Activities of Angel DZHAMBAZKI related to 2014/2228(INI)
Legal basis opinions (0)
Amendments (22)
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas investment protection provisions and investor state dispute settlement are an essential tool in international economic relations to ensure that states adhere to their commitments under mutually agreed international treaties, and are very important for investment activity, and whereas a balanced relationship between the necessary and effective protection of investors, the right of States to regulate and an appropriate dispute settlement procedure is fundamental;
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. recognising that cultural diversity is a distinctive feature of the EU because of Europe's history, its rich variety of traditions and strong cultural and creative industries, and that the promotion of cultural diversity will remain a guiding principle, just as it has been in other EU trade agreements;
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion
Recital D b (new)
Recital D b (new)
Db. recalling that cultural and creative industries contribute around 2.6% of EU GDP with a higher growth rate than the rest of the economy;
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion
Recital D c (new)
Recital D c (new)
Dc. underlining that, with a decline in the EU's competitiveness in traditional industries, the development of trade in cultural and creative-industry goods and services will constitute an important driver of economic growth and job creation in Europe; observing that, according to estimates, world trade in cultural and creative goods and services has nearly doubled in the past ten years;
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion
Recital D d (new)
Recital D d (new)
Dd. strongly believing that greater trade openness in the cultural and creative industries sector would greatly benefit both the European and US economies and could contribute to cultural richness and diