit the launch of new defence programmes and directly impact on the competitiveness and innovation capacity of the EU industry. In view of the cost escalation, of the magnitude of non-recurring R&D expenses and of the small series that can be procured nationally, the development of a new generation of major defence systems and of new defence technologies is increasingly beyond the reach of single EU Member States.
2018/10/11
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 46 #

2018/0254(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1 d (new)
(1 d) Despite the interplay between increasing costs and decreasing spending, defence planning and defence spending on R&D and procurement of equipment has remained largely at national level with very limited cooperation between Member States in defence equipment investments. Additionally, when implemented, only few programs are also linked to EU capability priorities: In 2015 only 16% of equipment was procured through European collaborative procurement, far away from the agreed collective benchmark of 35%.
2018/10/11
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 49 #

2018/0254(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
(3) Following an integrated approach and in order to contribute to the enhancement of the competitiveness and innovation capacity of the Union's defence industry, a European Defence Fund should be established. The Fund should aim at enhancing the competitiveness, innovation, efficiency and autonomy of the Union's defence industry thereby contributing to the Union's strategic autonomy by supporting the cross border cooperation between Member States and between enterprises, research centres, national administrations, international organisations and universities, in the research phase and in the development phase of defence products and technologies. To achieve more innovative solutions and an open internal market, the Fund should support the cross-border participation of defence small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) and middle capitalisation companies (mid-caps).
2018/10/11
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 53 #

2018/0254(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3 a (new)
(3 a) In order to achieve more innovative solutions and to foster an open internal market, the Fund should provide strong support to the cross-border participation of SMEs and middle capitalisation companies (mid-caps) and help create new market opportunities.
2018/10/11
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 63 #

2018/0254(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
(13) In certain circumstances, if this is necessary for achieving the objectives of the action, it should be possible to derogate from the principle that recipients and their subcontractors should not bet should be possible to derogate from the principle that beneficiaries and subcontractors involved in an action are not subject to control by non-associateda third countriesy or non-associatedby a third- country entitiesy. In that perspective, legal entitiecontext, undertakings established in the Union that are controlled by a non-associated third country or a non-associatedby a third -country entity can be eligible ifshould be able to be eligible for funding provided that relevant and, strict conditions relating to the security and defence interests of the Union and its Member States, as established in the framework of the Common Foreign and Security Policy pursuant to Title V of the Treaty on European Union (TEU), including in terms of strengthening the European Defence Technological and Industrial Base, are fulfilled. The participation of such entitieundertakings should not contravene the objectives of the Fund. ApplicantProgramme. Beneficiaries should provide all relevant information about the infrastructure, facilities, assets and resources to be used in the action. Member States' concerns regarding security of supply should also be taken into account.
2018/10/11
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 75 #

2018/0254(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
(31) The Commission should establish annual or multiannual work programmes in line with the objectives of the Fund. The work programme shall set out in detail the categories of projects to be funded under the Fund and their direct relation to the objectives set out in the Fund. The work programme shall also ensure that a credible proportion of the overall budget will benefit actions enabling the cross- border participation of SMEs, possibly on the basis of a specific project category focusing on SMEs cross-border participation. The Commission should be assisted in the establishment of the work programme by a committee of Member States. In order to benefit from its expertise in the defence sector, the European Defence Agency will be given the status of an observer in the committee. Given the specificities of the defence area, the European External Action Service should also assist in the committee of Member States.
2018/10/11
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 177 #

2018/0254(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. The work programme shall set out in detail the categories of projects to be funded under the Programme and their direct relation to the objectives set out in Article 3.
2018/10/11
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 188 #

2018/0254(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 2
2. Independent experts shall be Union's citizens identified and selected on the basis of open and transparent calls for expressions of interest addressed to relevant organisations such as Ministries of Defence and subordinated agencies, research institutes, universities, business associations or enterprises of the defence sector with a view to establishing a list of experts. By derogation from Article [237] of the Financial Regulation, this list shall not be made public.
2018/10/11
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 196 #

2018/0254(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 4
4. The Commission shall communicate the conclusions of the evaluationssend the evaluations as referred to in paragraph 2 and 3, accompanied by its observations, to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions.
2018/10/11
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 241 #

2018/0217(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3 – indent 1 (new)
- The accreditation of paying agencies accredited for period 2014-2020 shall be carried over to the programming period 2021-2027 provided that new system operations and procedures implemented by the paying agency will be subject of an examination of the accreditation criteria to be adopted by the Commission in accordance with point(a) of Article 10 (1).
2018/12/10
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 450 #

2018/0217(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission shall automatically decommit any portion of a budget commitment for rural development interventions in a CAP Strategic Plan that has not been used for the purposes of prefinancing or for making interim payments or for which no declaration of expenditure fulfilling the requirements laid down in Article 30(3) has been presented to it in relation to expenditure effected by 31 December of the seconthird year following that of the budget commitment.
2018/12/10
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 684 #

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
(25) In order to ensure a fairer distribution of income support, the Member States should decide that the amounts of direct payments above a certain ceiling should be reduced and the product should either be used for decoupled direct payments and in priority for the complementary redistributive income support for sustainability, or be transferred to the EAFRD. In order to avoid negative effects on employment, labour should be taken into account when applying the mechanism.
2018/12/10
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 767 #

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32
(32) Member States should be allowed to use part of their financial ceiling available for direct payments for coupled income support in order to improve competitiveness, sustainability, and/or quality in certain sectors and productions, especially livestock sector and special crop production, that are particularly important for social, economic or environmental reasons and undergo certain difficulties, and where other tools are not sufficient enough or don´t exist. Member States should be free to identify the sectors that should benefit from this. Furthermore, Member States should also be allowed to use an additional part of their financial ceiling available for direct payments to grant coupled income support specifically for the support of protein crop production in order to reduce the Union's deficit in this regard.
2018/12/10
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 921 #

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 48
(48) Support for direct payments under the CAP Strategic Plans should be granted within national allocations to be fixed by this Regulation. These national allocations should reflect a continuation of the changes whereby the allocations to Member States with the lowest support level per hectare are gradually increased to close 50%off of the gap towards 90% of the Union average. In order to take into account the reduction of payments' mechanism and the use of its product in the Member State, the total indicative financial allocations per year in the CAP Strategic Plan of a Member State should be allowed to exceed the national allocation.
2018/12/10
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 1242 #

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) 'genuine farmers' shall be definedthe Member States may define "genuine farmers" in a way to ensure that no support is granted to those whose agricultural activity forms only an insignificant part of their overall economic activities or whose principal business activity is not agricultural, while not precluding from support pluri-active farmers. The definition shall allow to determine which farmers are not considered genuine farmers, based on conditions such as income tests, labour inputs on the farm, company object and/or inclusion in registers.
2018/12/10
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 1244 #

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) 'genuine farmers' shallmay be defined, where the Member States so decides, in a way to ensure that no support is granted to those whose agricultural activity forms only an insignificant part of their overall economic activities or whose principal business activity is not agricultural, while not precluding from support pluri-active farmers. The definition shall allow to determine which farmers are not considered genuine farmers, based on conditions such as income tests, labour inputs on the farm, company object and/or inclusion in registers.
2018/12/10
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 1249 #

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
(d a) Member States may include other definitions in the CAP Strategic Plans that are considered necessary for the implementation of this regulation.
2018/12/10
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 1836 #

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Member States shallmay reduce the amount of direct paymentsbasic income support for sustainability to be granted to a farmer pursuant to this Chapter for a given calendar year exceas further specified ing EUR 60 000 as follow their CAP Strategic Plans:
2018/12/10
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 1839 #

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Member States shallmay reduce the amount of direct paymentsbasic income support to be granted to a farmer pursuant to this Chapter for a given calendar year exceeding EUR 60 000 as follows:a financial ceiling set by the Member State
2018/12/10
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 1853 #

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) by at least 25 % for the tranche between EUR 60 000 and EUR 75 000;deleted
2018/12/10
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 1857 #

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) by at least 25 % for the tranche between EUR 60 000 and EUR 75 000;deleted
2018/12/10
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 1867 #

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) by at least 50 % for the tranche between EUR 75 000 and EUR 90 000;deleted
2018/12/10
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 1871 #

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) by at least 50 % for the tranche between EUR 75 000 and EUR 90 000;deleted
2018/12/10
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 1886 #

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) by at least 75 % for the tranche between EUR 90 000 and EUR 100 000;deleted
2018/12/10
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 1888 #

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) by at least 75 % for the tranche between EUR 90 000 and EUR 100 000;deleted
2018/12/10
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 1900 #

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) by 100 % for the amount exceeding EUR 100 000.deleted
2018/12/10
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 1904 #

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) by 100 % for the amount exceeding EUR 100 000.deleted
2018/12/10
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 1929 #

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Before applying paragraph 1, Member States shall subtract from the amount of direct paymentsbasic income support to be granted to a farmer pursuant to this Chapter in a given calendar year:
2018/12/10
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 1940 #

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) the salaries linked to an agricultural activity and related activities declared by the farmer, including taxes and social contributions related to employment; and
2018/12/10
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 1949 #

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) the equivalent cost of regular and unpaid labour linked to an agricultural activity and related activities practiced by persons working on the farm concerned who do not receive a salary, or who receive less remuneration than the amount normally paid for the services rendered, but are rewarded through the economic result of the farm business.
2018/12/10
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 1966 #

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
To calculate the amounts referred to in points a) and b), Member States shall use the average standarentire amounts of labour costs and salaries linked to an agricultural activity and related activities at national or regional level multiplied by the number of annual work units declared by the farmer concerned.
2018/12/10
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 1982 #

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
The estimated product of the reduction of payments shallmay primarily be used to contribute to the financing of the complementary redistributive income support for sustainability and thereafter of other interventions belonging to decoupled direct payments.
2018/12/10
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 2002 #

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 4
4. The Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 138 supplementing this Regulation with rules establishing a harmonised basis for calculation for the reduction of payments laid down in paragraph 1 to ensure a correct distribution of the funds to the entitled beneficiaries.
2018/12/10
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 2004 #

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 4
4. The Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 138 supplementing this Regulation with rules establishing a harmonised basis for calculation for the reduction of payments laid down in paragraph 1 to ensure a correct distribution of the funds to the entitled beneficiaries.
2018/12/10
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 2190 #

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shallmay provide for a complementary redistributive income support for sustainability (‘redistributive income support’) under the conditions set out in this Article and as further specified in their CAP Strategic Plans.
2018/12/10
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 2195 #

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shallmay provide for a complementary redistributive income support for sustainability (‘redistributive income support’) under the conditions set out in this Article and as further specified in their CAP Strategic Plans.
2018/12/10
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 2205 #

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shallmay ensure redistribution of support from bigger to smaller or medium-sized farms by providing for a redistributive income support in the form of an annual decoupled payment per eligible hectare to farmers who are entitled to a payment under the basic income support referred to in Article 17.
2018/12/10
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 3401 #

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 65 – paragraph 8
8. Commitments shall be undertaken for a period of five to seven years. However, where necessary in order to achieve or maintain certain environmental benefits sought, Member States may determine a longer period in the CAP Strategic Plan for particular types of commitments, including by means of providing for their annual extension after the termination of the initial period. In exceptional and duly justifiedrelevant cases, and for new commitments directly following the commitment performed in the initial period, Member States may determine a shorter period in their CAP Strategic Plans.
2018/12/10
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 4018 #

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 86 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
At least 30% of the total EAFRD contribution to the CAP Strategic Plan as set out in Annex IX shall be reserved for interventions addressing the specific environmental- and climate-related objectives set out at least in points (d), (e) and (f) of Article 6(1) of this Regulation, excluding interventions based on Article 66.
2018/12/10
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 4023 #

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 86 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
At least 30% of the total EAFRD contribution to the CAP Strategic Plan as set out in Annex IX shall be reserved for interventions of all types addressing the specific environmental- and climate-related objectives set out in points (d), (e) and (f) of Article 6(1) of this Regulation, excluding interventions based on Article 66.
2018/12/10
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 4079 #

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 86 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1
The indicative financial allocations for the coupled income support interventions referred to in Subsection 1 of Section 2 of Chapter II of Title III, shall be limited to a maximum of 106% of the amounts set out in Annex VII.
2018/12/10
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 4123 #

2018/0216(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 86 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 3
The percentage referred to in the first subparagraph, may be increased by a maximum of 24%, provided that the amount corresponding to the percentage exceeding the 106% is allocated to the support for protein crops under Subsection 1 of Section 2 of Chapter II of Title III.
2018/12/10
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 131 #

2018/0168(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 28 c
No later than sefiven years after the date of transposition of this Directive, an evaluation and full review of this Directive shall be carried out. This evaluation shall, in particular, assess the suitability of this Directive in the light of technological developments related to autonomous, semi-autonomous and high speed small vehicles falling under categories of vehicles as referred to in Article 2, paragraph 2, point h), i), j), k) of Regulation (EU) No 168/2013, and whether the liability system it provides is likely to satisfy future needs. The Commission shall communicate the conclusions of the evaluation accompanied by its observations and, where appropriate, by a legislative proposal to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee.
2018/12/10
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 75 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4 a (new)
(4a) The definitions, technical specifications and procedural requirements for the new safety features based on advanced technologies should be laid down by this Regulation and other relevant legislative acts with full respect to the principle of technological neutrality. They should also respect and comply with the complexity of systems already required and introduced in vehicles so that the most efficient and effective results are achieved with regards safety and overall performance of the vehicle.
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 80 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 a (new)
(5a) The safety systems as defined in this Regulation should all be proven to be efficient and cost-effective. They should be easily understood, perceived and accepted by users.
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 84 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
(6) Intelligent speed assistance, lane- keeping systems, driver drowsiness and, attention monitoring and distraction detectionmonitoring and reversing detection systems have a high potential to reduce casualty numbers considerably. In addition, those systems are based on technologies which will be used for the deployment of connected and automated vehicles too. Therefore, harmonised rules and test procedures for the type-approval of vehicles as regards those systems and for the type-approval of those systems as separate technical units should be established at Union level.
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 91 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
(7) The introduction of event (accident) data recorders storing a range of crucial vehicle data over a very short timeframe before, during and after a triggering eventaction (for example, the deployment of an airbag) is a valuable step in obtaining more accurate, in-depth accident data. Motor-vehicles should therefore be required to be equipped with such recorders. It should also be a requirement that such recorders are capable for recording and storing data in such a way that the data can be used by Member States to conduct road safety analysis and assess the effectiveness of specific measures taken.
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 95 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
(8) Any processing of personal data, such as information about the driver processed in event (accident) data recorders or information about the driver on drowsiness and, attention monitoring or advanceand distraction recognitionmonitoring, should be carried out strictly in accordance with EU legislation on data protection, in particular the General Data Protection Regulation28. In addition, the processing of personal data collected through the 112-based eCall in- vehicle system is subject to specific safeguards29. __________________ 28 Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation), (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1). 29 Regulation (EU) 2015/758 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2015 concerning type-approval requirements for the deployment of the eCall in-vehicle system based on the 112 service and amending Directive 2007/46/EC, (OJ L 123, 19.5.2015, p. 77).
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 99 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
(15) Historically, Union rules have limited the overall length of truck combinations which resulted in the typical cab-over-engine designs as they maximise the cargo space. However, the high position of the driver led to an increased blind spot area and poorer direct visibility around the truck cab. This is a major factor for truck accidents involving vulnerable road users. The number of casualties could be reduced significantly by improving direct vision. Requirements should therefore be introduced to improve the direct vision of the driver.
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 100 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
(16) Given the emphasis of EU vehicle safety regulations to protect vulnerable road users, inter alia, by ensuring adequate visibility for drivers, public and private entities should refrain from requiringconsider viable alternatives to the affixing of any kind of label, vignette or sticker meant for whichever purpose to any part of the transparent surface of the vehicles’ glazing. Furthermore, national authorities should enforce that windscreens and side windows are indeed kept clear of non-compulsory labels, vignettes, stickers and any other vision impairing items as to not negate the effectiveness of the Union law on visibility for drivers.
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 107 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
(18) Vehicle platooning has the potential to bring about safer, cleaner and more efficient transport in the future. In anticipation of the introduction of platooning technology and the relevant standards, a regulatory framework with harmonised rules and procedures will be needed. In this regard, the Commission should be empowered to adopt delegated acts to establish a harmonised format for the exchange of data for the purposes of multi-brand vehicle platooning, in compliance with EU legislation on data protection.
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 110 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20 a (new)
(20a) When adopting acts in accordance to the delegated powers, the Commission should make sure that there is always an appropriate period for the economic operators to adapt and fully apply the new rules and that such period should exceed at least 18 months before the date of application of the above-mentioned acts.
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 115 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
(25) Detailed technical requirements and specific test procedures for type-approval of motor vehicles and their trailers, and of systems, components and separate technical units should be laid down in delegated acts before the date of application of this Regulation. Moreover, manufacturers should be allowed sufficient time to adapt to the requirements of this Regulation and the delegated acts adopted pursuant to it. Therefore, the application of this Regulation should be deferred, for a sufficient period of time: 18 months after the date of entry into force of this Regulation,
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 120 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point 1
(1) ‘vulnerable road user’ means a road user using a two-wheel powered vehicle or a non-motorised road user, such as a cyclist or, a pedestrian or a wheelchair user;
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 127 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point 3
(3) ‘intelligent speed assistance’ means a system to aidsupport the driver in observingadapting to the appropriate speed for the road environment by providing haptica feedback through the accelerator pedal wibased on the speed limit information obtained through observation of road signs and signals, based on infrastructure signals or electronic map data, or both, made available in-vehicle;
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 134 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point 6
(6) ‘advanced distraction recognitionmonitoring’ means a system capable of recognition of theassessing level visualof attention of the driver gives to the traffic situation and warning the driver if needed;
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 138 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point 7
(7) ‘emergency stop signal’ means rapid flashing stop lampsa light-signalling function to indicate to other road users to the rear of the vehicle that a high retardation force is being applied to the vehicle relative to the prevailing road conditions;
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 139 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point 8
(8) ‘reversing detection’ means a camera or monitor, optical or detection system to make the driver aware of people and objects at the rear of the vehicle with the primary aim to avoid collisions upon reversing;
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 144 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point 11
(11) ‘lane-keeping system’ means a system monitoring the position of the vehicle with respect to the road or lane boundaryies and applying a torque to the steering wheel, or pressure to the brakes,warning the driver or providing a haptic feedback at least when a lane departure occurs or is about to occur and a collision may be imminent;
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 146 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point 13
(13) ‘event (accident) data recorder’ means a system recording and storing critical crash- related parameters and information before, during and after a collision;
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 152 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point 21
(21) ‘assisted or automated vehicle’ means a motor vehicle designed and constructed to move autonomously for extendedcertain periods of time without continuous human supervision;
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 166 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1
1. Vehicles shall be equipped with an accurate tyre pressure monitoring system capable of giving an in-vehicle warning to the driver when a loss of pressure occurs in a tyre, in the interests of optimum fuel consumption and road safety, over a wide range of road and environmental conditions.
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 169 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2
2. Tyre pressure monitoring systems shall be designed to avoid resetting or recalibration at a low tyre pressure.deleted
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 173 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 4 – point b
(b) the type-approval of tyres, including in its worn state for wet grip performance and technical requirements concerning their installation.
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 183 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) advanced distraction recognitionmonitoring;
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 194 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) it shall be possible for the driver to feel through the accelerator pedal that the applicable speed limit is reached or exceededable to indicate the current speed limit at any time in the vehicle;
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 198 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
(aa) it shall be possible for the driver to be aware that the applicable speed limit is reached or exceeded;
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 203 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) it shall not be possible to switch off or supress the system;
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 205 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) it shall be possible for the driver to override the system’s prompted vehicle speed smoothly through a normal operation of the accelerator pedal without need for kick-down;
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 211 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point d
(d) where a cruise control system is engaged,and the intelligent speed assistance system must automaticallyare engaged the vehicle shall be able to adapt to any lower speed limit.
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 222 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 3
3. A motor vehicle equipped with an advanced distraction recognitionmonitoring system in accordance with point (d) of paragraph 1, may be considered to meet the requirement in point (c) of that paragraph too.
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 227 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) extending the detection capability to also include vulnerable road users, such as cyclists, pedestrian or wheelchairs users, ahead of the motor vehicle in the second phase.
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 233 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3
3. Vehicles of categories M1 and N1 shall be equipped with a lane-keeping system. The system shall allow: (a) to switch it off; (b) to be in normal operation mode upon each activation of the vehicle master control switch; (c) to easily suppress audible warnings, but such action shall not at the same time suppress system functions other than audible warnings.
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 238 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. Advanced emergency braking systems and lane-keeping systems shall meet the following requirements in particular:
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 245 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – point c
(c) it shall be possible to easily suppress audible warnings, but such action shall not at the same time suppress system functions other than audible warnings.deleted
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 251 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Vehicles of categories M1 and N1 shall be equipped with an event (accident) data recorder. Event (aAccident) data recorders shall meet the following requirements in particular:
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 252 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) the data that they are capable of recording and storing with respect of the period shortly before, during and after a collision shall include, as a minimum, the vehicle’s speed, the state and rate of activation of its safety systems and any other relevant input parameters of the on- board active safety and accident avoidance systems;
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 260 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 7 – point b
(b) the type-approval of event (accident) data recorders as separate technical units.
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 283 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – title
Specific requirements relating to assisted and automated vehicles
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 286 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. In addition to the other requirements of this Regulation and of the delegated acts adopted pursuant to it that are applicable to vehicles of the respective categories, assisted or automated vehicles shall comply with the requirements set out in the delegated acts adopted under paragraph 2 relating to:
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 287 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) driver readinessattention monitoring systems;
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 291 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) event (accident) data recorders for automated vehicles;
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 294 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2
2. In order to ensure the safe operation of assisted and automated vehicles on public roads, the Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 12 to lay down requirements relating to the systems and other items listed in points (a) to (e) of paragraph 1 of this Article, and to lay down detailed rules concerning the specific test procedures and technical requirements for the type-approval of automated vehicles with regard to those requirements.
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 303 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2
It shall apply from [PO: Please insert the date 36 months following the date of entry into force of this Regulation]1 September 2022.
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 73 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
(5) Online intermediation services and online search engines, as well as the commercial transactions facilitated by those services, have an intrinsic cross- border potential and are of particular importance for the proper functioning of the Union’s internal market in today’s economy. The potentially unfair and harmful trading practices of certain providers of those services in respect of business users and corporate website users hamper the full realisation of that potential and negatively affect the proper functioning of the internal market. In addition, the full realisation of that potential is hampered, and the proper functioning of the internal market is negatively affected, by diverging laws of certain Member States which, with a varying degree of effectiveness, regulate those services, while other Member States are considering adopting such laws.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 89 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
(7) Since online intermediation services and online search engines typically have a global dimension, this Regulation should apply to providers of those services regardless of whether they are established in a Member State or outside the Union, provided that two cumulative conditions are met. Firstly, the business users or corporate website users should be established in the Union. Secondly, the business users or corporate website users should, through the provision of those services, offer their goods or services to consumers located in the Union at least for part of the transaction. In accordance with Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 (Brussels I) and Regulation (EC) No 593/2008 (Rome I), this would mean that the online intermediation services and online search engines have targeted or directed sales to consumers located in one or more Member States, irrespective of where in the Union. Such consumers should be located in the Union, but do not need to have their place of residence in the Union nor have the nationality of any Member State. Accordingly, this Regulation should not apply where the business users or corporate websites users are not established in the Union or where they are established in the Union but where they use online intermediation services or online search engines to offer goods or services exclusively to consumers located outside the Union or to persons who are not consumers.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 95 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
(8) A wide variety of business-to- consumer commercial relations are intermediated online by providers operating multi-sided services that are essentially based on the same ecosystem- building business model. In order to capture the relevant services, online intermediation services should be defined in a precise and technologically-neutral manner. In particular, the services should consist of information society services, which are characterised by the fact that they aim to facilitate the initiating ofenable business users to target or direct offers of goods or services to consumers, with a view to receiving direct or indirect remuneration from direct transactions between business users and consumers, irrespective of whether the transactions are ultimately concluded either online, on the online portal of the provider of the online intermediation services in question or that of the business user, or offline. In addition, the services should be provided on the basis of contractual relationships both between the providers and business users and between the providers and the consumers. Such a contractual relationship should be deemed to exist where both parties concerned express their intention to be bound in an unequivocal and verifiable manner, without an express written agreement necessarily being required.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 116 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
(10) In line with the relevant case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union and in light of the fact that the dependent position of business users has been observed principally in respect of online intermediation services that serve as a gateway to consumers in the form of natural persons, the notion of consumer used to delineate the scope of this Regulation is to be understood as referring solely to natural persons, where they are acting for purposes which are outside their trade, business, craft or profession. For the purpose of this Regulation, therefore, online intermediation services and search engines that allow solely direct or target offers of goods and services from businesses to other businesses are excluded because while there may be an imbalance relationship, there is not direct consequence on consumers.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 129 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
(13) To ensure that the general terms and conditions of a contractual relationship enable business users to determine the commercial conditions for the use, termination and suspension of online intermediation services, and to achieve predictability regarding their business relationship, those terms and conditions should be drafted in clear and unambiguousplain and intelligible language which is easily understood by an average business user. Terms and conditions should not be considered to have been drafted in clear and unambiguousplain and intelligible language where they are vague, unspecific or lack detail on important commercial issues and thus fail to give business users a reasonable degree of predictability on the most important aspects of the contractual relationship. Moreover, language that could be seen as misleading in the choice of phrasing should not be considered plain and intelligible.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 135 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
(14) Ensuring transparency in the general terms and conditions can be essential to promoting sustainable business relationships and to preventing unfair behaviour to the detriment of business users. Providers of online intermediation services should therefore also ensure that the terms and conditions are easily available at all stages of the contractual relationship, including to prospective business users at the pre-contractual phase, and that any modifications to those terms are notified to business users within a set notice period which is reasonable and proportionate in light of the specific circumstances and which is at least 150 days. That notice period should not apply where, and to the extent that, it is waived in an unambiguous manner by the business user concerned, where a modification is of a purely administrative nature and have no negative effect on the end-user, where a modification is needed to prevent an imminent harm or danger to the service or consumer, or where, and to the extent that, the need to implement the modification without respecting the notice period stems from a legal obligation incumbent on the service provider under Union or national law. A business users should be seen as taking an affirmative action accepting a modification and waiving this notice period by continuing to actively use the online intermediation services after notification, either by changing or adding additional goods, content or services, or by a statement of acceptance. The continued offering of goods, content and services placed on the online intermediation services before the modification notice, without the interaction of the business user, should not be deemed as an affirmative action accepting a modification.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 151 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
(16) A provider of online intermediation services can have legitimate reasons to decide to suspend or terminate the provision of its services, in whole or in part, to a given business user, including by delisting individual goods or services of a given business user or effectively removing search results. However, given that such decisions can significantly affect the interests of the business user concerned, they should be properly informed of the reasons thereof. The statement of reasons should allow business users to ascertain whether there is scope to challenge the decision, thereby improving the possibilities for business users to seek effective redress where necessary. In addition, requiring a statement of reasons should help to prevent or remedy any unintended removal of online content provided by business users which the provider incorrectly considers to be illegal content, in line with Commission Recommendation (EU) No 2018/33422. The. In order to avoid an unjustified burden by online intermediation services due the potential number of cases, the statement of reasons should take place in two parts. The online intermediation services immediately inform the business user of the general reasons for the decision on the grounds that the provider had set out in advance in its terms and condition. Upon the request of the business users, an additional statement of specific reasons should identify the objective ground or grounds for the decision, based on the grounds that the provider had set out in advance in its terms and conditions, and refer in a proportionate manner to the relevant specific circumstances that led to that decision. _________________ 22 2018/334 of 1 March 2018 on measures to effectively tackle illegal content online (OJ L 63, 6.3.2018, p. 50). should be provided without delay to the business user. Commission Recommendation (EU) No
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 199 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21 a (new)
(21a) Providers of online intermediation services may not prevent business users from offering goods or services to consumers through other means under the same conditions, nor prevent business users from advertising through other means.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 202 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
(22) In order to enable business users, including those whose use of the relevant online intermediation services might have been suspended or terminated, to have access to immediate, suitable and effective redress possibilities, providers of online intermediation services should provide for an internal complaint-handling system. That internal complaint-handling system should be aimed at ensuring that a significant proportion of complaints can be solved bilaterally by the provider of the online intermediation services and the relevant business user in a reasonable period of time. In addition, ensuring that providers of online intermediation services publish information on the functioning and effectiveness of their internal complaint- handling system should help business users to understand the types of issues that can arise in the context of the provision of different online intermediation services and the possibility of reaching a quick and effective bilateral resolutionshould regularly review their internal complaint- handling system.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 207 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23 a (new)
(23a) The use of the word ‘internal’ should not be understood as a prevention to delegate an internal complaint- handling systems to an external service provider or other corporate structure as long as the operator have the full authority and ability to handle complaints without seeking additional permissions from the providers of online intermediation services.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 208 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
(24) Mediation can offer providers of online intermediation services and their business users a means to resolve disputes in a satisfactory manner, without having to use judicial proceedings which can be lengthy and costly. Therefore, providers of online intermediation services should facilitate mediation by, in particular, identifying mediators with which they are willing to engage. Mediators which provide their services from a location outside the Union should only be identified where it is guaranteed that the use of those services does not in any way deprive the business users concerned of any legal protection offered to them under Union law or the law of the Member States, including the requirements of this Regulation and the applicable law regarding protection of personal data and trade secrets. Nonetheless, providers of online intermediation services and their business users should remain free to jointly identify any mediator of their choice after a dispute has arisen between them. In order to be accessible, fair, and as swift, efficient and effective as possible, thoseall identified mediators should meet certain set criteria.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 211 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
(25) Providers of online intermediation services should bear a reasonable proportion of the total costs of the mediation, taking into account all relevant elements of the case at hand. To that aim, the mediator should suggest which proportion is reasonable in the individual case. However, that proportion should never be less than half of those costs.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 220 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27
(27) Various factors, such as limited financial means, a fear of retaliation and exclusive choice of law and forum provisions in terms and conditions, can limit the effectiveness of existing judicial redress possibilities, particularly those which require business users or corporate website users to act individually and identifiably. To ensure the effective application of this Regulation, organisations, associations representing business users or corporate website users, as well as certain public bodies set-up in Member States, should be granted the possibility to take action before national courts. Such action before national courts should aim to stop or prohibit infringements of the rules set out in this Regulation and to prevent future damage that could undermine sustainable business relationships in the online platform economy. In order to ensure that such organisations or associations exercise that right effectively and in an appropriate manner, they should meet certain criteria. Considering the particular status of the relevant public bodies in Member States where such bodies have been set up, it should only be required that those have been specifically charged, in accordance with the relevant rules of national law, with bringing such actions either in the collective interest of the parties concerned or in the general interest, without there being a need to apply those criteria to such public bodies. Member States should also communicate to the Commission which organisations, associations and public bodies which are qualified to bring an action according to the provisions of this Regulation. This additional possibility of a designation by Member States should provide for a certain level of legal certainty and predictability that business users and corporate website users can rely on. At the same time, it aims at making judicial procedures more efficient and shorter. The Commission should ensure the publication of a list of these organisations, associations and public bodies in the Official Journal of the European Union, whereby this list should serve as refutable proof of the legal capacity of the organisation, association or public body bringing the action. Any such actions should in no way affect the rights of the business users and corporate website users to take judicial action on an individual basis.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 221 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
(28) Codes of conduct, drawn up either by the service providers concerned or by qualified organisations or associations representing them, can contribute to the proper application of this Regulation and should therefore be encouraged. When drawing up such codes of conduct, in consultation with all relevant stakeholders, account should be taken of the specific features of the sectors concerned as well as of the specific characteristics of micro, small and medium-sized enterprises.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 236 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. This Regulation shall not apply to: - online advertising serving tools or online advertising exchanges; - online payment services; and - online intermediation services who solely direct or target offers of goods and services from businesses to other businesses
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 252 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b
(b) they allowone of their primary purpose is to enable business users to target or direct offers of goods or services to consumers, with a view to facilitating the initiating ofreceiving direct or indirect remuneration from direct transactions between those business users and consumers, irrespective of where those transactions are ultimately concluded;
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 290 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) are drafted in clear and unambiguousplain and intelligible language;
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 304 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) set out the objective grounds for decisions to suspend or terminate, in whole or in part, the provision of their online intermediation services to business users.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 319 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Providers of online intermediation services shall notify to the business users concerned any envisaged modification of their terms and conditions.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 327 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
The envisaged modifications shall not be implemented before the expiry of a notice period which is reasonable and proportionate to the nature and extent of the envisaged modifications and to their consequences for the business user concerned. That notice period shall be at least 150 days from the date on which the provider of online intermediation services notifies the business users concerned about the envisaged modifications.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 333 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
The business user concerned may, either by means of a written statement or a clear affirmative action, waive the notice period referred to in the second subparagraph. The continued active use of an online intermediation services shall be deemed an affirmative action.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 348 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 5
5. Paragraph 3 shall not apply where a provider of online intermediation services is: (a) subject to a legal obligation which requires it to modify its terms and conditions in a manner which does not allow it to respect the notice period referred to in the second subparagraph of paragraph 3; (b) addressing a security or other imminent danger related to the defend of the online intermediation services from fraud, malware, spam, data breaches or other cybersecurity risks; (c) in order to prevent unforeseen and imminent harm to other users of the online intermediation service. (d) a purely administrative nature and have no clear negative effect on a business user or corporate website user.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 357 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1
1. Where a provider of online intermediation services decides to suspend or terminate, in whole or in part, the provision of its online intermediation services to a given business user, it shall provide the business user concerned, without undue delay, with a general statement of reasons for that decision with reference to the term or condition infringed and provide information as to the complaint handling system under Article 9.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 363 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2
2. TheUpon request from the business user, an additional statement of reasons referred to in paragraph 1 shall containing a reference to the specific facts or circumstances that led to the decision of the provider of online intermediation services, as well as a reference to the applicable objective ground or grounds for that decision referred to in Article 3(1)(c) shall be immediately be provided. The provider in the statement according to paragraph 1 shall state, in a clear and prominent manner, that this additional statement is available, free of charge, and shall ensure that it can be requested in a quick and easy way.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 374 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Where a suspension or termination are based on a correctable infringement of the terms and conditions and not committed in bad faith, provider of online intermediation services shall seek to reinstate the business user as soon as the non-compliance is corrected. Where a suspension or termination is found to be in error, the business user shall be reinstalled without delay and under the same conditions as before the suspension or termination.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 384 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Providers of online intermediation services shall set out in their terms and conditions the main parameters determining ranking and the reasons for the relative importance of those main parameters as opposed to otherir use as parameters.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 407 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2
2. Providers of online search engines shall set out for corporate website users the main parameters determining ranking, by providing an easily and publicly available description, drafted in clear and unambiguousplain and intelligible language on the online search engines of those providers. They shall keep that description up to date.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 414 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Where the main parameters include the possibility to influence ranking against any direct or indirect remuneration paid by business users or corporate website users to the respective provider, that provider shall also set out a description of those possibilities and of the effects of such remuneration on ranking.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 420 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. The descriptions referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 shall be sufficient to enable the business users or corporate website users to obtain an adequate understanding of whether, and if so how and to what extent, the ranking mechanism takes account of the following:
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 428 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 4
4. Providers of online intermediation services and providers of online search engines shall, when complying with the requirements of this Article, not be required to disclose any trade secrets as defined in Article 2(1) of Directive (EU) 2016/943 nor how different parameters and characteristics of goods and services are weighed within rankings.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 438 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Providers of online intermediation services may include clear attempts to manipulate ranking results by business users as grounds for suspension or termination under article 3.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 479 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Paragraph 1 shall not apply where differentiated treatment is required in order to prevent harmful on-line practices, including, among other, frauds, spam and phishing attempts, scams, and malware.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 551 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Providers of online intermediation services shall provide for an internal system for handling the complaints of registered business users of an online intermediation service.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 556 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – introductory part
That internal complaint-handling system shall be easily accessible for business users and ensure handling within a reasonable timeframe. It shall allow them to lodge complaints directly with the provider concerned regarding any of the following issues:
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 569 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) communicate to the complainant the outcome of the internal complaint- handling process, in an individualised manner and drafted in clear and unambiguousplain and intelligible language.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 579 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Providers of online intermediation services shall annually establish and make easily available to the public information on the functioning and effectiveness ofregularly review their internal complaint-handling system.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 585 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
That information shall include the total number of complaints lodged, the subject- matter of the complaints, the time period needed to process the complaints and the decision taken on the complaints.deleted
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 604 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Providers of online intermediation services shall identify in their terms and conditions one or more mediators with which they are willing to engage to attempt to reach an agreement with business users on the settlement, out of court, of any disputes between the provider and the business user arising in relation to the provision of the online intermediation services concerned, including complaints thatwhich could not be resolved by means of the internal complaint-handling system referred to in Article 9.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 626 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3
3. Providers of online intermediation services and business users shall engage in good faith in any attempt to reach an agreement through the mediation of any of the mediators which they identified in accordance with paragraph 1, with a view to reaching an agreement on the settlement of the dispute.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 627 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Where an online intermediation services believes, based on evidence, that a business user is requesting mediation in bad faith, it may refuse to enter into mediator.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 628 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 4
4. Providers of online intermediation services shall bear a reasonable proportion of the total costs of mediation in each individual case. A reasonable proportion of those total costs shall be determined, on the basis of a suggestion by the mediator, by taking into account all relevant elements of the case at hand, in particular the relative merits of the claims of the parties to the dispute, the conduct of the parties, as well as the size and financial strength of the parties relative to one another. However, providers of online intermediation services shall in any case bear at least half of the total cost.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 638 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. The obligation set out in paragraph 1 shall not apply to providers of online intermediation services that are small enterprises within the meaning of Article 2(2) of the Annex to Recommendation 2003/361/EC.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 697 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission shall encourage the drawing up of codes of conduct by providers of online intermediation services and by organisations and associations representing themorganisations and associations representing online intermediation services and business users, intended to contribute to the proper application of this Regulation, taking account of the specific features of the various sectors in which online intermediation services are provided, as well as of the specific characteristics of micro, small and medium-sized enterprises.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 724 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2
2. It shall apply from [date: sixtwelve months following the day of its publication].
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 32 #

2018/0111(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 1
(1) Directive 2003/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council28 has been substantially amended28a. Since further amendments are to be made, that Directive should be recast in the interests of clarity. _________________ 28 Directive 2003/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 November 2003 on the re-use of public sector information (OJ L 345, 31.12.2003, p. 90). 28a See Annex I, Part A.
2018/07/16
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 33 #

2018/0111(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
(4) The substantive changes introduced to the legal text so as to fully exploit the potential of public sector information for the European economy and society focus on the following areas: the provision of real-time access to dynamic data via adequate technical means, increasing the supply of high-value public data for re-use, including from public undertakings, research performing organisations and research funding organisations, tackling the emergence of new forms of exclusive arrangements, the use of exceptions to the principle of charging the marginal cost and the relationship between this Directive and certain related legal instruments, including Directive 96/9/EC31, 2003/4/EC31a and Directive 2007/2/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council32 . _________________ 31 Directive 96/9/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 1996 on the legal protection of databases (OJ L 77, 27.3.1996, p. 20). 31a Directive 2003/4/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 January 2003 on public access to environmental information and repealing Council Directive 90/313/EEC (OJ L 41/26, 14.2.2003). 32 Directive 2007/2/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 March 2007 establishing an Infrastructure for Spatial Information in the European Community (INSPIRE) (OJ L 108, 25.4.2007, p.1).
2018/07/16
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 38 #

2018/0111(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 11
(11) Allowing the accessibility and re- use of documents held by a public sector body adds value for the re-users, for the end users and for society in general and in many cases for the public body itself, by promoting transparency and accountability and providing feedback from re-users and end users which allows the public sector body concerned to improve the quality of the information collected.
2018/07/16
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 39 #

2018/0111(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 12
(12) There are considerable differences in the rules and practices in the Member States relating to the exploitation of public sector information resources, which constitute barriers to bringing out the full economic potential of this key document resource. Practice in public sector bodies in exploiting public sector information continues to vary among Member States . That should be taken into account. Minimum harmonisation of national rules and practices on the accessibility and re- use of public sector documents should therefore be undertaken, in cases where the differences in national regulations and practices or the absence of clarity hinder the smooth functioning of the internal market and the proper development of the information society in the Community.
2018/07/16
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 43 #

2018/0111(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 16
(16) A general framework for the conditions governing re-use of public sector documents is needed in order to ensure fair, proportionate and non- discriminatory conditions for the accessibility and re-use of such informationdocuments. Public sector bodies collect, produce, reproduce and disseminate documents to fulfil their public tasks. Use of such documents for other reasons constitutes a re-use. Member States' policies can go beyond the minimum standards established in this Directive, thus allowing for more extensive re-use.
2018/07/16
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 51 #

2018/0111(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 27
(27) Public sector bodies are increasingly making their documents available for access and re-use in a proactive manner, by ensuring online discoverability and actual availability of both metadata and the underlying content. Documents should also be made available for re-use following a request lodged by a re-user. In those cases, the time limit for replying to requests for re-use should be reasonable and in accordance with the equivalent time for requests to access the document under the relevant access regimes. Public undertakings, educational establishments, research performing organisations and research funding organisations should however be exempt from this requirement. Reasonable time limits throughout the Union will stimulate the creation of new aggregated information products and services at pan-European level. This is particularly important for dynamic data ( including traffic data , satellite data, weather data ), the economic value of which depends on the immediate availability of the information and of regular updates. Dynamic data should therefore be made available immediately after collection in real-time and without delay, via an Application Programming Interface so as to facilitate the development of internet, mobile and cloud applications based on such data. Whenever this is not possible due to technical or financial constraints, public sector bodies should make the documents available in a timeframe that allows their full economic potential to be exploited. Should a licence be used, the timely availability of documents may be a part of the terms of the licence.
2018/07/16
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 54 #

2018/0111(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 28
(28) In order to get access to the data opened for re-use by this Directive, the use of suitable and well-designed Application Programming Interfaces (APIs) is needed. An API describes the kind of data can be retrieved, how to do this and the format in which the data will be received. It has different levels of complexity and can mean a simple link to a database to retrieve specific datasets, a web interface, or more complex set-ups. There is general value in re-using and sharing data via a suitable use of APIs as this will help developers and start-ups to create new services and products. It is also a crucial ingredient of creating valuable ecosystems around data assets that are often unused. The set-up and use of API needs to be based on several principles: stability, maintenance over lifecycle, uniformity of use and standards, user-friendliness as well as security. For dynamic data, meaning frequently updated data, often in real -time, public sector bodies and public undertakings shall make this available for re-use immediately after collection by ways of suitable APIs. (Should not be put to the vote)
2018/07/16
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 60 #

2018/0111(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 32
(32) Charges for the access and re-use of documents constitute an important market entry barrier for start-ups and SMEs. Documents should therefore be made accessible and available for re-use without charges and, where charges are necessary , they should in principle be limited to the marginal costs. In exceptional cases , the necessity of not hindering the normal running of public sector bodies that are required to generate revenue to cover a substantial part of their costs relating to the performance of their public tasks should be taken into consideration. The role of public undertakings in a competitive economic environment should also be acknowledged. In such cases, public sector bodies and public undertakings should therefore be able to charge above marginal costs. Those charges should be set according to objective, transparent and verifiable criteria and the total income from supplying and allowing re-use of documents should not exceed the cost of collection, production, reproduction and dissemination, together with a reasonable return on investment. Where applicable, the costs of anonymisation of personal data or of commercially sensitive information should also be included in the eligible cost. The requirement to generate revenue to cover a substantial part of the public sector bodies’ costs relating to the performance of their public tasks or the scope of the services of general interest entrusted with public undertakings does not have to be a legal requirement and may stem, for example, from administrative practices in Member States. Such a requirement should be regularly reviewed by the Member States.
2018/07/16
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 62 #

2018/0111(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 36
(36) Ensuring that the conditions for access and re- use of public sector documents are clear and publicly available is a pre-condition for the development of a Union-wide information market. Therefore all applicable conditions for the access and re-use of the documents should be made clear to the potential re-users. Member States should encourage the creation of indices accessible on line, where appropriate, of available documents so as to promote and facilitate requests for re- use. Applicants for access and re-use of documents held by entities other than public undertakings, educational establishments, research performing organisations and research funding organisations should be informed of available means of redress relating to decisions or practices affecting them. This will be particularly important for SMEs which may not be familiar with interactions with public sector bodies from other Member States and corresponding means of redress.
2018/07/16
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 63 #

2018/0111(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 37
(37) The means of redress should include the possibility of review by an impartial review body. That body could be an already existing national authority, such as the national competition authority, the national access to documents authority or a national judicial authority. That body should be organised in accordance with the constitutional and legal systems of Member States and should not prejudge any means of redress otherwise available to applicants for access and re-use. It should however be distinct from the Member State mechanism laying down the criteria for charging above marginal costs. The means of redress should include the possibility of review of negative decisions but also of decisions which, although permitting re-use, could still affect applicants on other grounds, notably by the charging rules applied. The review process should be swift, in accordance with the needs of a rapidly changing market.
2018/07/16
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 66 #

2018/0111(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 52
(52) Tools that help potential re-users to find documents available for access and re-use and the conditions for re-use can facilitate considerably the cross-border use of public sector documents. Member States should therefore ensure that practical arrangements are in place that help re-users in their search for documents available for re-use. Assets lists, accessible preferably online, of main documents (documents that are extensively re-used or that have the potential to be extensively re-used), and portal sites that are linked to decentralised assets lists are examples of such practical arrangements.
2018/07/16
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 82 #

2018/0111(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. This Directive shall guarantee the right to access and/or to re-use documents held by or for public sector bodies and sets out the basic terms and conditions of, and the practical arrangements for, its exercise.
2018/07/16
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 88 #

2018/0111(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 6
6. This Directive governs the re-use of existing documents held by public sector bodies of the Member States, including documents to which Directive 2007/2/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council46 appliesnd Directive 2003/4/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council46a apply. _________________ 46 Directive 2007/2/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 March 2007 establishing an Infrastructure for Spatial Information in the European Community (INSPIRE) (OJ L 108, 25.4.2007, p. 1). 46a Directive 2003/4/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 January 2003 on public access to environmental information and repealing Council Directive 90/313/EEC (OJ L 41/26, 14.2.2003).
2018/07/16
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 91 #

2018/0111(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1
1. Subject to paragraph 2 Member States shall ensure that documents to which this Directive applies in accordance with Article 1 shall be accessible and/or re- usable for commercial or non-commercial purposes in accordance with the conditions set out in Chapters III and IV.
2018/07/16
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 92 #

2018/0111(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 2
2. For documents in which libraries, including university libraries, museums and archives hold intellectual property rights and for documents held by public undertakings , Member States shall ensure that, where the access and/or re-use of such documents is allowed, these documents shall be accessible and/or re- usable for commercial or non-commercial purposes in accordance with the conditions set out in Chapters III and IV.
2018/07/16
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 93 #

2018/0111(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 a (new)
Article 3a Quality of documents 1. Member States shall, so far as is within their power, ensure that any document that is compiled by them or on their behalf is up to date, accurate and comparable. 2. Upon request, public sector bodies shall reply to requests for the accessibility and/or the re-use of documents, reporting to the applicant on the place where information, if available, can be found on the measurement procedures, including methods of analysis, sampling, and pre- treatment of samples, used in compiling the information, or referring to a standardised procedure used.
2018/07/16
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 94 #

2018/0111(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Chapter 2 – title
ACCESS TO DOCUMENTS AND/OR REQUESTS FOR RE-USE
2018/07/16
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 95 #

2018/0111(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – title
4. Requirements applicable to requests for access to documents and/or the processing of requests for re-use
2018/07/16
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 96 #

2018/0111(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph -1 (new)
-1. Member States shall ensure that public sector bodies are required, in accordance with the provisions of this Directive, to make available documents held by or for them to any applicant upon request and without having to state an interest.
2018/07/16
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 97 #

2018/0111(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1
1. Public sector bodies shall, through electronic means where possible and appropriate, process requests for access to documents and/or for their re-use and shall make the document available for re- use to the applicant or, if a licence is needed for re- use, finalise the licence offer to the applicant within a reasonable time that is consistent with the time-frames laid down for the processing of requests for access to documents.
2018/07/16
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 98 #

2018/0111(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2
2. Where no time limits or other rules regulating the timely provision of documents have been established, public sector bodies shall process the request and shall deliver the documents for re-use to the applicant or, if a licence is needed for re-use, finalise the licence offer to the applicant as soon as possible or, at the latest, within a timeframe of not more than 20 working days after its receipt. This timeframe may be extended by another 20 working days for extensive or complex requests. In such cases the applicant shall be notified as soon as possible, and in any case within three weeks after the initial request that more time is needed to process it and of the reasons for it.
2018/07/16
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 99 #

2018/0111(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 3
3. In the event of a negative decision, the public sector bodies shall communicate the groundreasons for refusaling, in full or in part, access to and/or re-use of a document, to the applicant on the basis of the relevant provisions of the access regime in that Member State or of the national provisions adopted pursuant to this Directive, in particular points (a) to (g) of Article 1(2) or Article 3. Where a negative decision is based on point (c) of Article 1(2), the public sector body shall include a reference to the natural or legal person who is the rightholder, where known, or alternatively to the licensor from which the public sector body has obtained the relevant material. Libraries, including university libraries, museums and archives shall not be required to include such a reference.
2018/07/16
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 100 #

2018/0111(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. The reasons for a refusal to make documents available, in full or in part, in the form or format requested shall be provided to the applicant within 20 working days.
2018/07/16
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 101 #

2018/0111(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Member States may also provide for a request for the access to or re-use of documents to be refused if: (a) the document requested is not held by or for the public sector body to which the request is addressed. In such a case, where that public sector body is aware that the document is held by or for another public sector body, it shall, as soon as possible, transfer the request to that other body and inform the applicant accordingly or inform the applicant of public sector body to which it believes it is possible to apply for the document requested; (b) the request is manifestly unreasonable; (c) the request is formulated in a too general manner; (d) the request concerns material in the course of completion or unfinished documents or data; (e) the request concerns internal communications, taking into account the public interest served by disclosure and General Data Protection Regulation46b; (f) the request is outside the scope of this Directive, in accordance with Article 1, paragraph 2. If a request for a document is formulated in a too general manner, the public sector body shall as soon as possible, and at the latest within 20 working days, ask the applicant to specify the request and shall assist the applicant in doing so, for example by providing information on the use of the public registers referred to in paragraph 4a. Where a request is refused on the basis that it concerns material in the course of completion, the public sector body shall state the name of the public sector body preparing the material and the estimated time needed for completion. Documents held by or for public sector bodies which has been requested by an applicant shall be made available in part where it is possible to separate out any document falling within the scope of points (d) to (f) from the rest of the documents requested. _________________ 46b Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1).
2018/07/16
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 102 #

2018/0111(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 3 c (new)
3c. The reasons for refusing a request for the access to or re-use of documents mentioned in paragraph 3b and Article 1(2) shall be interpreted in a restrictive way, taking into account for the particular case the public interest served by disclosure. In every particular case, the public interest served by disclosure shall be weighed against the interest served by the refusal.
2018/07/16
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 103 #

2018/0111(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 3 d (new)
3d. Where a Member State provides for exceptions, it may draw up a publicly accessible list of criteria on the basis of which the body concerned may decide how to handle requests.
2018/07/16
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 104 #

2018/0111(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. For the purposes of this Article, Member States shall ensure that: (a) officials are required to support the public in seeking access to documents; (b) lists of public sector bodies are publicly accessible; and (c) the practical arrangements are defined for ensuring that the right of access to documents and their re-use can be effectively exercised, such as: – the designation of information officers; – the establishment and maintenance of facilities for the examination of the documents required, – registers or lists of documents held by public sector bodies or information points, with clear indications of where such documents can be found. Member States shall ensure that public sector bodies inform the public adequately of the rights they enjoy as a result of this Directive and to an appropriate extent provide information, guidance and advice to this end.
2018/07/16
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 105 #

2018/0111(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)
For the purposes of this paragraph, public sector bodies shall make all reasonable efforts to maintain documents held by or for them in forms or formats that are readily reproducible and accessible by electronic means.
2018/07/16
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 106 #

2018/0111(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 4
4. Public sector bodies and public undertakings shall make dynamic data available for re-use immediately after collection, in real-time and without delay wherever possible, via suitable Application Programming Interfaces (APIs).
2018/07/16
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 107 #

2018/0111(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 5
5. Where making available documents immediately after collection in real-time and without delay would exceed the financial and technical capacities of the public sector body or the public undertaking, documents referred to in paragraph 4 shall be made available in a timeframe that does not unduly impair the exploitation of their economic potential. The exact delay timeframe and update frequency shall be notified to users of such documents.
2018/07/16
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 110 #

2018/0111(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1
1. RAccess to and the re-use of documents shall be free of charge or limited to the marginal costs incurred for their reproduction, provision and dissemination , and – where applicable – anonymisation of personal data and measures taken to protect commercially confidential information .
2018/07/16
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 128 #

2018/0111(COD)

1a. The list pursuant to paragraph 1 shall include any and all spatial information which is subject of Directive 2007/2/EC.
2018/07/16
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 83 #

2018/0089(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 19
(19) Member States should be allowed to decide whether their court or national authority seized of a representative action for redress may exceptionally issue, instead of a redress order, a declaratory decision regarding the liability of the trader towards the consumers harmed by an infringement which could be directly relied upon in subsequent redress actions by individual consumers. This possibility should be reserved to strictly exceptional and duly justified cases where the quantification of the individual redress to be attributed to each of the consumer concerned by the representative action is extremely complex and it would be inefficient to carry it out within the representative action. Declaratory decisions should not be issued in situations which are not extremely complex and in particular where consumers concerned are identifiable and where the consumers have suffered a comparable harm in relation to a period of time or a purchase. Similarly, declaratory decisions should not be issued where the amount of loss suffered by each of the individual consumers is so small that individual consumers are unlikely to claim for individual redress. The court or the national authority should duly motivate its recourse to a declaratory decision instead of a redress order in a particular case.
2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 117 #

2018/0089(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 33
(33) To enhance legal certainty, avoid inconsistency in the application of Union law and to increase the effectiveness and procedural efficiency of representative actions and of possible follow-on actions for redress, the finding of an infringement established in a final decision, including a final injunction order under this Directive, issued by an administrative authority or a court should not be relitigated in subsequent legal actions related to the same infringement by the same trader as regards the nature of the infringement and its material, personal, temporal and territorial scope as determined by that final decision. Where an action seeking measures eliminating the continuing effects of the infringement, including for redress, is brought in a Member State other than the Member State where a final decision establishing this infringement was issued, the decision should constitute at least a rebuttable presumption that the infringement has occurred.
2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 133 #

2018/0089(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 2
2. This Directive aims at minimum harmonisation and shall not prevent Member States from adopting or maintaining in force provisions designed to grant qualified entities or any other persons concerned other procedural means to bring actions aimed at the protection of the collective interests of consumers at national level.
2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 161 #

2018/0089(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point c a (new)
(c a) it is, at all times, fully transparent about the source of funding of its activity in general and the funds that it uses to support the action.
2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 246 #

2018/0089(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1
1. The qualified entity seeking a redress order as referred in Article 6(1) shall declare at an early stage of the action the source of the funds used for its activity in general and the funds that it uses to support the action. It shall demonstrate that it has sufficient financial resources to represent the best interests of the consumers concerned and to meet any adverse costs should the action fail.
2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 276 #

2018/0089(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall ensure that a final decision referred to in paragraph 1, taken in another Member State is considered by their national courts or administrative authorities at least as a rebuttable presumption that an infringement has occurred.
2018/09/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 68 #

2018/0082(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 7 a (new)
(7a) It is essential to prohibit at Union level manifestly widespread unfair trading practices in business-to-business relationships between suppliers without bargaining power and non-SME buyers in the food supply chain, and to provide an exhaustive and minimum list of what can be considered as such. Having a broad or vague definition of unfair trading practices could prevent efficiency- enhancing behaviours and commercial practices between those operators from taking place. Proscribing behaviours that are efficiency- enhancing will reduce the surplus to a transaction and likely harm all parties to it, making it imperative not to incorrectly identify such behaviours as unfair trading practices at Union level.
2018/07/20
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 110 #

2018/0082(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 3
3. This Directive shall apply to supply agrerrangements concluded after the date of applicability of the provisions transposing this Directive referred to in the second subparagraph of Article 12(1).
2018/07/20
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 112 #

2018/0082(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Member States may, in accordance with Article 8, provide for rules that go beyond the provisions of this Article.
2018/07/20
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 225 #

2018/0082(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 4
4. Member States shall ensure that the prohibitions laid down in paragraphs 1 and 2 constitute overriding mandatory provisions of trading arrangements which are applicable to any situation falling within their scope, irrespective of the law otherwise applicable to the supply agreement between the parties.
2018/07/20
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 226 #

2018/0082(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. A supplier may require that their trading arrangement is subject to a written contract including all relevant aspects of the trading arrangement.
2018/07/20
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 227 #

2018/0082(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Member States may, in accordance with Article 8, provide for rules that go beyond the provisions of this Article.
2018/07/20
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 245 #

2018/0082(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2
2. Producer organisations or associations of producer organisations whose member(s) or member(s) of their members consider(s) that they are affected by a prohibited trading practice shall have the right to submit a complaint and to be properly involved in the procedures.
2018/07/20
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 259 #

2018/0082(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Member States may, in accordance with Article 8, provide for rules that go beyond the provisions of this Article.
2018/07/20
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 277 #

2018/0082(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Member States may, in accordance with Article 8, provide for rules that go beyond the provisions of this Article.
2018/07/20
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 285 #

2018/0082(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Member States may, in accordance with Article 8, provide for rules that go beyond the provisions of this Article.
2018/07/20
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 43 #

2018/0018(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
(12) In order to ensure a wide application of harmonised rules on clinical aspects of HTA and enable pooling of expertise and resources across HTA bodies, it is appropriate to require joint clinical assessments to be carried out for all medicinal products undergoing the central marketing authorisation procedure provided for under Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council,11 which incorporate a new active substance, and where those medicinal products are subsequently authorised for a new therapeutic indication. Joint clinical assessments should also be carried out on certain medical devices within the meaning of Regulation (EU) 2017/745 of the European Parliament and of the Council12 which are in the highest risk classes and for which the relevant expert panels have provided their opinions or views. A selection of medical devices for joint clinical assessment should be made based on specific criteria. _________________ 11 Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 laying down Community procedures for the authorisation and supervision of medicinal products for human and veterinary use and establishing a European Medicines Agency (OJ L 136, 30.4.2004, p. 1). 12Regulation (EU) 2017/745 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 April 2017 on medical devices, amending Directive 2001/83/EC, Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 and Regulation (EC) No 1223/2009 and repealing Council Directives 90/385/EEC and 93/42/EEC (OJ L 117, 5.5.2017, p. 1).
2018/06/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 46 #

2018/0018(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
(15) In order to ensure a Member-State led approach to joint clinical assessments and scientific consultations, Member States should designate national HTA authorities and bodies which inform decision-making as members of the Coordination Group. The designated authorities and bodies should ensure an appropriately high level of representation in the Coordination Group and technical expertise in its sub- groups, taking into account the need to provide expertise on the HTA of medicinal products and medical devices.
2018/06/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 51 #

2018/0018(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
(18) The establishment of a time-frame for the joint clinical assessments for medical devices should take into account the highly decentralised market access pathway for medical devices and the availability of appropriate evidence data required to carry out a joint clinical assessment. As the required evidence may only become available after a medical device has been placed on the market and in order to allow for the selection of medical devices for joint clinical assessment at an appropriate time, it should be possible for assessments of such devices to take place following market launch of medical devices.deleted
2018/06/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 53 #

2018/0018(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
(19) In all cases the joint work carried out under this Regulation, in particular the joint clinical assessments, should produce high quality and timely results, and not delay or interfere with the CE marking of medical devices or market access of health technologies. This work should be separate and distinct from regulatory assessments of the safety, quality, efficacy or performance of health technologies carried out pursuant to other Union legislation and have no bearing on decisions taken in accordance with other Union legislation.
2018/06/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 62 #

2018/0018(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
(25) In order to ensure a uniform approach to the joint work provided for in this Regulation, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission to establish a common procedural and methodological framework for clinical assessments, procedures for joint clinical assessments and procedures for joint scientific consultations. Where appropriate, distinct rules should be developed for medicinal products and medical devices. In the development of such rules, the Commission should take into account the results of the work already undertaken in the EUnetHTA Joint Actions. It should also take into account initiatives on HTA funded through the Horizon 2020 research programme, as well as regional initiatives on HTA such as the Beneluxa and Valletta Declaration initiatives. Those powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council.13 _________________ 13 Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by the Member States of the Commission's exercise of implementing powers (OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13).
2018/06/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 68 #

2018/0018(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28 a (new)
(28 a) Given the sensitive nature of health information, the confidential handling of data should be safeguarded at all times.
2018/06/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 83 #

2018/0018(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) medical devices classified as class IIb and III pursuant to Article 51 of Regulation (EU) 2017/745 for which the relevant expert panels have provided a scientific opinion in the framework of the clinical evaluation consultation procedure pursuant to Article 54 of that Regulation;deleted
2018/06/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 85 #

2018/0018(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) in vitro diagnostic medical devices classified as class D pursuant to Article 47 of Regulation (EU) 2017/74617 for which the relevant expert panels have provided their views in the framework of the procedure pursuant to Article 48(6) of that Regulation. _________________ 17Regulation (EU) 2017/746 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 April 2017 on in vitro diagnostic medical devices and repealing Directive 98/79/EC and Commission Decision 2010/227/EU (OJ L 117, 5.5.2017, p. 176).deleted
2018/06/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 86 #

2018/0018(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2
2. The Coordination Group shall select the medical devices referred to in paragraph 1 points (b) and (c) for joint clinical assessment based on the following criteria: (a) unmet medical needs; (b) potential impact on patients, public health, or healthcare systems; (c) significant cross-border dimension; (d) major Union-wide added value; (e) the available resources.deleted
2018/06/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 96 #

2018/0018(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. The designated sub-group shall request, in addition to the data referred to in paragraph 2, data from relevant sources, such as patient registries, databases or European Reference Networks, where that data is deemed necessary to complete the information provided by the health technology developers and to perform a more accurate clinical assessment of the health technology.
2018/06/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 106 #

2018/0018(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 13
13. The assessor shall ensure the removal of any information of a commercially sensitive nature from the approved joint clinical assessment report and the summary report. The assessor shall consult the developer on the report before its publication. The developer shall have a period of 30 working days to respond in order to identify any information it considers confidential and to justify the commercially sensitive nature of that information. In the event of disagreement between the assessor and the developer, the assessor and the co- assessor shall decide.
2018/06/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 131 #

2018/0018(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) cooperation with the notified bodies and expert panels on the preparation and update of joint clinical assessments of medical devices.deleted
2018/06/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 143 #

2018/0018(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) the consultation of patients, healthcare professionals, clinical experts and other relevant stakeholders;
2018/06/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 145 #

2018/0018(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) cooperation with the expert panels referred to in Article 106(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/745 on the joint scientific consultations on medical devices.deleted
2018/06/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 147 #

2018/0018(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. In the preparation of the study, the Coordination Group shall consultbe conscious of breakthrough innovations and seek the input of all relevant stakeholders with the aim of exploring new possibilities in innovation. The Coordination Group shall consult all relevant stakeholders, including but not limited to:
2018/06/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 149 #

2018/0018(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
(c a) healthcare professionals;
2018/06/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 151 #

2018/0018(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) collaborative assessments on medical devices;deleted
2018/06/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 152 #

2018/0018(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) health technology assessments on health technologies other than medicinal products or medical devices;
2018/06/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 155 #

2018/0018(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The Commission shall adopt implementing acts concerningordination Group shall establish, after consulting all relevant stakeholders:
2018/06/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 159 #

2018/0018(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point a – point iii
(iii) the consultation of patients, healthcare professionals, clinical experts, and other stakeholders in clinical assessments.
2018/06/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 167 #

2018/0018(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) facilitate cooperation with the relevant Union level bodies on the joint work on medical devices including the sharing of confidential information.deleted
2018/06/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 174 #

2018/0018(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 4
4. On the request of the Coordination Group, the Commission shall invite patients, healthcare professionals and clinical experts nominated by the stakeholder network to attend meetings of the Coordination Group as observers.
2018/06/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 176 #

2018/0018(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 a (new)
Article 27 a Common rules on data 1. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 31 concerning data collection, interoperability of data and the comparability of data. 2. Assessors and co-assessors shall have full access to the data used by the authorities responsible for granting the marketing authorisation of a medicinal product, as well as the possibility of using or generating additional relevant data for the purposes of assessing a medicinal product in the context of a joint HTA. 3. The confidential handling of data shall be safeguarded at all times.
2018/06/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 179 #

2018/0018(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 2
2. When preparing those implementing and delegated acts, the Commission shall take into account the distinctive characteristics of the medicinal product and medical device sectors.
2018/06/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 3 #

2017/2278(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses that public procurement markets are of major economic importance, given that procurement expenditure is estimated to account for 20 % of global GDP, and that improving access to public procurement markets in third countries can therefore be a major driver for growth in trade of goods and services, and a motor for economic growth and jobs in the EU, and also leads to greater choice and better value for tax payers money both in the EU and in third countries;
2018/04/10
Committee: INTA
Amendment 9 #

2017/2278(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
2. Points out that public procurement markets in third countries are often de jure and/or de facto closed to EU bidders; recalls that the Commission estimates that more than half of the global procurement market is currently closed to free international competition owing to protectionist measures, which are globally on a rise, while approximately EUR 352 billion in value of EU public procurement is open to bidders from member countries of the WTO Agreement on Government Procurement (GPA)1 ; __________________ 1Stresses the need for the EU to address this imbalance, without resorting to protectionist measures itself or closing its own market; __________________ 1 Amended IPI proposal (2016). Amended IPI proposal (2016).
2018/04/10
Committee: INTA
Amendment 16 #

2017/2278(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomes the fact that one of the six priority areas for the Commission’s action in the field of public procurement is the improvement of access to procurement markets; stresses that improving access to public procurement markets in third countries, including at the sub-national level, constitutes a strong offensive interest for the EU in trade negotiations on public procurement, given that many EU companies are highly competitive in various sectors; recalls that improved market access to third-country public procurement markets, and enhanced rules for transparent procurement procedures, should be key elements for any trade agreement to be concluded by the EU; notes that bilateral and sub-regional free trade agreements do not always guarantee full access to procurement markets; asks the Commission to negotiate the greatest possible access in public procurement markets in third countries;
2018/04/10
Committee: INTA
Amendment 23 #

2017/2278(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. EHighlights that one of the key elements affecting the internationalisation of SMEs is public procurement; emphasises that any strategy to open up public procurement markets in third countries shouldmust take into account the specific needs of SMEs, as access tothey are particularly disadvantaged when it comes to penetrating third- country public procurement markets can be particularly difficult for them; Asks the Commission to concretely address the obstacles SMEs face in accessing procurement markets in third countries in all current and future trade negotiations; Stresses the benefits to be gained for SMEs in particular through digitalizing all public procurement processes;
2018/04/10
Committee: INTA
Amendment 36 #

2017/2278(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
6. Highlights the importance of the GPA not only for providing de jure access to procurement markets in third countries, but also for enhancing the transparency and predictability of procurement procedures; encourages the Commission to promote the development of global and convergent standards for transparent procurement as an important tool for combating corruption;
2018/04/10
Committee: INTA
Amendment 57 #

2017/2274(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
6. Supports the ongoing negotiations on a comprehensive EU-China Investment Agreement; calls for further reciprocity in market access; reiterates its support to negotiations of bilateral investment agreement between the EU and Taiwan which would further deepen mutual trade and investment relations;
2018/05/02
Committee: INTA
Amendment 2 #

2017/2191(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
1. Recalls that competition policy is closely interlinked with taxation policy; eEncourages the Commission to strengthen its efforts to tackle all types of illegal state aid and taxation rules that distort competition in the internal market;
2017/10/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 8 #

2017/2191(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
2. Supports the Commission’s investigations into anti-competitive practices such as selective tax advantages or excess profit ruling systems; emphasises that if there is to befiscal state aids incompatible with the competition rules; emphasises that equal treatment of all entities is crucial for a well- functioning internal market all players need to pay their fair share of tax;
2017/10/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 13 #

2017/2191(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Encourages the Commission to strengthen the supervision of national implementation of competition policy; is concerned that uneven enforcement of EU competition law by national authorities can result in varying outcomes, thus distorting competition in the internal market; welcomes in this regard the Commission’s proposal on the ECN+; stresses in this respect that the refusal of requested authority to enforce a decision imposing fines based on the exception under Art.25.5 of the proposal should always be duly justified and a system should be set up whereby potential disputes between authorities in such cases could be solved; furthermore asks the Commission to ensure that the notification of the start of formal investigative measure received from a national competition authority under Article 11.3 of Regulation 1/2003 is made available to the national competition authorities of the other Member States within the ECN;
2017/10/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 23 #

2017/2191(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. Reiterates the possible option of setting up a travelling unit within the Commission which, independently of Member States’ efforts, would need be able to investigate suspected cases of unfair competition and breaches of competition law;deleted
2017/10/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 29 #

2017/2191(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
6. Highlights the importance of access to justice for consumers and of the availability for collective redress in order to ensure fair competition; underlines that the absence of such opportunities on EU level weakens competition at, the expensefunctioning of the internal market and consumer rights;
2017/10/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 33 #

2017/2191(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
7. Recalls that if anti-competitive practices are to be fought effectively, all aspects of unfair competition must be taken into consideration, including social dumping and fraudulent posting of workers.deleted
2017/10/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 41 #

2017/2191(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Takes note of the E-commerce Sector Inquiry and its final report;believes that the inquiry should be part of a greater enforcement effort by the Commission to apply the full competition policy to online retailers;underlines that given the asymmetrical relationship between large online retailers and their suppliers, the Commission and national competition authorities should actively enforce competition rules as suppliers, especially SMEs, do not have the means to challenge such players in the courts;
2017/10/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 50 #

2017/2191(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7 b. Is concerned by the increased use of contractual restrictions by manufacturers on online sales, as confirmed by the e-commerce inquiry, and calls on the Commission to further review such clauses to ensure that they do not create unjustified restrictions of competition;at the same time, asks the Commission to review the Guidelines on Vertical Restraints and the Block Exemption (Regulation 330/2010) in light of these changes;
2017/10/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 57 #

2017/2191(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 c (new)
7 c. Believes that retailers should be able to set retail prices freely;believes that price parity and conditional parity clauses may undermine free competition, especially in the digital single market;asks the Commission to further analyse such clauses and if needed, to propose restrictions on their use;
2017/10/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 61 #

2017/2191(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 d (new)
7 d. Underlines that territorial distribution and selective distribution agreements cannot be used as a justified reason to geoblock consumers, especially in case of passive sales without delivery;
2017/10/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 64 #

2017/2191(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 e (new)
7 e. Believes that criteria to join a selective distribution or franchising network should be transparent in order to ensure that such criteria do not violate competition policy and the free functioning of the single market;underlines that such criteria must be objective, qualitative, non- discriminatory and not go beyond what is strictly necessary;calls on the Commission to take measures to ensure this transparency;
2017/10/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 65 #

2017/2191(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 f (new)
7 f. Takes note of the Advocate General Wahl's 26 July 2017 opinion on Coty Germany GmbH v Parfümerie Akzente GmbH that distribution agreement restrictions on online marketplace sales should not be considered as hardcore restrictions under the VBER;nonetheless, asks the Commission, in order to protect competition, to ensure that such restrictions are limited to what is strictly necessary;
2017/10/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 66 #

2017/2191(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 g (new)
7 g. Notes the increased risk of collusion between competitors due to, among others, price monitoring software;considers that concerted practices may emerge despite contact between competitors being weaker than required under current norms, perhaps even automated, as algorithms interact with each other independent of the direction of one or more market players;asks the Commission to be vigilant to such new challenges to free competition;
2017/10/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 67 #

2017/2191(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 h (new)
7 h. Considers that effective competition policy can complement or, in some cases, replace regulatory initiatives in the area of the Digital Single Market;considers that where the impetus for regulatory action is primarily in response to market actions by some players, it would be wiser to tackle any harms through competition measures;believes this would tackle the real anticompetitive practices without holding back those who seek to compete;
2017/10/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 68 #

2017/2191(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 i (new)
7 i. Welcomes the Commission's efforts to link with their international partners and multilateral fora in the area of competition policy;believes that international cooperation is increasingly essential where companies subject to actions operate across multiple jurisdictions;
2017/10/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 69 #

2017/2191(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 j (new)
7 j. Believes that increasing the network of free trade agreements involving the European Union will benefit the enforcement of competition law globally;encourages the Commission in this regard to seek further trade agreement opportunities and to include strong antitrust and state aid rules in any such future agreements;
2017/10/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 20 #

2017/2085(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
3. Believes that full cost-benefit analysis in the form of adequate ex ante impact assessments by the Commission is essential for any new Union safety requirements, and that particular consideration should be given to their potential impact on the price of new cars for European consumers, as well their effect on vehicle emissions; recommends, furthermore, that the implementation of new Union road safety requirements be synchronised with the activities of the UN Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE); recommends that Europe should remain ambitious as a global leader in order to come to higher, global safety standards and less road casualties;
2017/06/27
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 22 #

2017/2085(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Is of the opinion that any new Union safety measures should be proportional to the design and production challenges facing small-volume and bespoke manufacturers; is of the opinion that the Euro NCAP should always reflect the actual car safety of a specific model and strongly rejects the current practice where the normally high-ranked models actually perform less well in real life, because they are stripped of the non- mandatory advanced safety features in specific countries;
2017/06/27
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 28 #

2017/2085(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the improvements that market-led technological developments have already brought to Union road safety, and encourages the continued exploration of the opportunities the digital revolution offers in that regard; emphasises that the protection of personal data is fundamental, and underlines that public administrations should handle personal data securely in line with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the EU Rules on Privacy; considers it important to further explore the principle of data ownership; calls for continuing research and the development of new standards in autonomous emergency braking, lane keeping assistance and reverse detection technologies for motor vehicles, and front-end blind spot cameras and detection for HGVs; calls for phasing in specific measures which significantly increase vehicle safety.
2017/06/27
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 3 #

2017/2073(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B
B. whereas in the absence of harmonisation, it is for the Member States to decide on the regulation of professions, albeit in athe regulation of professional services remains Member States competence, which has to be exercised in a transparent, non- discriminatory, justified and proportionate manner;
2017/09/20
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 7 #

2017/2073(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas over-regulation of professional services and unjustified barriers are detrimental to the Member States' economies and the internal market as a whole;
2017/09/20
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 11 #

2017/2073(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas the mutual evaluation exercise revealed that the level of regulation of professions varies significantly between Member States, and therefore warrants further clarification as to why the level of state intervention is particularly high in some countries;
2017/09/20
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 15 #

2017/2073(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D b (new)
Db. whereas both the guidance on reform recommendations and the proportionality test aim to guarantee proportionate regulation and are to be considered as complementary: while the test is a measure to be used before Member States adopt new legislation or modify the rules already in place, the guidance encourages them to adapt the existing regulatory framework for specific professions;
2017/09/20
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 18 #

2017/2073(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses that regulated professions play a fundamental role in the EU economy, representing a significant part of the occupation rate as well asas they account for 22% of the European labour force and thus represent an important share of the added value in the Union; believeconsiders, furthermore, that the high-quality of professional services isare of paramount importance for preserving the EU economic, social and cultural modelgrowth, innovation and job creation;
2017/09/20
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 23 #

2017/2073(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. believes, therefore that improving the regulatory environment by eliminating the disproportionate regulatory barriers will help to realise the largely untapped potential in the development of professional services;
2017/09/20
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 24 #

2017/2073(INI)

1a. Recalls that there are over 5,500 regulated professions across the EU, which corresponds to an average of 200 regulated professions per Member State, but with large variations between countries;
2017/09/20
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 34 #

2017/2073(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
4. Notes that Member States have faced significant challenges in notifying information about the professions they regulate and the requirements for accessing those professions;deleted
2017/09/20
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 37 #

2017/2073(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Deplores the fact that a number of Member States have failed to fully notify the information about the professions they regulate and the requirements for accessing those professions;
2017/09/20
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 43 #

2017/2073(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
6. NoteDeeply regrets that not all Member States have submitted a National Action Plan (NAP) as required by Directive 2005/36/EC and that the levels of ambition, depth and detail of the NAPs submitted differ;
2017/09/20
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 53 #

2017/2073(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
8. AcknowledgDeprecates that some Member States did not consult the relevant stakeholders in an appropriate manner while preparing the NAPs; calls for a broader involvement of all interested parties in the future;
2017/09/20
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 56 #

2017/2073(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
9. Stresses that effective regulation of professions contributes to the development of a fair society; recalls that Member States are free to introduce new regulations or to amend existing rules restricting the access to or pursuit of regulated professions where justified by public interest objectives, including overriding reasons of general interest, reflecting thus their vision for society and their socio-economic contextal services will be beneficial for both consumers and professionals and could have a positive impact on the productivity and competitiveness of the EU economy; recalls that Member States are free to regulate professional services with the aim to ensure the protection of general interest objectives; stresses, however that such regulation should be in full compliance with the principles of non-discrimination and proportionality, as repeatedly confirmed by the European Court of Justice;
2017/09/20
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 70 #

2017/2073(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
11. Recognises the role of professional regulation in achieving a high level of protection of public interest objectives, such as the protection of consumers, recipients of services and workers, the safeguarding of the proper administration of justice, the protection of the environment, and the preservation of national historic and artistic heritage and social and cultural policy objectives; acknowledges the margin of appreciation of Member States in determining the ways to achieve this;deleted
2017/09/20
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 78 #

2017/2073(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
12. Notes that profession-specific regulations pursuing objectives in the public interest aim to ensure effective supervision of the lawful practice of the regulated profession, and of its deontological rules where relevant;deleted
2017/09/20
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 89 #

2017/2073(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Encourages, however, Member States to make full use of the restrictiveness indicator in order to compare Member States’ performance in the seven groups of professions selected and to significantly reduce the accumulated burden of multiple requirements as regards to those professions;
2017/09/20
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 92 #

2017/2073(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
15. Takes note ofWelcomes the fact that the Commission has issued a new restrictiveness indicator, seeking to improve on the existing OECD Product Market Regulation restrictiveness indicator as regards the detailed analysis of the sectors concerned;
2017/09/20
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 102 #

2017/2073(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
17. Recalls that the analysis of the impact of the regulations in Member States should be subject not only to a quantitative but also to a qualitative assessment; encompassxpresses satisfaction, ing the general interest objectives and the qualityat context, that the indicator is accompanied by a qualitative assessment and analysis which provides additional information ofn the servicreality on the pgrovideund;
2017/09/20
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 116 #

2017/2073(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19a. Stresses that, for regulation to be fit for purpose, it has to be reviewed regularly in order to take account of technical innovation and digitalisation in professional services; underlines that such changes may render established rules as obsolete or unjustified;
2017/09/20
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 7 #

2017/2070(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 7 a (new)
– having regard to its resolution of 12 December 2018 ‘Towards a Digital Trade Strategy’(2017/2065)
2018/01/30
Committee: INTA
Amendment 46 #

2017/2070(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
2. Takes note of the growing mighteconomic importance of Asia and of the USA’s gradual withdrawal on the trade front, generating uncertainty for trade internationally; calls on the Commission to adapt its trade policy to be able to address developments at international level and to be more responsive;, while at the same time establishing a longer-term strategy given these changes in the international context
2018/01/30
Committee: INTA
Amendment 48 #

2017/2070(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
3. Highlights the growing importance of services, especially digital services, and of e-commerce in international trade, and underscores the need to strengthen the international rules governing these sectors so as to secure real benefits for European consumers, improve European companies’ access to international markets and safeguard the observance of fundamental rights throughout the world;deleted
2018/01/30
Committee: INTA
Amendment 53 #

2017/2070(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Highlights that data and digital services are important to the economy, and stresses the importance of e- commerce and data flow in international trade; calls for digital trade chapters to be included in all future trade agreements, including those currently under negotiation; believes that digital rights of citizens should be advanced through trade agreements, with provisions on net neutrality, a ban on forced unjustified data localisation requirements, data security, security of data processing and data storage, encryption and intermediary liability protections in trade agreements;
2018/01/30
Committee: INTA
Amendment 62 #

2017/2070(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Calls for swift decisiveness on the ratification procedure, fully respecting the Opinion 2/15 of the CJEU of 16 May 2017, in order not to further delay or hold hostage any agreed but not yet ratified trade deals with trade partners, which may otherwise harm the EU’s credibility;
2018/01/30
Committee: INTA
Amendment 63 #

2017/2070(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Takes note that, despite the US withdrawal from negotiations, the remaining 11 countries have managed to reach a deal on the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement on 23 January 2018 in Tokyo;
2018/01/30
Committee: INTA
Amendment 72 #

2017/2070(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
8. Points outWelcomes that the free trade agreements with Canada and Ecuador have entered into force provisionally and that those with Vietnam and Japan have been concluded since the Trade for All strategy was published; ;underlines the need for giving enough political and administrative support to ensure that trade deals can be agreed within appropriate timeframes; regrets that some trade agreements have been unable to reach a conclusion after many years of negotiations; Welcomes the decision to revise the effectiveness of older agreements, namely Mexico and Chile, and to initiate a process of modernisation to bring these agreements up to date; considers that this practice should be applied to all existing agreements in order to reflect and adapt to current contexts;
2018/01/30
Committee: INTA
Amendment 82 #

2017/2070(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
9. Emphasises that the agreements concluded and the Union’s ongoing and forthcoming bilateral negotiations represent opportunities for growth through market access and the lifting of trade barriers; issues a reminders that priority must be given to the substance of the negotiations rather than their pace, that the aims of reciprocity and mutual benefit must be guiding threads, that EU rules and standards must be secured and cannot be watered down, and that public services including services of general interest, as well as audiovisual services, must be excluded;
2018/01/30
Committee: INTA
Amendment 87 #

2017/2070(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
10. Asks the Commission and Member States to updatereview their negotiating mandates every five years in order to reflect the changing context and challengeson whether these should be updated due to possible changes in the context, and to include review clauses in trade agreements to ensure that they are implemented as effectively as possible and that they are adaptable;
2018/01/30
Committee: INTA
Amendment 105 #

2017/2070(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
14. Points out that, in the implementation of Union trade policy, special attention needs to be paid to sensitive sectors, for instance agricultural products, and to the interests of European producers and consumers; emphasises that trade agreements, and notably the agreement with Japan, can open up new business horizons for the agrifood sector; highlights the importance of striking the right balance between protecting sensitive agricultural products and advancing the Union’s offensive interests in relation to agrifood exports, with provision for, inter alia, transition periods and suitable quotas, and in certain cases for the exclusion of the most sensitive products; points out that it is essential to safeguard a robust system of health and plant-health rules while combating any form of discriminatory treatment in this area;
2018/01/30
Committee: INTA
Amendment 110 #

2017/2070(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 3
The reciprocity principle as a pillar of Union trade policyA Union trade policy that promotes a level playing field and a guarantee ofs fair competition
2018/01/30
Committee: INTA
Amendment 116 #

2017/2070(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
15. Welcomes the multiple references to the principle of reciprocity in the report on implementationStrongly believes that one of the main goals of the Union’s trade strategy; reiterates that reciprocity must be a pillar of Union trade policy; emphasises the importance for the Union of having an international instrument on public procurement, and deplores the fact that the relevant proposalpolicy should be to promote fair competition and ensure a level playing field; takes note of the revised proposal of the Commission for an international instrument on public procurement that has been held up in the Council; takes the view that the Commission should have provided an impact assessment on the proposal onfor the monitoring of foreign investment, which could make for greater reciprocity in the area of access to markets;
2018/01/30
Committee: INTA
Amendment 121 #

2017/2070(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
17. Considers it regrettable that the Commission report on the implementation of the trade policy strategy makes scarcely any mention of the task of coordination which needs to be undertaken with customs services; makes the point that trade policy must work to combat unlawful trading in order to keep EU companies competitive and to underpinensure a high level of consumer safety;
2018/01/30
Committee: INTA
Amendment 127 #

2017/2070(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
20. Calls on the Commission to invest mortake stock of the human and financial resources in improving the way that trade policy is implemented, and asks that a specialcurrently available, with the view to improving the way that trade policy is implementation monitoring unit be set up within the Commissioned;
2018/01/30
Committee: INTA
Amendment 139 #

2017/2070(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
25. Encourages the Commission to pursue and intensify its cooperation with international organisations and forums, including the G20, the United Nations, the OECD, the ILO, the World Customs Organisation and the World Bank, on the development of international standards, their implementation and the monitoring of trade;
2018/01/30
Committee: INTA
Amendment 141 #

2017/2070(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
26. Welcomes the publication by the Commission of the first report on implementation of FTAs; asks the Commission to continue publishing the report annually and to cover the topic in greater depth, including interpretations of data, placing in context the figures published and providing additional qualitative information; further asks, in addition, that the Commission also conduct more in depth comprehensive studies into the implementation of the Union's free trade agreements, including econometric methods and interpretations of data, placing in context the figures published and providing additional qualitative information in order to have a better assessment of the real impact of agreements on the ground; in this regard, believes that a common methodology should be identified and used for these studies;
2018/01/30
Committee: INTA
Amendment 154 #

2017/2070(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 a (new)
32a. Asks for more legal and administrative support to be made available for SMEs considering to export to foreign markets, not just through updating websites but also considering new tools such as online technical chats that could provide basic and more easily accessible support; Asks that the Union’s delegations take part in contributing to the information about exporting to the respective overseas markets, with a view to help SMEs;
2018/01/30
Committee: INTA
Amendment 164 #

2017/2070(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
36. Points out that the Union’s public procurement markets are the most open in the world; is concerned at certain partners’ non-compliance with provisions on public- procurement market access, to the detriment of EU companies; asks the Commission to work to secure greater access to third countries’ public procurement markets and to consider, as part of a range of measures, the introduction of rules along the lines of a ‘Buy European Act’, directed at third countries which give domestic companiwithout resorting to retaliatory protectionist behaviour, measures that ensure compliance from third countries on these priority access to their public procurement marketovisions;
2018/01/30
Committee: INTA
Amendment 180 #

2017/2070(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43
43. Welcomes the fact that gender equality has been taken into account in the Commission’s report on the implementation of its trade strategy; underscores the aim of ensuring that women benefit from trade to the same extent as menat all citizens should benefit from trade;
2018/01/30
Committee: INTA
Amendment 193 #

2017/2070(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 50
50. Welcomes the publication by the Council of the negotiating mandates for the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) and for the agreements with Japan and, Tunisia, and Chile, as well as the Commission’s publication of its draft negotiating mandates for agreements with Australia and New Zealand and for the creation of the MIC; calls on the Council and the Member States to publish all negotiating mandates, and on the Commission to publish all draft mandates for the opening of future negotiations; asks the Council and the Commission, when they are drafting and adopting negotiating mandates, to incorporate Parliament’s recommendations;
2018/01/30
Committee: INTA
Amendment 3 #

2017/2066(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the Consumer Financial Services Action Plan and its focus on many of the key issues and initiatives raised in Parliament’s report on the Green Paper on Retail Financial Services and the opinion of the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection (IMCO), in particular those on cross-border transaction fees, pricing for car rentals, motor insurance and eIDAS, and those aiming to increase transparency in generaland comparability of financial products and services at EU level ;
2017/06/30
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 4 #

2017/2066(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Deeply regrets that only 7% of EU consumers have purchased a financial service in another EU member state than their member state of residence; considers in that regards consumers´ lack of trust in cross-border financial services as one of the main reasons behind the limited development of cross-border financial services;
2017/06/30
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 5 #

2017/2066(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1 b. Stresses that differences between national regulatory systems hinder the proper functioning of the Single market for financial services;
2017/06/30
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 6 #

2017/2066(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1 c. Believes that developing effective Europe-wide markers for financial services will improve choice for consumers, allow successful providers to offer their services throughout the EU as well as support new entrants and innovation;
2017/06/30
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 7 #

2017/2066(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 d (new)
1 d. Underlines that digitalisation and innovation have rapidly changed the shape of retail financial services in recent years, with the emergence of new financial products and business models as well as the entrance of new players such as new financial technology companies (Fintechs);firmly believes that these changes will be beneficial for consumers;
2017/06/30
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 15 #

2017/2066(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Believes that the completion of the Capital Market Union will help support the development of a true single market for cross-border financial products and services throughout the European Union;
2017/06/30
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 16 #

2017/2066(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2 b. Regrets that retail financial services are excluded from the scope of the Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on addressing geo-blocking and other forms of discrimination based on customers' nationality, place of residence or place of establishment within the internal market and amending Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 and Directive 2009/22/EC; emphasizes in that context that a large number of consumers are prevented from buying financial services abroad due to territorial restrictions; calls therefore on the Commission to rapidly monitor the impact of the Payment Accounts Directive as well as the geo- blocking practices in other financial services than payment accounts;
2017/06/30
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 25 #

2017/2066(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
3. Underlines that consumers need to be able to choose the best rates and be aware of fees and other associated costs when making transactions or payments abroad, including when using dynamic currency conversion (DCC); asks the Commission to require, where appropriate, that the value of a transaction be displayed both in local currency and in the consumer’s home currency at the time of the transaction, and that rates offered by different financial service providers be displayed in a transparent manner, and calls for a neutral reference rate provided by a non-business actor;
2017/06/30
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 41 #

2017/2066(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5a (new)
5 a. Recalls that fees for cross-border payments outside of the Euro area still remains high;calls therefore on the Commission to rapidly propose an amendment to the Regulation (EC) No 924/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 September 2009 on cross-border payments in the Community and repealing Regulation (EC) No 2560/2001 in order to reduce charges for cross-border transactions in all Member States;regrets in that regards the lack of a common European online banking payments system, such as a EU-wide, European owned, credit or debit card;
2017/06/30
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 47 #

2017/2066(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses the potential of e-signature for easier transactions; calls on the Commission to build on the work of the eIDAS Regulation and to further assess the framework of European e-ID schemes in order to facilitate the supply of cross- border online financial services; asks furthermore that the Commission urgently assess the current regulatory barriers for e-identification techniques; underlines the importance of system security to combat potential identity theft and the need for financial non- discrimination of persons unable or unwilling to use e-signature.
2017/06/30
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 50 #

2017/2066(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Deplores the low switching levels of consumers for most banking and non- life insurance products, which remains one of the major barriers to entering retail cross-border markets;calls on the Commission to take rapid action in order to facilitate for consumers to switch to more advantageous retail financial services across the EU;
2017/06/30
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 55 #

2017/2066(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6 b. Highlights the large potential for the provision of cross-border insurance products, such as motor insurance;underlines that contract law differences between Member states impede the supply of insurance products across the EU;
2017/06/30
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 1 #

2017/2065(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
1. Reiterates its support for the Commission’s ‘Trade for All’ strategy; encourages the Commission to continue to prioritise new approaches to facilitate trade in digital goods and services and eliminate digital non-tariff barriers; believes that the EU should have a leading role in promoting digital trade issues on international level and considers that all avenues for progress in this area should be explored;
2017/09/06
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 9 #

2017/2065(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 15
– having regard to the letter of 115 ‘like-minded countries’ to Commission Vice-President Timmermans on 16 May 2017 regarding the rules on data flows and data localisation measures in trade agreements,
2017/10/04
Committee: INTA
Amendment 17 #

2017/2065(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
3. Notes the efforts made by the WTO to advance its work programme on e- commerce; regrets that positive progress has been slow in this regard; calls on the Commission to be ambitious in framing issues to be addressed in the programme; considers that particular consideration should be given to the increasing number of consumers caught up in customs procedures and possible violations in relation to goods purchased over the internet; believes that broader use of tools such as online dispute settlements would be beneficial for consumers in this regard; believes that a higher de minimis rate should be pursued in the context of trade negotiations;
2017/09/06
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 20 #

2017/2065(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Asks the Commission to analyses custom and taxation agreements to ensure that digital trade is not harmed by rules that were drafted with only physical goods in mind and to seek reforms where needed;
2017/09/06
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 22 #

2017/2065(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3 b. Believes that consumers should have access to secure international payment systems and basic consumer protection on international transactions;asks the Commission to promote and work towards such improvements as part of the increase in international trade;
2017/09/06
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 24 #

2017/2065(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)
3 c. Asks the Commission to seek the further expansion of the WTO's Information Technology Agreement to more products and more WTO members;
2017/09/06
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 30 #

2017/2065(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. Emphasises that digital trade is best facilitated through an open exchange of data, with no geographical restrictions; considers that the removal of data localisation requirements should be a top priority, while emphasising that the relevant data protection legislation should be adhered to; regrets attempts to use such requirements as a form of non-tariff barrier to trade and as a form of digital protectionism; believes that the first step towards a global ban on data localisation requirements should be an Union-wide ban within the single market and the establishment of the free flow of data as a "fifth freedom" in Europe and supports all Commission efforts in this regards; calls for the creation of an international convention on data flows, in addition to bi-lateral agreements on the free flow of data;
2017/09/06
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 32 #

2017/2065(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Calls on the Commission to include digital trade and data flows as part of all future trade negotiation mandates;furthermore invites the Commission to seek the introduction of annexes on digital trade and data flows to current agreements, wherever possible;
2017/09/06
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 37 #

2017/2065(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Supports making the current WTO moratorium on tariffs on electronic transmissions permanent;calls on the Member States to defend European interests from any attempts to generate revenue from such tariffs by third party countries;
2017/09/06
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 38 #

2017/2065(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6 b. Underlines the value of the Collaborative Economy, both within the Single Market and between EU businesses and consumers and businesses outside the EU;believes the global growth of this type of commerce should be seen as a positive for the future of trade;
2017/09/06
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 39 #

2017/2065(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 c (new)
6 c. Takes note of the WTO Ministerial Conference in Buenos Aires scheduled for the December 2017;asks the Commission to consult with European businesses and Member States as soon as possible on the Commission's position on e-commerce and other digital trade matters to be agreed at the conference in order to ensure an united European position;
2017/09/06
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 40 #

2017/2065(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 d (new)
6 d. Stresses the important of international standards on digital equipment and services, especially in the area of cyber-security;asks the Commission to work to ensure the introduction of basic cyber-security measures into Internet of Things products and cloud based services;
2017/09/06
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 108 #

2017/2065(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
6. Calls onUrge the Commission to draw up as soon as possible ambitious rules for cross-border data transfers, including through FTAs, in full compliance with, and without prejudice to, the EU’s data protection and privacy rules; such rules should be part of all future FTAs with third countries;
2017/10/04
Committee: INTA
Amendment 117 #

2017/2065(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Commission to strictly prohibit unjustified data localisation requirements in FTAs;
2017/10/04
Committee: INTA
Amendment 122 #

2017/2065(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
8. Calls on the Commission to put forward its position on cross-border data transfers and unjustified data localisation requirements in trade negotiations before the end of the year in order to create level playing field for EU companies and to avoid compromising EU’s position in international negotiations;
2017/10/04
Committee: INTA
Amendment 3 #

2017/2057(INI)

Proposal for a recommendation
Recital B
B. whereas the EU and Chile are close B. partners with common values and a shared commitment to free trade, promoteing effective multilateralism and respect for human rights, as well as shared prosperity and security within a rules-based global system;
2017/06/27
Committee: INTA
Amendment 5 #

2017/2057(INI)

Proposal for a recommendation
Recital C
C. whereas the current AA, including its trade pillar, was concluded in 20021 and worked well betweenhas been greatly beneficial to both parties duringsince its implementation in 2003, doubling trade in goods and seeing an increasing trade in services and investments2; considering, however, that both the EU and Chile have concluded more modern and ambitious trade agreements ever since; __________________ 1 http://eur- lex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:f83a503c- fa20-4b3a-9535- f1074175eaf0.0004.02/DOC_2&format=PDF 2 http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/countries-and- regions/countries/chile/
2017/06/27
Committee: INTA
Amendment 9 #

2017/2057(INI)

Proposal for a recommendation
Recital E
E. whereas the current AA lacks, among chapters, aothers, separate chapters on SMEs, IPR, Energy and on trade and sustainable development chapter (TSDC);
2017/06/27
Committee: INTA
Amendment 11 #

2017/2057(INI)

Proposal for a recommendation
Recital F
F. whereas any EU trade negotiation must preserve the right and ability of all parties to regulate in order to achieve legitimate public policy objectives, such as the protection and promotion of public health, social services, social and consumer protection, public education, safety, environment, public morals, privacy and data protection, and the promotion and protection of cultural diversitygovernments to regulate in the public interest;
2017/06/27
Committee: INTA
Amendment 13 #

2017/2057(INI)

Proposal for a recommendation
Recital G
G. whereas any EU trade negotiation must guarantee the highest levels of social, labour and environmental protection achieved by the parties, and may serve as a tool to promote an agenda of social justice and sustainable development, both in the EU and throughout the world; whereas the modernisation of the AA should be seen as an opportunity for the EU and its Member States to further promote common high standards and commitments in their trade agreements, especially in the areas of labour rights, environmental protection, consumer rights and public welfare; whereas a sanctions-based mechanism is needed to redress infringements effectivelyin global trade;
2017/06/27
Committee: INTA
Amendment 17 #

2017/2057(INI)

Proposal for a recommendation
Recital H
H. whereas Article 8 TFEU requires the Union to ‘aim to eliminate inequalities, and to promote equality, between men and women’, and whereas Chile is a likeminded partner that is strongly committed to this goal;deleted
2017/06/27
Committee: INTA
Amendment 21 #

2017/2057(INI)

Proposal for a recommendation
Recital L
L. whereas even if Article 45 of the 2002 EU-Chile AA already includes provisions in the cooperation chapter specifying that it should ‘contribute to strengthening policies and programmes that improve, guarantee and extend the equitable participation of men and women in all sectors of political, economic, social and cultural life’, it does not include any particular and binding objective or benchmark in the area of trade1; 1 http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2012/august/t radoc_149881.pdfdeleted
2017/06/27
Committee: INTA
Amendment 24 #

2017/2057(INI)

Proposal for a recommendation
Recital N
N. whereas in 2010 Chile became the first South American country to become a member of the OECD, and has a sound macroeconomic framework and keeps working towards more inclusive growth;
2017/06/27
Committee: INTA
Amendment 26 #

2017/2057(INI)

Proposal for a recommendation
Recital O
O. whereas it is important to maximise the potential opportunities introduced by the current AA and the modernisation of itsthe trade pillar in the most inclusive manner, and whereas the dissemination of accessible information, in particular for SMEs,AA for businesses and citizens in both the EU and Chile; whereas in this regard more could be done to facilitate SMEs access, for instance through the dissemination of information, which could trigger an important multiplying effect of benefits for the parties of the AA;
2017/06/27
Committee: INTA
Amendment 30 #

2017/2057(INI)

Proposal for a recommendation
Paragraph 1 – point a
(a) to bear in mindensure that the European Parliament will have to decide on grantingis regularly and timely informed about the negotiations in its role to consent to the conclusion of the modernised AA with Chile, including its trade pillar, and that ratification processes by Member States could follow in case of provisions of shared competence;
2017/06/27
Committee: INTA
Amendment 34 #

2017/2057(INI)

Proposal for a recommendation
Paragraph 1 – point b
(b) to note that both the EU and Chile have concluded more modern, ambitious and comprehensive trade agreements since their bilateral AA entered into force and that a number of areas remain unaddressed by it, which are important to ensure that it deliverscontributes to shared growth, equal opportunities, decent jobs and sustainable development, including the respect and promotion of labour and environmental standards and gender equality for the benefit of citizens on both sides;
2017/06/27
Committee: INTA
Amendment 38 #

2017/2057(INI)

Proposal for a recommendation
Paragraph 1 – point d
(d) to recall that globalisation and trade policy have recently been subject to intense debate in Europe and elsewhere, because of the unequal distribution of its gains, and to consider that it is necessary to guarantee a more inclusive distribution of the benefits of trade and to provide adequate protection to those which may be disadvantaged in the process, while developing policy action in other spheres beyond the provisions of trade agreements themselves, going from industrial to fiscal and social policies;deleted
2017/06/27
Committee: INTA
Amendment 42 #

2017/2057(INI)

Proposal for a recommendation
Paragraph 1 – point f
(f) to put shared social, environmental and political values at the core of the modernisation process and to make it explicitly clear that a horizontalcontinue the practice of including a human rights clause, applies throughout the entire AA, including its trade parts is done in all AAs;
2017/06/27
Committee: INTA
Amendment 43 #

2017/2057(INI)

(g) to ensure that a modernised AA guarantees, throughout the entire text, and enshrines, explicitly and unequivocally, the right and the ability of the parties to adopt and apply their own laws and regulations in the public interest, in order to achieve legitimate public policy objectives such as the protection and promotion of public health, social services, public education, safety, the environment, public morals, social or consumer protection, privacy and data protection, and the promotion and protection of cultural diversityregulate in the public interest;
2017/06/27
Committee: INTA
Amendment 53 #

2017/2057(INI)

Proposal for a recommendation
Paragraph 1 – point j
(j) on trade in services, to consider that the potential of the service sector is not fully accomplished in the current AA, and that a modernised AA should address unnecessary barriers to market access and provide national treatment via a positive list schedule; to consider that commitments should be taken building on the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) and that rules should be updated as necessary to account for new developments;
2017/06/27
Committee: INTA
Amendment 54 #

2017/2057(INI)

Proposal for a recommendation
Paragraph 1 – point k
(k) to ensure that a modernised agreement establishes the necessary steps providing for increased regulatory transparency and mutual recognition, including provisions to ensure impartiality and respect for the highest standards of protection with regards to requirements, qualifications and licences, and to foresee, in this regards, institutional mechanisms for systematic consultation, to all actors concerned and, in particular, tohat involves various stakeholders such as SMEs and civil society organisations;
2017/06/27
Committee: INTA
Amendment 55 #

2017/2057(INI)

Proposal for a recommendation
Paragraph 1 – point l
(l) to ensure that while commitments are made to facilitate the entry and stay of natural persons for business purposes, all EU and Member States labour rights, conditions and social security systems are applicable to the employment of workers benefitting from Mode 4 commitments;
2017/06/27
Committee: INTA
Amendment 57 #

2017/2057(INI)

Proposal for a recommendation
Paragraph 1 – point m
(m) to ensure that any cooperation on regulatory matters remains voluntary, respect the autonomy of regulatory authorities, must be purely based on enhanced information exchange and administrative cooperation with a view to identifying unnecessary barriers and administrative burdens, and must preserve the precautionary principleregulatory cooperation, mutual recognition and harmonization of standards should be part of the AA; to recall that regulatory cooperation must aim to benefit governance of the global economy by intensified convergence and cooperation on international standards, guaranteeing the highest level of consumer, environmental, social and labour protection;
2017/06/27
Committee: INTA
Amendment 63 #

2017/2057(INI)

Proposal for a recommendation
Paragraph 1 – point p
(p) to mandate the inclusion of a tax good governance clause that reaffirms the parties’ commitment to implementencourage the implementation of international standards in the fight against tax evasion, avoidance and elusion, and that include obligations for county by country reporting, automatic exchanges of information and the establishment of, including those contained in public registers of beneficial ownership;
2017/06/27
Committee: INTA
Amendment 66 #

2017/2057(INI)

Proposal for a recommendation
Paragraph 1 – point r
(r) to clearly spell out in the negotiating directives the requirement to commit the parties to promote corporate social responsibility (CSR) via binding standards, including with regard to internationally recognised instruments, and the uptake of sectorial OECD guidelines and the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights; to recall the need to respect and ensure the effective implementation of indigenous’ rights, including ILO standards on indigenous’ labour rights and the right to consultation with governmental authorities;deleted
2017/06/27
Committee: INTA
Amendment 69 #

2017/2057(INI)

Proposal for a recommendation
Paragraph 1 – point s
(s) to recall that corruption undermines human rights, equality and social justice, and is a major non-tariff barrier to trade impeding economic growth; to explicitly commit the parties, andtrade and fair competition; to include a specific section on measures, to combat corruption in all its forms and implement international standards and multilateral anti-corruption conventions;
2017/06/27
Committee: INTA
Amendment 71 #

2017/2057(INI)

Proposal for a recommendation
Paragraph 1 – point t
(t) to consider that openness of public procurement markets, simplified procedures and transparency for bidders, including those from other countries, can also be effective tools to combat corruption and foster integrity in public administration while providing value for money to taxpayers, in terms of the quality of delivery, efficiency, effectiveness and accountability;: to deliver in a modernised AA improved access to public procurement markets, including at sub-central level, and transparent procedures based on national treatment, impartiality and fairness;
2017/06/27
Committee: INTA
Amendment 74 #

2017/2057(INI)

Proposal for a recommendation
Paragraph 1 – point u
(u) to ensure that investment policyrotection goes beyond merely protecting investment to also include good governance, facilitation and investor obligationcurrent levels of protection of mutual investment and provides more certainty to investors;
2017/06/27
Committee: INTA
Amendment 78 #

2017/2057(INI)

Proposal for a recommendation
Paragraph 1 – point w
(w) to consider that negotiations on an investment chapter may be an opportunity to make progress towards a necessary international reform of the dispute settlement regime, to seek a commitment by all parties to put an end to investor-to- state dispute settlement (ISDS) based on ad hoc private arbitration, and to replace it withcontinue reflection on a public investment court system (ICS) with an appeal mechanism, with a view to preserving the right to regulate to achieve legitimate public policy objectives, prevent frivolous litigation and guaranteinclude all democratic procedural guarantees, such as the right to access to justice (with particular attention to SMEs), judicial independency, transparency and accountability, while pursuing the establishment of a multilateral investment court (MIC);
2017/06/27
Committee: INTA
Amendment 82 #

2017/2057(INI)

Proposal for a recommendation
Paragraph 1 – point x
(x) to ensure that the modernised AA contains a robust and ambitious TSDC that includes binding and enforceable provisions, subject to dispute settlement mechanisms, with the possibility of imposing sanctions in case of breach; considers that the TSDC should cover, among other things, the parties’ commitment to adopt and maintain in their national laws and regulations the principles enshrined in core ILO conventions and to effectively implement up-to-date ILO instruments, especially the Governance Conventions, the Decent Work Agenda, ILO Convention n°169 on the rights of indigenous peoples, the Convention on Equal Opportunities and Equal Treatment for Men and Women Workers, the Convention on Domestic Workers, and the Workers with Family Responsibilities Convention, as well as labour standards for migrant workersTSDC that can address issues such as labour rights and environmental protection;
2017/06/27
Committee: INTA
Amendment 86 #

2017/2057(INI)

Proposal for a recommendation
Paragraph 1 – point y
(y) to ensure, with reference to the progress achieved by Chile in bilateral trade negotiations with Uruguay and Canada, that the parties include a specific chapter on trade and gender equality that specifically contains clear and measurable targets, beyond the adherence of the parties and their respect for international human rights, labour and social standards, foreseeing active measures aiming to enhance opportunities for women to benefit from the opportunities provided by the AA; to ensure, inter alia, that the parties commit to collect disaggregated data allowing for thorough ex ante and ex post analysis on the impact of the modernised AA on gender equality, to pursue an enhanced participation of women enterprises (particularly micro-enterprises and SMEs) in public procurement, building on the experience of the Chilean Ministry of Gender Equality which, in 2015, established a supporting program to strengthen women entrepreneurs’ participation as suppliers in the public procurement market of ‘Chile Compras’, to support the internationalisation of women enterprises and the participation of women in WTO Mode 4 opportunities; and to ensure that this chapter foresees the involvement of women organisations and gender equality experts in the negotiating teams, as well as in the JCC (foreseeing the development of innovative means of consultation, such as electronic discussions) and that it guarantees periodical substantial discussions on gender and trade, if necessary, with the establishment of a specific consultative subcommittee;deleted
2017/06/27
Committee: INTA
Amendment 93 #

2017/2057(INI)

Proposal for a recommendation
Paragraph 1 – point z
(z) to include as well a dedicated chapter on micro-enterprises andcomprehensive chapter on SMEs foreseeing substantial progresses in terms of trade facilitation, the elimination of trade barriers and unnecessary administrative burdens, as well as active measures aiming to ensure that the resulting opportunities are sufficiently usable and communicated to all main and potential actors (i.e. though the establishment of single windows, dedicated websites and the publication of sectorial guidebooks with information on procedures and new opportunities for trade and investment);
2017/06/27
Committee: INTA
Amendment 96 #

2017/2057(INI)

Proposal for a recommendation
Paragraph 1 – point a d
(ad) to accept that the negotiations must result in strong and enforceable provisions covering the recognition and protection of all forms of intellectual property rights, including ambitious provisions on geographical indications (GIs) building upon but extending those contained in the existing AA, ensuring anbetter market access, enhanced enforcement and the possibility to add new GIs; to ensure that any IPR-related provisions must not undermine access to affordable essential medicines under domestic public health programmes chapter is included in the revised AA, that goes beyond the provisions of the TRIPs agreement;
2017/06/27
Committee: INTA
Amendment 99 #

2017/2057(INI)

Proposal for a recommendation
Paragraph 1 – point a e
(ae) to ensure that the parties guarantee a maximum level of transparency and participation, ensuring that the objectives of the negotiations are fulfilled, and that this involves constant and duly informed dialogues with all parties concerned, particularly theincluding stakeholders such as business, social partners and civil society; to involve systematically, in this regard, both the competent parliamentary bodies, particularly the EU-Chile JCC and the JCC, throughout the full life-cycle of the AA, from negotiations to implementation and evaluation, and to support the creation of an official Chilean civil society participation body reflecting the pluralism of Chilean society, attaching particular attention to its indigenous peoples; to this aim, to ensure, together with Chile, that all relevant information is published in the most accessible way to the general public, including fact-sheets translated into Spanish as the shared official language;
2017/06/27
Committee: INTA
Amendment 102 #

2017/2057(INI)

Proposal for a recommendation
Paragraph 1 – point a g
(ag) to ensure that the AA provides the necessary mechanisms ensuring that it is respected in practice during implementation, including a modern, effective state-to-state dispute settlement mechanism, with public hearings, with the possibility for all relevant actors to submit written observations (amicus curiae briefs) and also providing for the option to resort to mediation before recourse to dispute settlement is sought;
2017/06/27
Committee: INTA
Amendment 103 #

2017/2057(INI)

Proposal for a recommendation
Paragraph 1 – point a g a (new)
(ag a) to ensure the inclusion of a chapter on energy, that would cover for instance renewable energy and the exploitation of raw materials.
2017/06/27
Committee: INTA
Amendment 3 #

2017/2036(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 15
— having regard to its previous resolutions on Cuba, in particular the ones of 17 November 2004 on Cuba, of 2 February 2006 on the EU's policy towards the Cuban Government, of 21 June 2007 on Cuba and of 11 March 2010 on prisoners of conscience in Cuba,
2017/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 5 #

2017/2036(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 15 a (new)
- having regard to the findings of the UN Committee on Enforced Disappearances on Cuba issued on 17 March 2017,
2017/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 7 #

2017/2036(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 15 b (new)
- having regard to the Universal Declaration of Human rights;
2017/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 8 #

2017/2036(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital -A (new)
-A. whereas pursuant to Article 21 of the Treaty of the European Union, the external action of the Union should be guided by the principles of democracy, rule of law, the universality and indivisibility of human rights and fundamental freedoms, respect for human dignity, the principles of equality and solidarity, and the respect for the principles of the UN Charter and the international law;
2017/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 9 #

2017/2036(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A
A. whereas the historical, economic and cultural ties linking Europe and Cuba are characterised by their depth and strength;
2017/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 14 #

2017/2036(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C
C. whereas the European Union maintains relations with the Community of Latin America and the Caribbean and there is broad consensus among its 33 member states on the desira possibility of expanding relations between the European Union and Cuba;
2017/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 16 #

2017/2036(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D
D. whereas Cuba was the only country in Latin America and the Caribbean with which the EU had not signed any type of agreement; whereas 20 of its Member States have signed various types of bilateral agreements and maintain good relations with the island;
2017/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 18 #

2017/2036(INI)

E. whereas what is known as the ‘cCommon pPosition of the EU’, adopted in 1996, has been superseded by the bilateral agreements with Cuba that have been signed during this period by 20 EU Member States96/697/CFSP was repealed by Council decision (CFSP) 2016/2233 of 6 December 2016;
2017/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 23 #

2017/2036(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)
Ga. whereas closer political and economic relations with Cuba could help advancing political reforms in the country in accordance with the aspirations of all its citizens;
2017/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 25 #

2017/2036(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Underlines the need to modernise the Cuban economic system with regard to trade liberalisation, foreign direct investmentStresses the importance of the rule of law, good governance, respect of human rights and economic freedom in improving the business climate to stimulate growth and prosperity within Cuba and enhance trade and investment relations abroad; underlines the need to modernise the Cuban economic system with regard to trade liberalisation, foreign direct investment, legal recognition and certainty for both private and public actors, the creation of spaces for the setting up and functioning of fully independent enterprises including SMEs, diversification of exports, economic and financial investments, technological innovation and overall market freedoms; emphasises the importance of the cuentapropistas, and of private initiatives, for the Cuban economy and agricultural sector; recalls that private property is not recognised in the current constitution of Cuba;
2017/05/10
Committee: INTA
Amendment 26 #

2017/2036(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital H a (new)
Ha. whereas in particular the protection of the universality and indivisibility of human rights, including civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights is one of the main objectives of the European Union, both internally and in its relations with third countries; whereas in this sense the full compliance with human rights and the defence of democracy and the rule of law, should be the aspiration of the EU in its relations with Cuba;
2017/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 32 #

2017/2036(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital J
J. whereas the human rights dialogue between the EU and Cuba, led by the EU Special Representative for Human Rights, began in 2015; whereas no tangible results have been achieved on human rights in Cuba, despite the setup of the Human rights dialogue;
2017/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 35 #

2017/2036(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. Takes note of the measures that the Cuban authorities have adopted in recent months to encourage free enterprise and economic liberalisation in general; points out that there is still much to be done to fully liberalise the economy; remains concerned at the still very low levels of economic freedom in the country which is hindered by legal uncertainty, rigid state- planning and controls;
2017/05/10
Committee: INTA
Amendment 39 #

2017/2036(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital K a (new)
Ka. whereas the political dialogue between the EU and the Cuban Government, must neither forget nor neglect the direct 'intensive dialogue with civil society and the peaceful opposition' without any restriction, and should follow the EU's 'views on democracy, universal human rights and fundamental freedoms' such as freedom of expression, assembly and political association, as well as its 'worldwide policy of support to human rights defenders';
2017/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 45 #

2017/2036(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital L a (new)
La. whereas independent journalists, peaceful dissidents and human rights defenders, mostly members of the democratic opposition, are still persecuted, arbitrarily detained or being held in jail in Cuba for exercising the basic rights of expression, assembly and political association;
2017/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 47 #

2017/2036(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital L b (new)
Lb. whereas throughout March 2017 the Cuban Commission for Human Rights and National Reconciliation verified at least 432 arbitrary detentions of peaceful dissidents in Cuba; whereas 11 cases of physical assaults and 8 cases of harassment by secret political police and para-police agents, of which peaceful opponents were also victims, were also documented;
2017/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 49 #

2017/2036(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital L c (new)
Lc. whereas a humane treatment must be ensured for the political prisoners and prisoners of conscience in Cuba; whereas on 24 February 2017, political prisoner Hamel Santiago Maz Hernández, a member of the Patriotic Union of Cuba (UNPACU), died in the great prison of Havana, known as Combinado del Este; whereas since 3 June 2016 he was in jail accused of disrespect to any government official, without being subjected to any trial;
2017/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 50 #

2017/2036(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital L d (new)
Ld. whereas on 20 March Eduardo Cardet Concepción, leader of the opposition Christian Liberation Movement was sentenced to 3 years in prison after publicly criticizing the late Cuban leader Fidel Castro; whereas Amnesty International considers him a prisoner of conscience;
2017/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 51 #

2017/2036(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
7. WIs deeply concerned about various reports of increased government repression against the opposition, journalists, bloggers and artists in the past year; welcomes the ongoing human rights dialogue in the frame of the PDCA, but deplores the insufficient inclusion of civil society, which is recognised in the agreement as one of the actors of cooperation; calls on Cuba to ensure the establishment of a transparent and binding roadmap on human, environmental and labour rights, which should be aimed essentially at safeguarding human rights, enhancing and improving trade unionists’ rights and protecting the environment; calls for immediate tangible improvements to facilitate the European Parliament’s consent.; calls on the Commission and the EEAS to establish clear benchmarks and indicators in order to monitor the implementation of human rights obligations in the PDCA; calls on the EU to further advance human rights in all areas of its cooperation with Cuba, in line with the policy goals declared in the "Trade for All" Strategy; recalls that all agreements with the EU and third countries include a human rights clause, including the PDCA with Cuba;
2017/05/10
Committee: INTA
Amendment 59 #

2017/2036(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital Q a (new)
Qa. whereas the Cuban economic system is in need of trade liberalization, economic and financial investments, technological innovation and overall market freedoms that would allow the island to modernize its economy;
2017/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 61 #

2017/2036(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital Q b (new)
Qb. whereas this economic and trade liberalization should enable the country to overcome the limitations to the population in the provision of goods and services and bring inevitably a progressive move towards free social spaces, coexistence, technology and communication, that the Cuban population appreciate and demand;
2017/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 64 #

2017/2036(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital S
S. whereas Cuba is a signatory to 11 of the 18 United Nations human rights conventions and has ratified eight of them; whereas Cuba has not ratified the International Convenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Convenant on Economic, social and cultural rights;
2017/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 70 #

2017/2036(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital U a (new)
Ua. whereas the need for Cuba to launch a process of political transition to multi-party democracy, with participation and decision-making open to all Cubans on the basis of an open-ended dialogue that excludes no-one;
2017/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 76 #

2017/2036(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital V a (new)
Va. whereas on three occasions the European Parliament have awarded the Sakharov Prize for Freedom of Thought to Cuban activists, Oswaldo Payá in 2002, the Ladies in White in 2005 and Guillermo Fariñas in 2010;
2017/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 77 #

2017/2036(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital V b (new)
Vb. whereas Foreign Affairs Committee of the European Parliament decided to send a delegation to Cuba to ascertain the situation without any positive response from the Cuban authorities yet; whereas some political groups are facing the same situation despite several attempts to visit Cuba;
2017/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 80 #

2017/2036(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
1. WelcomNotes the signing in Brussels, on 12 December 2016, of the Political Dialogue and Cooperation Agreement between the EU and Cuba and states that it constitutes an instrument that will offer an appropriate new framework for relations, in keeping with the EU’s interests in its relationship with Cubabetween the EU and Cuba; stresses that this agreement depends on its full compliance;
2017/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 92 #

2017/2036(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
4. Welcomes the factUnderlines that the Council of the EU understood the nagreed to establish a new framework for relations with Cuba and took the decision to embark on negotiations and conclude them successfully within a significantly brief timeframe;
2017/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 94 #

2017/2036(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
5. RecogniStresses the high level of commitment thatresponsibility of the Republic of Cuba is undertaking with the European Union in a wide range of fields and through a sophisticated system of political dialoguewhen fulfilling the engagements included in the agreement;
2017/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 100 #

2017/2036(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Urges the Cuban government to redefine its policy on Human rights aligning with the provisions of the Charters, declarations and international instruments to which Cuba is a signatory; insists that the persecution and imprisonment of dissidents for their ideals and their peaceful political activity is contrary to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights;
2017/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 103 #

2017/2036(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Calls on the Cuban authorities to immediately release all political prisoners and prisoners of conscience, arbitrarily detained solely for exercising their freedom of expression and assembly and condemns again such detentions; urges the authorities to stop harassing, persecuting and intimidating independent journalists, peaceful dissidents and human rights defenders and to hold those responsible accountable;
2017/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 104 #

2017/2036(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 c (new)
5c. Reminds the Cuban authorities that these acts and detentions constitute an attack on the most basic human rights in particular freedom of expression, assembly and political association; Urges the EEAS and its delegation in Cuba to take the necessary actions in order to seek the release of the above individuals, to ensure that an immediate stop is put to the harassment of political opponents and human rights defenders as well as to assist and protect them;
2017/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 106 #

2017/2036(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
6. Affirms the European Parliament’s aspiration to see relations between the EU and Cuba develop to the greatest possible extent, with full respect for the independence and autonomy of the partiesStresses that the political future of Cuba must rest on the sole will of its citizens; Recalls that reconciliation and mutual understanding must include all Cubans who are willing to work peacefully for freedom, democracy and harmony;
2017/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 112 #

2017/2036(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
7. RecognisNotes the efforts made by Cuba to incorporate the United Nations fundamental principles on human and labour rights into its national legislation, and calls on Cuba to ratify the United Nations human rights conventions still pending, specifically the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women;
2017/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 119 #

2017/2036(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Supports the findings of the UN Committee on enforced disappearances in Cuba of 17 March 2017 urging Cuba to take the necessary measures to guarantee the full independence of its judicial system as well as to set up an independent National Institution of Human Rights in lines with the Paris Principles;
2017/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 121 #

2017/2036(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
9. WelcomesTakes notes of the process of normalising relations that has been achieved between Cuba and the United States of America with the restoration of diplomatic ties in 2015;
2017/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 133 #

2017/2036(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Reiterates that the objectives of the European Union's policy towards Cuba has to continue to be the respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, encouragement of a process of transition to a pluralist democracy and a lasting economic recovery aimed at improving the living standards of the Cuban population;
2017/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 137 #

2017/2036(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Urges the European institutions and the Member States to assist the economic and political transition in Cuba, encouraging the evolution towards a fully democratic regime that respects the basic rights of all its citizen; supports the use of the various EU's foreign policy instruments, and in particular the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights (EIDHR) in order to reinforce EU's dialogue with Cuba's civil society and those who support a peaceful transition in Cuba;
2017/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 141 #

2017/2036(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 b (new)
12b. Calls on the HR/VP Federica Mogherini to recognise the existence of a political opposition to the Cuban Government;
2017/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 142 #

2017/2036(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
13. Recalls that the PDCA, as the first agreement between the EU and Cuba, will mark a turning point in bilateral relations between the two Parties; welcomes the fact that both Parties have agreed to develop this relationship in a structured manner, mutually subscribing to an agenda and obligations that are binding for both signatories;
2017/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 150 #

2017/2036(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Urges the EU to promote and provide guarantees for the work of the human rights defenders and the active participation of civil society actors including peaceful dissidents without any exclusion, in this process;
2017/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 155 #

2017/2036(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
15. Recalls that the PDCA includes a provision for suspension of the agreement in case of violation of the provisions on human rights; in this sense calls on the EU to closely follow the respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms in Cuba when implementing the PDCA;
2017/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 157 #

2017/2036(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Stresses that the PDCA should contribute to improving the living conditions and social rights of Cuban citizens, reaffirming the importance of working systematically in promoting the values of democracy and human rights, including freedom of expression, association and assembly;
2017/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 159 #

2017/2036(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 b (new)
15b. Takes note of the measures that the Cuban authorities have adopted to encourage free enterprise and economic liberalization in general, in the recent months, while emphasizing that the development of strong foreign investment to improve the physical and technological infrastructure of the country and build a competitive Cuban production system will require many other economic and financial measures with regulations that give legal certainty and economic stability to the country;
2017/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 165 #

2017/2036(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
19. Takes the view that the agreement will serve to promote dialogue and economic cooperation, facilitating a predictable and transparent business environment and the development of a stronger, more stable framework in the future where it is ensured that Cubans can participate in investments jointly with companies and individuals from the European Union;
2017/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 173 #

2017/2036(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22a. Voices its profound solidarity with the entire Cuban people and its support for them in their progress towards democracy and respect and promotion of fundamental freedoms;
2017/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 174 #

2017/2036(INI)

22b. Confirms its decision to send an official delegation of the Foreign Affairs committee of the European Parliament to Cuba, and urges the Cuban authorities to allow the entry of such a delegation and have an unimpeded access to its interlocutors; regrets the Cuban authorities' refusal to allow some EP political groups visiting Cuba and calls on the authorities to alter their position;
2017/05/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 2 #

2017/2028(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
1. Recalls that corruption is inextricably linked to harm toundermines human rights, equality, economic growth, social justice and the environment; stresses in particular the profound impact that corruption has on trade, negatively affecting many areas such as investment, customs, licensing, regulation, procurement processes;
2017/05/10
Committee: INTA
Amendment 13 #

2017/2028(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
2. Emphasises thatViews trade agreements should be seen as a key mechanism forto promotinge anti-corruption measures and good governance; calls for such agreements toWelcomes in this regard the fact that many trade agreements concluded and being negotiated with the EU include commitments to good governance and multilateral anti-corruption conventions in a, some through specific anti-corruption chapters in the agreement; Reaffirms the aim stated in the Trade for All Strade dealtegy to include ambitious provisions on anti- corruption in all future trade agreements; Welcomes the measures that the EU has already taken to combat corruption in its trade policy, for instance through GSP+, and the inclusion of commitments to ratify international anti-corruption conventions with trading partners;
2017/05/10
Committee: INTA
Amendment 26 #

2017/2028(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
3. Calls for whistleblower protection to be addressed in EU trade dealsWhile having regard to the current internal EU discussion on whistleblower protections, acknowledges the possibility for whistleblower protection to be addressed in the future in EU trade deals once an EU wide system is in place; stresses that signatory parties of trade agreements should take measures to promote the active participation of the private sector, civil society organisations and domestic advisory groups in the implementation of anti-corruption programmes and clauses in international trade and investment deals;
2017/05/10
Committee: INTA
Amendment 29 #

2017/2028(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Believes that passWelcomes the entering into force of the WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement on 22 February 2017 which provides measures to combat corruption in global trade; Believes, however, that passing or reforming legislation is in itself insufficient and that implementation is the key; points out that legislative reform needs to be accompanied by training of the judiciary, public access to information and transparency measures; points out that trade agreements could help in monitoring domestic reform in relation to anti-corruption policies;
2017/05/10
Committee: INTA
Amendment 34 #

2017/2028(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. Regrets the lack of effective enforcement andCalls for better monitoring of the implementation of anti-corruption provisions in current EU trade agreements; calls onEncourages the Commission to negotiate enforceabset clear and rele vanti-corruption provisions in all future trade agreemen conditions and performance indicators allowing better assessment and demonstration of results;
2017/05/10
Committee: INTA
Amendment 40 #

2017/2028(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
6. Insists that EU trade partners lose benefits granted by trade agreements where they fail to comply with anti- corruption commitments or with international standards in the field of anti-corruption; calls on the Commission to set clear and relevant conditions and performance indicators allowing better assessment and demonstration of results; calls, furthermore, on the Commission to respond firmly, proportionally and quickly where the beneficiary government shows insufficient commitment to comply with what has been agreed.Deleted
2017/05/10
Committee: INTA
Amendment 47 #

2017/2028(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Calls on the Commission to set up consultation mechanisms in cases of system corruption with trading partners and to provide exchanges of expertise to assist countries implementing anti- corruption measures;
2017/05/10
Committee: INTA
Amendment 2 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 2 a (new)
- having regard to its resolution of 24 November 2016 on new opportunities for small transport businesses, including collaborative business models1a . _________________ 1a Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0455
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 3 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 2 b (new)
- having regard to the Council High Level Working Group on Competitive and Growth meeting of the 12 September 2016 and the Presidency's discussion paper1a ; _________________ 1a http://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/docu ment/ST-11834-2016-INIT/en/pdf
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 9 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
A a. whereas PricewaterhouseCoopers, in a study for the Commission, estimated that by 2025 that many areas of the sharing economy will rival the size of their traditional counterparts, with platforms in five sectors generating Europe-wide revenues worth over €80bn and facilitating nearly €570bn of transactions1a ; _________________ 1a http://press.pwc.com/News- releases/europe-s-five-key-sharing- economy-sectors-could-deliver--570- billion-by-2025/s/45858e92-e1a7-4466- a011-a7f6b9bb488f
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 12 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A b (new)
A b. Whereas PwC also projects that sharing economy revenues will grow at a 35-40% rate per year in Europe and that the collaborative economy should account for 50% of the rental sector by 2025 globally1a ; _________________ 1a http://www.pwc.co.uk/issues/megatrends/c ollisions/sharingeconomy/the-sharing- economy-sizing-the-revenue- opportunity.html
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 15 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
B a. whereas small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) are the main engine of the European economy, representing, on 2014 figures, 99.8 % of all undertakings outside the financial sector and accounting for two out of three of all jobs;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 24 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B b (new)
B b. whereas a recent study by the Commission shows that 17 % of European consumers have used services provided by the sharing economy, and 52 % are aware of the services offered1a ; _________________ 1aFlash Eurobarometer 438 (March 2016) on ‘The use of collaborative platforms’
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 25 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B c (new)
B c. whereas only 1.7 % of enterprises in the EU make full use of advanced digital technologies, while 41 % do not use them at all; whereas the digitalisation of all sectors is crucial if the EU's competitiveness is to be maintained and improved;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 27 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B d (new)
B d. whereas the flexibility and ease of entry inherent in the collaborative economy can provide employment opportunities for groups traditionally excluded from the labour market, in particular women, young people and migrants; whereas collaborative economy services can provide a good way of becoming self-employed and promote a culture of entrepreneurship;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 36 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
2. Believes that, if developed in a responsible manner, the collaborative economy maywill continue to create significant opportunities for citizens and consumers, who benefit from enhanced competition, tailored services, increased choice and lower prices;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 40 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
2. Believes that, if developed in a responsible manner, the collaborative economy may create significant opportunities for citizens and consumers, who benefit from enhanced competition, tailored services and lower prices; underlines that the growth in this sector is consumer driven and lead to greater consumer empowerment;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 48 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
3. Agrees that the collaborative economy could also generates new entrepreneurial opportunities, jobs and growth, and could plays an important role in making the economic system not only more efficient, but also socially and environmentally sustainable;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 57 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
4. Acknowledges, at the same time, that the collaborative economy is having a profound impact on long-established business models; underlines the risk of having different legal standards for similar economic actors; is concerned about the risk of reducing consumer protection, workers’ rights and tax compliance; acknowledges the effects that collaborative businesses are having on the urban environment;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 58 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
4. Acknowledges, at the same time, that the collaborative economy iscan having a profounde a significant impact on long-established business models; underlinestands the riskchallenges of having different legal standards for similar economic actors; is concerned about the risk of redubalancing consumer protection with consumer empowerment, workers' rights andwith workers opportunities and the potential for tax compliance; acknowledges the effectnd tax transparency; recognises that the collaborative businesses are having on the urbaneconomy affects both urban and rural environments;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 66 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Notes the raise of peer reviews and forums as a part of the collaborative and wider economy; welcomes this and agrees with the Commission that these could serve as means to address asymmetric information exchanges; underlines that such reviews and forums are efficient means to ensure better information exchange, better consumer service and complaint resolutions;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 68 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
5. Points to the risks of increasing regulatory grey areas, the consequent disregard of existing regulations and the fragmentation of the Single Market; is aware that, if not properly governed, these changes could result in legal uncertainty about applicable rules and constraints in exercising individual rights;deleted
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 69 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
5. Points to the risks of increasing regulatory grey areas, the consequent disregard of existing regulations and the fragmentation of the Single Market; is aware that, if not properly governed, these changes could result in legal uncertainty about applicable rules and constraints in exercising individual rightscurrent fragmentation of the single market due to diverging approaches taken at local and national levels, the lack of coordination between Member states and the lack of enforcement from the European Commission; is deeply concerned about the negative impact of legal uncertainty and complexity of rules on European start ups and social organisations involved the collaborative economy;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 70 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
5. Points to the risks of increasing regulatory grey areas, the consequent disregard of existing regulations and the fragmentation of the Single Marketconfusion by companies and regulators as to how to apply existing regulations and directives which has lead to greater fragmentation of the Single Market by regional and national authorities; is aware that, if not properly governed, these changesis confusion could result in legal uncertainty about applicable rules and constraints in exercising individual rights;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 79 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
6. Considers the development of a harmonised, dynamic and clear legal environment to be of paramount importance for the collaborative economy to flourish in the EU;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 84 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
6. Considers the development of a dynamic and clear legal environment to be of paramount importance for the collaborative economy to flourish in the EU; notes that there are already many examples of using self and co-regulation to achieve these goals;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 89 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
7. Emphasises the need to consider the collaborative economy not only as a business modelcollection of new business models to offer goods and services but also as a new form of integration between the economy and society which is able to embed economic relations within social ones and to create new forms of community;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 125 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
12. Is concerned that, while a large part of the nascent it is not always completely clear which EU regulations apply to all sectors of the collaborative economy remains unregulated,and this has lead to significant differences are emerging among Member States due to national, regional and local regulations, as well as case-law, posing a risk ofwhich has only furthered fragmentation of the Single Market;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 126 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
12. Is concerned that, while a largeNotes that many parts of the nascent collaborative economy aremains unregulated, covered by national and local regulation; recognises however that some significant differences are emerging among Member States due to national, regional and local regulations, as well as case-law, posing a risk of fragmentation of the Single Market;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 132 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12 a. Stresses the complex nature of the transport sector within and outside the collaborative economy; notes that this sector is subject to heavy regulation, particularly regarding access to the profession, activities concerned and the development, use and marketing of transport services (exclusive rights, capping of the number of licenses), as well as subsidisation; deplores the fact that they are, among other factors, sometimes used as a pretext to erect artificial barriers, especially against new business models;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 137 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
13. Welcomes the Commission's intent to tackle the current fragmentation, but regrets that its communication did not bring sufficient clarity about the applicability of existing EU legislation to different collaborative economy models; calls for a clear enforcement framework of the consumer acquis and of the Services Directive; encourages the Commission and Member States to ensure the full implementation of existing rules, using infringement procedures whenever incorrect or insufficient implementation of the legislation is identified;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 141 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13 a. Underlines the existing legislation of the Services Directive and the failure to fully implement it in practice by many Member States; calls on the Commission to launch further infringement actions against those Member States, who despite having transposed the Directive, have not ensure that it is respected by local and regional authorities; urges the Commission to increase the speed by which infringement and competition cases are handled in order to allow for swift resolutions for both companies and individuals;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 146 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
14. Agrees that, in line with the EU Treaty and applicable secondary legislation, any market access requirements for collaborative platforms and service providers must be necessary, justified and proportionate, and that this assessment should be dependent on whether services are provided by professional or private individuals, making to meet legitimate public interest objectives as set out in the Services Directive; recalls that the Service Directive includes an obligation for Member States' authorities to review existing legislation and remove such market restrictions; believes that peer providers should be subject to lighter legal requirements;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 149 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
14. Agrees that market access requirements for collaborative platforms and service providers must be necessary, justified and proportionate, and that this assessment should be dependent on whether services are provided by professional or private individuals, making peer providers subject to lighter or no legal requirements;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 155 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14 a. Welcomes the Service Package proposals and guidance on regulated professions; calls for further review and harmonisation of the rules on access to regulated professions and activities in Europe, so as to enable new operators and services linked to digital platforms and the collaborative economy to develop in a business-friendly environment, including greater transparency with regard to legislative changes, and to coexist with incumbent operators within an environment of healthy competition;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 156 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 b (new)
14 b. Agrees with the Communication that when assessing whether market access and other requirements meet the conditions of the Services Directive, Member States should take into account the specific features of collaborative economy business models; is of the same understanding as the Council's Collaborative Economy Discussion Paper that not everything that has historically been considered justified and proportionate in an economic sector is automatically also justified and proportionate in the collaborative economy;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 159 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
15. Urges the Commission to provide further guidelines to Member States with a view to laying down effective criteria for distinguand Member States to work together to agree guidelines for distinguishing between peers and professionals, which is crucial for the fair development of the collaborative economy; requests the European Commission to conduct a study of existing thresholds in the collaborative economy across Member States in order to get a better understanding of exishting between peers and professionals, which is crucial for the fair developmentpractices and to be able to analyse the best possible way forward, bearing in mind differing economic realities and purchasing powers across Member States; recognises that a one-size fits all solution may not be appropriate; notes that such guidelines should take into account the fact that there may be several definitions of what is a professional depending ofn the collaborative economyarea of law considered; Stresses that an important criteria to distinguish a peer from a professional is whether the user is making a profit or only sharing costs;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 163 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15 a. Underlines that any thresholds based on income levels must take into account the important differences in income levels and prices across the Member States, stresses that there can be no 'one-size-fits-all' EU income threshold;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 166 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
16. Believes that peer providers, in most cases being private individuals offering services on an occasional basis, should not fall under the definition of professional service providers, and thresholds can be useful in that respect to exempt peers from legal requirements. Draws attention, at the same time, to the risk that establishing thresholds may not only create a disparity between micro and small businesses on the one side, and peers on the other; calls therefore for the legislation applicable to professional service providers to be revised in order to level the playing field among comparable categories of service providers and to remove unnecessary regulatory burdens but also create disparity between cities, regions and member states when different thresholds are set at local, regional or national levels ; calls therefore for the legislation applicable to professional service providers to be simplified and modernised to remove unnecessary regulatory burdens and ensure that legal requirements are proportionate, necessary and non discriminatory;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 167 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
16. Draws attention, at the same time, to the risk that establishing thresholds may create a disparity between micro and small businesses on the one side, and peers on the other; calls therefore for the legislation applicable to professional service providers to be revised in order to level the playing field among comparable categories ofa full analysis of potential impacts to be ascertained before considering whether the legislation applicable to professional service providers should be revised and to remove unnecessary regulatory burdens; cautions against calls for legislative actions which stifle innovation;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 169 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
16. Draws attention, at the same time, to the risk that establishing thresholds may create a disparity between micro and small businesses on the one side, and peers on the other; calls therefore for the legislation applicable to professional service providers to be revised in order to level the playing field among comparable categories of service providers and to remove unnecessary regulatory burdensuse this transformation as an occasion to remove unnecessary regulatory burdens for all business operators, collaborative and traditional alike;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 171 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
17. Believes that consumers should enjoy a high and effective level of protection, regardless of whether services are provided by professionals or peers; highlights, in particular, the importance of protecting consumers in peer-to-peer transactions; welcomes the Commission’s initiative to ensure the adequacy of consumer law and preventing abuse of the collaborative economy; Stresses however that this initiative should take into account consumers and platforms behaviors in the collaborative economy, consumers being more active and empowered than in traditional markets, and collaborative economy platforms more reactive and agile with regard to consumer satisfaction, their business model being largely based on trust ;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 172 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
17. Believes that consumers should enjoy a high and effective level of protection, regardless of whether services are provided by professionals or peers; highlights, in particular, the importance of protecting consumersconsumer protection in peer-to-peer transactions; welcomes the Commission's initiative to ensure the adequacy of consumer law and preventing abuse of the collaborative economy; recognises that some forms of protection can be delivered by platforms without the need for regulation;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 183 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
18. Emphasises that, in manyWhere there is persisting market dominated players and therefore a lack of choice or competition, that clases,sical rules for protecting consumers aremight still be needed in the collaborative economy, especially due to persisting asymmetric information or lack of choiceand actions taken to ensure new market entries access to a local or regional market;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 184 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
18. Emphasises that, in many cases, rules for protecting consumers are still needed in the collaborative economy, especially due to where there is persisting asymmetric information or lack of choice ; Stresses therefore that the need for consumer protection should be based first and foremost on an assessment on the extent to which technology solves asymmetry of information ;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 195 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
19. Calls on the Commission to clarifUnderlines that the Ecommerce framework fully applies to the collaborative economy platforms, therefore online platforms should benefit from the limited liability regime according to the conditions set out by the Ecollaborative platforms liability regime, which couldmmerce directive. Acknowledges however the lack of legal certainty and clarity in defining the level of control and knowledge a platform has over the information it hosts. Calls on the Commission to provide further guidance on the application of the criteria that indicate whether a platform is providing an underlying service or is merely an hosting provider and on the possibilities for hosting providers to take voluntary measures to enhance responsible behaviour and increase user confidence;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 197 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
19. CRecalls on the Commission to clarify the collaborative platforms liability regime, which couldthe E-commerce Directive and the requirements as to online intermediaries liability; at the same time, asks platforms to take voluntary measures to enhance responsible behaviour and increase user confidence;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 212 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
20. Calls on the Commission to further scrutinise EU legislation in order to reduce uncertainties concerning the rules applicable to collaborative business models and to assess whether new or amended rules are desirablappropriate;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 217 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
21. Believes that any new regulation should leveragefocus on ex-post regulation instead of ex-ante and that platforms’ self- governing capacities and peer-review should be leveraged to the greatest extent possible; is convinced that collaborative platforms themselves could take an active role in such a new regulatory environment by correcting many asymmetric information and other market failures which have been traditionally addressed through regulation, especially by digital trust-building mechanisms;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 228 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
22. Strongly believes, at the same time, that this self-regulating capacity does not undercut the need for regulation, especially for market failures that platforms cannot address and for other normative goals (e.g. reversing inequalities, boosting fairness, inclusiveness, and openness, etc.);deleted
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 232 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
22. Strongly believes, at the same time, that this self-regulating capacity does not undercut the need for regulation, especially for market failures that platforms cannot address and for other nWhereas self-regulation has proved to be a good alternative to ex-ante regulation, especially in the area of the collaborative economy thanks to new technological developments such as two- way rating mechanisms; notes that customer satisfaction with collabormative goals (e.g. reversing inequalities, boosting fairness, inclusiveness, and openness, etc.)economy services is much higher than in the traditional sectors; believes, at the same time, that this self-regulating capacity does not replace the need for regulation, such as the Services and eCommerce Directives, and EU consumer law to ensure coherence and complementarity;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 240 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
23. Points out the crucial importance of clarifying methods by which decisions based on algorithms are taken and of guaranteeing algorithm fairness; emphasises the need to verify the potential harm to privacy caused by big data, to assess the impact of data on different segments of society and to prevent discrimination; calls on the Commission to lay down effective criteria for developing algorithm accountability principles for information- based collaborative platforms;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 248 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
24. ICalls convinced that the Commission to assess in order to prevent further fragmentation of the single market whether a common EU horizontal and harmonised regulatory framework, consisting of a combination of general principles and specific rules, needs to be developed, in addition to any sector- specific regulation that might be needed ;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 249 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
24. Is convinced that a common EU horizontal and harmonised regulatory framework, consisting of a combination of general principles and specific rules, needs to be developed, in addition to any sector- specific regulation that might be needed; takes the view that any legislation which imposes new requirements on collaborative economy actors, particularly tax-related, social and environmental measures, should be proportionate, simple and clear, and not hampering their development;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 256 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
25. Is deeply concerned of the impact of unjustified market access requirements taken in numerous member states on innovation in Europe; Calls on the Commission for an ambitious and more effective enforcement framework , and to support the Member States in developing a strong culture of compliance and enforcement;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 264 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)
26 a. Welcomes that the rise of the collaborative economy has brought greater competition and has challenged existing operators to focus on consumers' real demands, consumer service and a better service to cost ratio; underlines that the collaborative economy is positive even for those individuals that do not directly take part in it;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 268 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
27. Is concerned about the difficulties that have emerged so far in relation to tax compliance and enforcement, despite the increased traceability of economic transactions via online plStresses the increased traceability of economic transactions via online platforms which should lead to greater tax compliance and enforcement; asks that the Member States to seek, based on these best practices, greater tax compliance and enforcement within traditional market operatforms as well;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 270 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
27. Is concerned about the difficulties that have emerged so far in relation to tax compliance and enforcement, despite the increased traceability of economic transactions via online platforms; Underlines that public-private cooperation with regard to tax and social security compliance has proven successful in some Member States ; Stresses therefore the role competent authorities should play in engaging with platforms to develop effective and innovative solutions that facilitate compliance and the role of the European Commission in facilitating exchange of best practices and reuse of technological solutions;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 284 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
30. AWhile respecting the principle of subsidiarity and national tax policies, agrees that functionally similar tax obligations should be applied to businesses providing comparable services, and is convinced that taxes should be paid where profits are generated;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 291 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 5
Impact on labour market and workers’ rights
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 292 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
31. Emphasises that the digital revolution is having a profound impact on the labour market and that emerging trends in the collaborative economy are part of a broader tendency; of transformation of the society and economy from a vertical hierarchical structure to a more horizontal structure; believes that the collaborative economy provides workers with more flexibility, autonomy, and opportunities that represents this shift in behaviors and therefore requires modernisation of employment and welfare systems ; Stresses in that regard that modernisation should imply to reform a system that should no longer be based on open-ended contracts, which are no longer the norm, but at the level of the labour market, to ensure that all workers benefit from social protection.
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 300 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
32. Underlines the paramount importance of safeguarding workers’ rights in collaborative services, of avoiding social dumping, and of guaranteeing fair working conditions and adequate social protection;deleted
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 311 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
33. Is concerned about the risk that on-demand workers might not enjoy genuine legal protection, and that collaborative platforms might pass on their risks to workers with no entrepreneurial responsibilities;deleted
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 334 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
35. Believes that there is ample room for manoeuvre for national, regional and local authorities to adopt context-specific regulations in order to address clearly identified public interest objectives with proportionate measures fully in line with EU legislation; calls on the Commission therefore to support the Member States in their policy-making and in adopting rules consistent with EU law;deleted
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 339 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35 a (new)
35 a. Regrets that local governments' responses to the development of collaborative business models has so far been very fragmented and in some cases inconsistent with the potential and benefits of the development of this sector, as well as contrary to consumer expectations; considers that a coordinated overall European-level action is needed to prevent local and regional authorities from adopting rules that are inconsistent with EU law;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 341 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35 b (new)
35 b. calls on the Member States to comply with, and fully implement, the Electronic Commerce Directive (Directive 2000/31/EC) and the Services Directive (Directive 2006/123/EC); maintains that the free movement of service providers and freedom of establishment, as provided for in Articles 56 and 49 TFEU respectively, are essential in order to realise the European dimension of services and hence of the internal market;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 342 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35 c (new)
35 c. Calls on the Member States to put an end to over-regulation, which is often protectionist in nature and inhibit the advantages of new market entries in order to protect established market players and other social actors; believes it is necessary for Member States to refrain from uncoordinated actions and unwarranted restrictive unilateral measures against collaborative economy companies;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 346 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
36. Notes that first movers have been cities, where urban conditions such as population density and physical proximity favour the adoption of collaborative practices; is also convinced that the collaborative economy can offer significant opportunities to inner peripheries and outlying, mountainous and rural areas, toogions, and also offer indirect benefits for the tourism sector;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 359 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37 a (new)
37 a. Calls on the Commission to be proactive in encouraging public-private cooperation in particular with regard to the take up of e-IDs, to increase consumers and service providers trust in online transactions, building on the EU framework for mutual recognition of Eids, and to address other existing barriers to the growth of the collaborative economy, such as obstacles to providing crossborder insurance schemes ;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 363 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39 a (new)
39 a. Notes that services provided by SMEs in the collaborative economy sector are not always sufficiently tailored to the needs of persons with disabilities and the elderly; calls for tools and programmes aimed at supporting these operators to take into account the needs of persons with disabilities;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 5 #

2017/2002(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the Commission proposals for actions to reduce disparity in education and disadvantages throughout the lifetime of a person, but draws attention to a number of administrative ‘bottlenecks’ which are slowing progress in attaining those objectives in relation to mobility, and recognition of qualifications and the social dimension;
2017/03/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 8 #

2017/2002(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Recognizes the primary importance of promoting digital literacy in order to take full advantage of growth and competitiveness opportunities in the European Digital Single Market;
2017/03/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 17 #

2017/2002(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
2. Calls, to that end, for the systematic use of the Internal Market Information System (IMI) in order to ensure better exchange of data, enhance administrative cooperation and secure simpler and faster procedures for the recognition of professional qualifications and continuous professional development requirements of qualified professionals planning to work in another Member State, and to prevent discrimination of all kinds;
2017/03/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 19 #

2017/2002(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Calls on the Member States to include leadership, management, entrepreneurial and financial education, business start-up advice and communication technologies in their education programmes, and to prioritise the further development of apprenticeships, vocational training and education (VET) programmes, including enhancing European craftsmanship;
2017/03/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 23 #

2017/2002(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
3. Recalls that closing the skills gap and mismatches in the labour market and promoting opportunities for social mobility, including for vocational training and apprenticeships, is essential to ensure sustainable growth and jobs creation, in particular for SMEs and crafts;
2017/03/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 31 #

2017/2002(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on the Commission to provide significant support for the development of digital abilities in all age groups, irrespective of employment status, as a first step towards the better alignment of labour market shortages and demand; to that end, encourages the Commission to increasereview the funding under Horizon 2020, fostering inclusive, innovative and reflective European societies to get the elderly, the unemployed and poorly educated, migrants, people in need of care, people living in remote or poorer areas, persons with disabilities, and the homeleswith the aim to get all Europeans to fully participate in society and the labour market;
2017/03/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 39 #

2017/2002(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. AWelcomes the Commission's proposal to urge Member States to draw up comprehensive national strategies for digital skills; and asks the Commission to come forward with a methodology for the recognition of the new digital professions and to make provision for appropriate funding forreview appropriate means to fund the new educational framework for digital skills.
2017/03/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 45 #

2017/0354(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
(3) The principle of mutual recognition derives from the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union. According to this principle, Member States may not prohibit the sale on their territory of goods which are lawfully marketed in another Member State, even where the goods have been produced or manufactured in accordance with different technical rules. But the principle is not absolute. Member States can oppose the marketing of goods lawfully marketed elsewhere, when such restrictions are justified on the grounds set out in Article 36 of the Treaty or on the basis of other overriding reasons of public interest recognised by the ECJ jurisprudence in relation to the free movement of goods, and which in either case are proportionate to the aim pursued.
2018/05/22
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 52 #

2017/0354(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
(4) The concept of overriding reasons of public interest is an evolving concept developed by the Court of Justice in its case-law in relation to Articles 34 and 36 of the Treaty. This concept covers, inter alia, the effectiveness of fiscal supervision, the fairness of commercial transactions, protection of consumers, protection of the environment, the maintenance of press diversity and the risk of seriously undermining the financial balance of the social security system. Such overriding reasons, where legitimate differences exist from one Member State to another,Where legitimate differences exist from one Member State to another, such overriding reasons may justify the application of national rules by the competent authorities. However, such decisions need to be always duly justified, andthoroughly explained, and in full respect with the principle of proportionality must always be respected, regard being had to whether the competent authority has in fact made the least restrictive decision possible. In order to improve the functioning of the single market for goods, the Commission and the Member States should initiate, as part of this Regulation, an ongoing process of assessing whether national rules are fit for purpose and do not create disproportionate non-tariff barriers. Furthermore, administrative decisions restricting or denying market access in respect of goods lawfully marketed in another Member State must not be based on the mere fact that the goods under assessment fulfil the legitimate public objective pursued by the Member State in a different way from the way that domestic goods in that Member State fulfil that objective.
2018/05/22
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 53 #

2017/0354(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4 a (new)
(4a) In order to assist Member States in their task to justify restrictions to the principle of mutual recognition, the Commission should provide guidance on the concept of overriding reasons of public interest and how to apply the principle of mutual recognition.
2018/05/22
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 55 #

2017/0354(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
(7) Regulation (EC) No 764/2008 has several shortcomings, and should therefore be revised and strengthened. For the sake of clarity, Regulation (EC) No 764/2008 should be replaced by this Regulation. This Regulation should establish clear procedures to ensure the free movement to goods lawfully marketed in another Member State and to ensure that free movement can be restricted only where Member States have duly justified legitimate public interest grounds for doing so and the restriction is proportionate. It ensures that existing rights and obligations deriving from the mutual recognition principle are observed, by both economic operators and national authorities.
2018/05/22
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 59 #

2017/0354(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14 a (new)
(14a) To raise awareness and improve the application of the principle of mutual recognition, Member States are urged to insert in their national technical regulations clear and unambiguous 'single market clauses', which ensure that goods lawfully marketed in one Member State are presumed to be compatible with the national technical rules of another Member State.
2018/05/22
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 61 #

2017/0354(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
(15) The evidence required to demonstrate that goods are lawfully marketed in another Member State varies significantly from Member State to Member State. This causes unnecessary burdens delays and additional costs for economic operators, while preventing national authorities from obtaining the information necessary for assessing the goods in a timely manner. This may inhibit application of the mutual recognition principle. It is therefore essential to make it easier for economic operators to demonstrate that their goods are lawfully marketed in another Member State. Economic operators should be able to benefit from a process of self-declaration, which should provide competent authorities with all necessary information on the goods and on their compliance with the rules applicable in that other Member State. The use of the voluntary declaration does not prevent national authorities from taking a decision restricting market access, on the condition that such a decision is proportionate, duly justified and respects the mutual recognition principle and this Regulation.
2018/05/22
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 71 #

2017/0354(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
(20) In order to enhance the efficiency and competitiveness of businesses operating in the non-harmonised area, it should be possible to benefit from new information technologies for the purposes of facilitating the provision of the mutual recognition declaration. Therefore, economic operators should be able and encouraged to make their declaration available online.
2018/05/22
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 74 #

2017/0354(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20 a (new)
(20a) The Commission should ensure that a template for the Mutual Recognition Declaration and relevant guidelines to complete the declaration are made available on the Single Digital Gateway in all of the official languages of the Union.
2018/05/22
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 75 #

2017/0354(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
(22) Where producers decide not to make use of the mutual recognition declaration mechanism, it should be forthe competent authorities of the Member State tomay request thespecific and clearly defined information that it considers necessaryindispensable for the assessment of the goods, taking due accounin full respect of the principle of proportionality.
2018/05/22
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 79 #

2017/0354(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22 a (new)
(22a) The economic operator should be given appropriate time within which to submit documents or any other information requested by the competent authority of the Member State of destination, or to present any comments or arguments in relation to the assessment of the goods in question.
2018/05/22
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 81 #

2017/0354(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
(23) Directive (EU) 2015/1535 of the European Parliament and of the Council requires Member States to communicate to the Commission and to the other Member States any draft national technical regulation concerning any product, including agricultural and fish products, and a statement of the grounds which make the enactment of that regulation necessary. It is necessary, however, to ensure that, following the adoption of such a national technical regulation, the principle of mutual recognition is correctly applied in individual cases to specific goods. This Regulation should lay down procedures for the application of the mutual recognition principle in individual cases by, for example, requiring Member States to indicate the national technical rules on which the administrative decision is based and the legitimate public interest ground justifying the applicable national technical rule on which the administrative decision is justifibased. This requirement does not, however, oblige Member States to justify the national technical rule itself, but rather the application of that national technical rule with respect to a product lawfully marketed in another Member State. The proportionality of the administrative decision should always be demonstrated by means of a case-by case evaluation.
2018/05/22
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 87 #

2017/0354(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
(25) While a competent authority is assessing goods before deciding whether or not it should deny or restrict market access, it should not be able to take decisions suspending market access, except where rapid intervention is required to prevent harm to safety and health of users or to prevent the goods being made available where the making available of such goods is generally prohibited on grounds of public morality or public security, including for example the prevention of crimein a situation where under normal or reasonably foreseeable conditions of use, the goods may pose a serious risk, including one where the effects are not immediate, which should require rapid intervention by the competent authority.
2018/05/22
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 91 #

2017/0354(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
(30) Any administrative decision taken by competent authorities of Member States pursuant to this Regulation should specify the remedies available so that an economic operator can appeal the decision or bring proceedings before the competent national court or tribunal. The administrative decision should also refer to the possibility of economic operators to use the SOLVIT network and to have access to the problem- solving procedure provided for in this Regulation.
2018/05/22
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 94 #

2017/0354(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33
(33) The SOLVIT system has provedthe potential to be an effective non-judicial, problem- solving mechanism that is, provided free of charge. It works under short deadlines and provides practical solutions to citizens and businesses when they are experiencing difficulties with their Union rights being recognised by public authorities. Ther efore, economic operators should have to rely on SOLVIT first before the problem-solving mechanism under this Regulation can be triggered. Where the economic operator, the relevant SOLVIT centre and the involved Member States in question all agree on the appropriate outcome, no further action should be requiredfectiveness of the problem-solving procedure, introduced by this Regulation is based on the SOLVIT system and depends great deal on its efficient performance. To ensure the enhanced performance of the SOLVIT system, Member States and the Commission should urgently take all the necessary measures to equip the national SOLVIT centres with adequate resources and to bring increased awareness, especially amongst businesses regarding the existence and benefits of SOLVIT.
2018/05/22
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 95 #

2017/0354(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 34
(34) The economic operators should always rely on SOLVIT as a first measure before the problem-solving mechanism under this Regulation can be triggered. Where the economic operator, the relevant SOLVIT centre and the involved Member States in question all agree on the appropriate outcome, no further action should be required. However, where the SOLVIT's informal approach fails, and serious doubts remain regarding the compatibility of the administrative decision with the mutual recognition principle the Commission should be empowered to look into the matter and provide an assessment to be taken into account by the competent national authorities at the request of any of the SOLVIT centres or an economic operator. The Commission's intervention should be subject to a reasonable time-limit, in compliance witwo-months’ time-limit. The 30 days period does not include the the European Code of Good Administrative Behaviour. ime necessary for receiving the additional information that might be deemed necessary.
2018/05/22
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 109 #

2017/0354(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2 a (new)
The aim of this Regulation is to strengthen the functioning of the internal market by improving the application of the principle of mutual recognition.
2018/05/22
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 120 #

2017/0354(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 12
(12) 'legitimate public interest ground' means any of the grounds set out in Article 36 of the Treaty or any other overriding reasons of public interest recognised by the European Court of Justice in relation to Articles 34 and 36 of the Treaty.
2018/05/22
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 137 #

2017/0354(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
The declaration shall be completed in one of the official languages of the Union and, where that language is not the language required by the Member State of destination, it shall be translated by ththe declaration may always be economic operators into the language or languages required by the Member State of destinationmpleted and submitted in English.
2018/05/22
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 140 #

2017/0354(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
The Commission shall ensure that a template for the Mutual Recognition Declaration and relevant guidelines to complete the declaration are made available on the Single Digital Gateway in all the official languages of the Union.
2018/05/22
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 144 #

2017/0354(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 4
4. Economic operators shall ensure that the declaration is kept up to date at all times toby reflecting any changes in the information provided by them in the declaration. The competent authority shall give reasonable time to economic operators for such an update, when necessary.
2018/05/22
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 145 #

2017/0354(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. The economic operator may provide the declaration up to 10 working days after the request has been made from the competent authorities.
2018/05/22
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 146 #

2017/0354(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 5
5. The mutual recognition declaration may be supplied to the competent authority of the Member State of destination for the purposes of an assessment to be carried out under Article 5. It may be supplied either in paper form or by electronic means. or be made available online.
2018/05/22
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 148 #

2017/0354(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 6 – introductory part
6. EWhere economic operators may make the declaration available on a website, provided thatline, the following conditions arshall be satisfied:
2018/05/22
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 152 #

2017/0354(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 7 – point a
(a) the declaration, together with any evidence reasonably required by the competent authority to verifyand the evidence supporting the information contained in it, shall be accepted by the competent authority as sufficient to demonstrate that the goods are lawfully marketed in another Member State; and
2018/05/22
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 154 #

2017/0354(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 7 – point a a (new)
(aa) the economic operator may provide the information up to 10 working days after the request has been made by the competent authorities;
2018/05/22
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 155 #

2017/0354(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 7 – point a b (new)
(ab) refusal to accept a declaration shall be considered a breach of the free movement of goods and the Commission shall act accordingly;
2018/05/22
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 161 #

2017/0354(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 8 – point a
(a) any relevant and indispensable information concerning the characteristics of the goods or type of goods in question;
2018/05/22
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 165 #

2017/0354(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 8 – point b
(b) any relevant and indispensable information on the lawful marketing of the goods in another Member State;
2018/05/22
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 170 #

2017/0354(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 8 – point c
(c) any other information the competent authority considers usefulindispensable for the purposes of its assessment, for which due justification shall be provided.
2018/05/22
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 171 #

2017/0354(COD)

(c) any other information the competent authority considers usefulnecessary for the purposes of its assessment.
2018/05/22
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 177 #

2017/0354(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1
1. Where, as part of their market control activities, a competent authority of athe Member State has doubts as regards goods which the economic operator claimof destination has reasonable and duly justified doubts as to whether goods that are made available or are going to be made available on its market are lawfully marketed in another Member State, the competent authority shall contact the competent authority of that other Member State and the relevant economic operator without delay and shall carry out an assessment the goods.
2018/05/22
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 181 #

2017/0354(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2
2. In carrying out assessments under paragraph 1, the competent authorities of Member States shall take due account ofaptly respect the content of test reports or certificates issued by a conformity assessment body and provided by any economic operator as part of the assessment. Competent authorities of Member States shall not refuse certificates or test reports issued by a conformity assessment body accredited for the appropriate field of conformity assessment activity in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 765/2008 on grounds related to the competence of that body, no matter where the conformity assessment body is established.
2018/05/22
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 185 #

2017/0354(COD)

3. Where, on completion of an assessment under paragraph 1, the competent authority of a Member State takes an administrative decision with respect to the goods, it shall communicate its decision withiout delay and no later than 210 working days to the relevant economic operator referred to in paragraph 1, to the Commission and to the other Member States. Notification to the Commission and to the other Member States shall be done by means of the system referred to in Article 11.
2018/05/22
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 189 #

2017/0354(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 5 – point b
(b) the legitimate public interest ground on which the decision is justified and which the national technical rule referred to in point (a) seeks to protect;
2018/05/22
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 194 #

2017/0354(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 5 – point e
(e) the evidence demonstrating that the decision is appropriate for the purpose of achieving the objective pursued and that it does not go beyond what is necessary in order to attain that objective including how less restrictive means to achieve the objective regarding that product have been considered.
2018/05/22
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 196 #

2017/0354(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 6
6. The administrative decision referred to in paragraph 3 shall clearly specify the remedies available under the law in force in the Member State concerned, how economic operators may avail themselves from these remedies, and the time limits applicable to those remedies, and it shall also include a reference to the procedure under Article 8.
2018/05/22
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 197 #

2017/0354(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 7
7. The administrative decision referred to in paragraph 3 shall not take effect before it has been notified to the relevant economic operator and to the Commission under that paragraph.
2018/05/22
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 200 #

2017/0354(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. While the competent authority of a Member State is carrying out an assessment of goods pursuant to Article 5, it shall not temporarily suspend the making available of those goods on the domestic market in that Member State, except in one or the other of the following situations:a situation where under normal or reasonably foreseeable conditions of use, the goods may pose a serious risk, including one where the effects are not immediate, which should require rapid intervention by the competent authority
2018/05/22
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 202 #

2017/0354(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) under normal or reasonably foreseeable conditions of use, the goods pose a serious risk, including one where the effects are not immediate, which requires rapid intervention by the competent authority;deleted
2018/05/22
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 206 #

2017/0354(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the making available of the goods, or goods of that type, on the domestic market in that Member State is generally prohibited in that Member State on grounds of public morality or public security.deleted
2018/05/22
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 211 #

2017/0354(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2
2. The competent authority of the Member State shall immediately notify the relevant economic operator, the Commission and the other Member States of any suspension pursuant to paragraph 1. The notification to the Commission and other Member States shall be made by means of the system referred to in Article 11. In cases falling within point (a) of paragraph 1 of this Article, tThe notification shall be accompanied by a reasoned technical or scientific justification demonstrating whythat the case is considered to fall within that pointgoods may pose a serious risk, and shall be communicated also to the economic operator.
2018/05/22
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 212 #

2017/0354(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. If the administrative decision referred to in Article 5 or the temporary suspension referred to in Article 6 is also a measure which is required to be notified through RAPEX as referred to in the General Product Safety Directive 2001/95/EC, a separate notification to the Commission and to the Member State under this Regulation is not required, provided that the following conditions are met:
2018/05/22
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 216 #

2017/0354(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1
1. This Article applies if an economic operator affected by an administrative decision has submitted the decision to the Internal Market Problem Solving Network (SOLVIT) and, during the SOLVIT procedure, the Home Centre, the Lead Centre or economic operator asks the Commission to give an opinion to assist in solving the case. The Commission may also give an opinion on its own initiative.
2018/05/22
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 218 #

2017/0354(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2
2. The Commission shall, within three moout undue delay, consider the documenths of receipt of the request referred to in paragraph 1, enter into communication with the relevant economic operator or operators and the competent authorities who took the administrative decision in order to assessand information provided within the SOLVIT procedure in order to assess the compatibility of the administrative decision with the principle of mutual recognition and this regulation. Where addition information is needed for the purposes of the assessment referred to above, the cCompatibility of the administrative decision with the principle of mutual recognition and this Regulationmission shall without undue delay enter info communication with the relevant economic operator or operators and the competent authorities.
2018/05/22
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 225 #

2017/0354(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3
3. Following completion of its assessment, the Commission mayWithin 30 days of receipt of the request referred to in paragraph 1, the Commission shall complete its assessment and issue an opinion identifying concerns that should, in its view, be addressed in the SOLVIT case and, where appropriate, making recommendations to assist in solving the case. The 30 days period does not include the time necessary for receiving the additional information and documents as provided for in paragraph 2.
2018/05/22
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 231 #

2017/0354(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Where, during the assessment referred to in paragraph 2, the Commission is informed that the case is solved, it may decide not to issue an opinion.
2018/05/22
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 233 #

2017/0354(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 4
4. The Commission's opinion shall be consideredmmunicated to all parties involved in the case as well as to the market surveillance authorities within the meaning of Regulation (EC) No765/2008 by means of the system referred to in Article 11. The opinion shall be taken into account during the SOLVIT procedure referred to in paragraph 1.
2018/05/22
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 241 #

2017/0354(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 4
4. Product Contact Points shall respond within 157 working days of receiving any request under paragraph 3.
2018/05/22
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 256 #

2017/0354(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1
1. By (…), and every fivetwo years thereafter, the Commission shall carry out an evaluation of this Regulation against the objectives it pursues and shall submit a report thereon to the European Parliament, to the Council and to the European Economic and Social Committee.
2018/05/22
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 131 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
(1) In order to guarantee the free movement of products within the Union, it is necessary to ensure that products fulfil requirements providing a high level of protection of public interests such as health and safety in general, health and safety in the workplace, protection of consumers, protection of the environment and public security. Robust enforcement of these requirements is essential to the proper protection of these interests and to create the conditions in which fair competition in the Union market for goods can thrive. Rules are therefore necessary to ensure this enforcement throughout the internal market, including on productsregardless of whether products are traded in shops or online and regardless of whether they are produced domestically or entering the Union from third countries.
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 132 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1 a (new)
(1a) The value of products subject to Union harmonisation rules amounts to more than EUR 2 400 billion per year representing 69 % of the overall value of manufacturing products in the Union.
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 133 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1 b (new)
(1a) Non-compliant products cause harm to buyers and law-abiding undertakings alike. In practice, non- compliance means that citizens are exposed to potentially dangerous products or that the environment is put at risk. Furthermore, non-compliance means that undertakings selling compliant products face distorted competition which cuts corners or deliberately flouts the rules in order to gain a competitive edge.
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 157 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
(19) Regulation (EC) No 765/2008 does not set explicit obligations on how market surveillance is to be organised at national level and leaves it to the prerogative of Member States. As a consequence, market surveillance remains fragmented in the Union and market surveillance authorities find it difficult to enforce their decisions in other Member States, due to the territoriality of their administrative decisions, their enforceability and language issues. In order to ensure that the Union harmonisation legislation on products is correctly enforced, market surveillance authorities should therefore have a common set of investigative and enforcement powers, allowing for enhanced cooperation between market surveillance authorities and more effective deterrence for economic operators that willingly infringe Union harmonisation legislation. Those powers should be sufficiently robust to tackle the enforcement challenges of Union harmonisation legislation, along with the challenges of e-commerce and the digital environment and to prevent economic operators from exploiting gaps in the enforcement system by relocating to Member States whose market surveillance authorities are not equipped to tackle unlawful practices. In particular, the powers should ensure that information and evidence can be exchanged between competent authorities so that enforcement can be undertaken equally in all Member States.
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 160 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19 a (new)
(19a) There should be effective, speedy and accurate exchange of information among the Member States and between the Member States and the Commission. Regulation (EC) No 765/2008 includes a number of legal, administrative and financial tools (e.g. Information and Communication System on Market Surveillance (ICSMS) and Rapid Alert System for dangerous non-food products (RAPEX)) which enable coordination among market surveillance authorities in the Union. However, evidence shows that those tools are not exploited to the extent sufficient to trigger effective coordination and efficient work sharing among the market surveillance authorities. The overall degree of cross-border cooperation therefore remains insufficient and should be increased.
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 162 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19 b (new)
(19a) The provisions of Regulation (EC) No 765/2008 have been implemented in many different and specific forms at national levels. Differences emerge not only in terms of distribution of competences between market surveillance authorities but also in terms of internal coordination mechanisms at national level, level of deployed financial resources dedicated to market surveillance, market surveillance strategies and approaches, powers of inspections, sanctions and penalties for product non-compliance. The lack of uniformity leads to market surveillance being more rigorous in some Member States than in others. This might result in a less effective deterrence power, and an unequal playing field among businesses in some Member States also potentially imbalances in the level of product safety throughout the Union.
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 180 #

2017/0353(COD)

It also provides a framework for the market surveillance of such products to ensure that those products fulfil requirements providing a high level of protection of public interests such as health and safety in general, health and safety in the workplace, the protection of consumers, protection of the environment and, security and cyber- security.
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 194 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 15
(15) ‘serious risk’ means any serious risk, including a serious risk where the effects are not immediate, requiring rapid intervention and follow-up by the market surveillance authorities, including a risk where the effects may not be immediate;
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 197 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 22 a (new)
(22a) ‘online marketplace’ means a service provider which allows consumers to conclude online contracts with traders and consumers on the online marketplace’s online interface;
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 239 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Where Union harmonisation legislation provides for the drawing up of an EU declaration of conformity, manufacturers shall make the declaration publicly available on their website or, in the absence of a website, by any other means that allows the declaration to be easily and readily accessed by the general public in the Union free of charge.
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 246 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 a (new)
The Product Contact Points shall, together with the Commission, prepare the general product requirements laid down by Union law and provide them to economic operators in a transparent, accessible and user-friendly way.
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 247 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Such information may be published online, in order to raise awareness about the general product requirements laid down by Union law among economic operators.
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 266 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Market surveillance authorities may enter into memoranda of understanding with businesses or organisations representing businesses or end-users for the carrying out, or financing, of joint activities aimed at raising awareness, providing guidance in relation to the general requirements laid down by Union law, as well as identifying non-compliance or promoting compliance in specific geographical areas or with respect to specific categories of product, in particular with respect to products presenting a serious risk or with respect to products that are often notified as dangerous in the Rapid Alert System for Non-Food Consumer Products (RAPEX).
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 271 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Any memorandum of understanding shall include strict provisions aimed at ensuring the confidentiality, the objectivity, the independence and impartiality of the parties, the information and the activities concerned. Where any of its parties is in breach of any such provisions, a memorandum of understanding shall be terminated.
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 276 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1
1. Market surveillance authorities shall establish appropriate and effective communication and coordination mechanisms with other market surveillance authorities.
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 289 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3
3. The single liaison office of a Member State shall be responsible for coordinating the enforcement and market surveillance activities of the market surveillance authorities designated by that Member State. It shall also be responsible for the coordination of market surveillance activities performed in cooperation with other authorities responsible for the control of products entering Union territory, in particular with custom authorities.
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 294 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 4
4. Member States shall ensure that their market surveillance authorities and single liaison office have the necessary resources, including sufficient budgetary and other resources, staffing, expertise, procedures and other arrangements for the proper performance of their duties.
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 298 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) the effective coordination with other market surveillance authorities in Union territory.
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 347 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
(ca) the specific enforcement actions planned in order to reduce the occurrence of non-compliance as regards products sold online to end-users within Union territory, including, where relevant, the minimum control levels envisaged for categories of those products which have significant levels of non-compliance;
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 361 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3 – point c
(c) the power to have access to any relevant documents, data or information related to an instance of non-compliance, in any form or format and irrespective of its storage medium or the place where it is stored;
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 369 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3 – point e – point 3
(3) to request any representative or a relevant member of staff of the economic operator to give explanations of facts, information or documents relating to the subject-matter of the inspection and to record their answers;
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 387 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3 – point m
(m) the power to order the restitution of profits obtained as a result of anrepeated and intentional instances of non-compliance;
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 393 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 5
5. Market surveillance authorities shall exercise their powers in accordance with the principle of proportionality.deleted
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 396 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 a (new)
Article 14a Exercise of powers or duties of market surveillance authorities 1. Market surveillance authorities shall exercise powers set out in this Article proportionately, efficiently and effectively in accordance with Union law, including the principles of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, applicable procedural safeguards and the Union rules on data protection, in particular Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council 1a, and national law. 2. Market surveillance authorities shall in any case exercise the powers set out in point 1 of point (e) and in point (h) of Article 14(3) by application to courts competent to grant the necessary decision, including, where appropriate, by appeal, if the application to grant the necessary decision is not successful. 3. Investigation and enforcement measures adopted when applying this Regulation shall adequately reflect the nature and degree of the non-compliance and the overall actual and potential harm caused by it. 4. When a decision as to whether to impose a penalty and on the amount of such penalty to be imposed in each individual case is being made, due regard shall be given to the following: (a) the nature, gravity and duration of the non-compliance, taking into account the number of consumers affected and the level of damage suffered by them; (b) the intentional and negligent character of the non-compliance; (c) any action taken by the manufacturer to mitigate the damage suffered by consumers; (d) any relevant previous non- compliance committed by the manufacturer; (e) the degree to which the manufacturer has cooperated with market surveillance authorities in order to remedy the non-compliance and mitigate its potential adverse effects. _________________ 1a Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1).
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 401 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Market surveillance authorities shall perform sufficient and appropriate checks on the characteristics of products on an adequate scale, by means of documentary checks and, where appropriate, physical and laboratory controls on the basis of a representative sample.
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 425 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 2
2. If a product presenting a serious risk has been made available on the market, market surveillance authorities shall immediately notify the Commission of any voluntary measures taken and communicated by an economic operator.
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 430 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 4 – point a
(a) carry out product-testing in relation to market surveillance activities and investigations, including, in particular, on behalf of the Member States that do not yet possess their own testing capacities;
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 433 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Duplication of efforts between Member States and Union testing facilities shall be avoided.
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 435 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Market surveillance authorities shall recognise the tests performed by Union testing facilities.
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 436 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 5
5. The Commission shall adopt implementing acts specifying the procedures for the designatingon and the functioning of Union testing facilities. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 63.
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 464 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 (new)
The parties concerned shall, whenever feasible, be given an opportunity to submit their views before the adoption of the measure. If this has not been done in advance because of the urgency of the measures to be taken, they shall be given such opportunity in due course after the measure has been implemented.
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 465 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Paragraph 3 shall not apply in case of formal non-compliance of products as defined in point (22b) of Article 3.
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 476 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
By 31 March each year, Member States shall submit to the Commission detailed statistical data covering controls performed by the authorities designated under paragraph 1 with respect to products subject to Union harmonisation legislation during the previous calendar year, including data covering:
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 513 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 3
3. The Commission shall establish separate or joint administrative coordination groups for all the instruments of Union harmonisation legislation listed in the Annex to this Regulation. Each administrative coordination group shall be composed of representatives of the competent national market surveillance authorities and, ifwhere appropriate and in line with the subject matter in question, representatives of the single liaison offices, and representatives of the relevant business associations and of consumer associations.
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 516 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. As much as possible, the meeting of the EUPC Board as well as the meetings of the administration groups shall be conducted in an open and transparent manner.
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 65 #

2017/0293(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
(2) This Regulation should apply from 1 January 2020 in order to provide a coherent and efficient transition following the recast and repeal of Regulations (EC) No 443/2009 and (EU) No 510/2011. However, it is appropriate to maintain the CO2 performance standards and the modalities for achieving them as set out in those Regulations without changes until 20245.
2018/05/28
Committee: ENVI
Amendment 83 #

2017/0293(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
(10) It is therefore appropriate to pursue the objectives of those Regulations by setting new EU fleet-wide CO2 reduction targets for passenger cars and light commercial vehicles for the period up to 2030. In defining the reduction levels, account has been taken of their effectiveness in delivering a cost-effective contribution to reducing emissions of the sectors covered by the Effort Sharing Regulation […/…] by 2030, of the resulting costs and savings for society, manufacturers and vehicle users, as well as of their direct and indirect implications for employment, competitiveness and innovation and the co-benefits generated in terms of reduced air pollution and energy security. The use of renewable de- fossilized fuels (focus on synthetic fuels following definition(s) from Article 2 of RED II with advanced renewable fuels (Annex IX of REDII) in accordance with sustainability criteria) can offer significant CO2-reduction in well-to-wheel terms, in the new and in the existing fleet. To encourage technology development and increase the share of these fuels in the market, the use of renewable de- fossilised fuels should be accounted for in the specific emission target of manufactures in case of voluntary commitment of a manufacturer.
2018/05/28
Committee: ENVI
Amendment 93 #

2017/0293(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
(13) Reduction levels for the Union- wide fleets of new passenger cars and light commercial vehicles should therefore be set for 20256 and for 2030, taking into account the vehicle fleet renewal time and the need for the road transport sector to contribute to the 2030 climate and energy targets. This stepwise approach also provides a clear and early signal for the automotive industry not to delay the market introduction of energy efficient technologies and zero- and low-emission vehicles.
2018/05/28
Committee: ENVI
Amendment 132 #

2017/0293(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 3
3. This Regulation will until 31 December 2024 be complemented by additional measures corresponding to a reduction of 10 g CO2/km as part of the Union 's integrated approach referred to in the 2007 Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament27 . __________________ 27 Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament of 7 February 2007 Results of the review of the Community Strategy to reduce CO2 emissions from passenger cars and light- commercial vehicles (COM(2007) 19 final).
2018/05/04
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 133 #

2017/0293(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
(19) In order to maintain the diversity of the car market for passenger cars and light commercial vehicles and its ability to cater for different consumer needs, CO2 targets for passenger cars should be defined according to the utility of the cars vehicles on a linear basis. Maintaining mass as the utility parameter is considered coherent with the existing regime. In order to better reflect the mass of vehicles used on the road, the parameter should be changed from mass in running order to the vehicle's test mass as specified in Regulation (EU) 2017/1151 of 1 June 2017 with effect from 20256.
2018/05/28
Committee: ENVI
Amendment 133 #

2017/0293(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 4
4. From 1 January 2025 the following EU fleet-wide targets shall apply: (a) new passenger car fleet, an EU fleet-wide target equal to a 15% reduction of the average of the specific emissions targets in 2021 determined in accordance with point 6.1.1 of Part A of Annex I; (b) for the average emissions of the new light commercial vehicles fleet, an EU fleet-wide target equal to a 15% reduction of the average of the specific emissions targets in 2021 determined in accordance with point 6.1.1 of Part B of Annex I;deleted for the average emissions of the
2018/05/04
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 144 #

2017/0293(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
(20) It should be avoided that the EU fleet-wide targets are altered due to changes in the average mass of the fleet. Changes in the average mass should therefore be reflected without delay in the specific emission target calculations, and the adjustments of the average mass value that is used to this end should therefore take place every two years with effect from 20256.
2018/05/28
Committee: ENVI
Amendment 153 #

2017/0293(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
(21) In order to distribute the emission reduction effort in a competitively neutral and fair way that reflects the diversity of the market for passenger cars and light commercial vehicles, and in view of the change in 2021 to WLTP-based specific emission targets, it is appropriate to determine the slope of the limit value curve on the basis of the specific emissions of all newly registered vehicles in that year, and to take into account the change in the EU fleet-wide targets between 2021, 20256 and 2030 with a view to ensuring an equal reduction effort of all manufacturers. With regard to light commercial vehicles, the same approach as that for car manufacturers should apply to manufacturers of lighter, car derived, vans, while for manufacturers of vehicles falling within the heavier segments, a higher and fixed slope should be set for the whole target period.
2018/05/28
Committee: ENVI
Amendment 165 #

2017/0293(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 5 – point a
(a) for the average emissions of the new passenger car fleet, an EU fleet-wide target equal to a 320% reduction of the average of the specific emissions targets in 2021 determined in accordance with point 6.1.2 of Part A of Annex I;
2018/05/04
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 170 #

2017/0293(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
(28) The procedure for granting derogations from the 95 g CO2/km fleet target to niche car manufacturers ensures that the reduction effort required by niche manufacturers is consistent with that of large volume manufacturers with regard to that target., However, experience shows that niche manufacturers have the same potential as large manufacturers to meet the CO2 targets and with regard to the targets set from 20256 onwards it is not considered appropriate to distinguish between those two categories of manufacturers.
2018/05/28
Committee: ENVI
Amendment 175 #

2017/0293(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 5 – point b
(b) for the average emissions of the new light commercial vehicles fleet, an EU fleet- wide target equal to a 3015% reduction of the average of the specific emissions targets in 2021 determined in accordance with point 6.1.2 of Part B of Annex I.
2018/05/04
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 199 #

2017/0293(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) for each calendar year from 2021 until 20249, the specific emissions target determined in accordance with points 3 and 4 of Parts A or B of Annex I as appropriate or, where a manufacturer is granted a derogation under Article 10 , in accordance with that derogation and point 5 of Parts A or B of Annex I;
2018/05/04
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 201 #

2017/0293(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) for each calendar year, starting from 202530, the specific emissions targets determined in accordance with point 6.3 of Parts A or B of Annex I.
2018/05/04
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 212 #

2017/0293(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. From 1 January 20256 the following EU fleet-wide and manufacturers targets shall apply:
2018/05/28
Committee: ENVI
Amendment 233 #

2017/0293(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) the average mass in running order for all new passenger cars and new light commercial vehicles registered in the Union in the preceding calendar year until 31 December 20209;
2018/05/04
Committee: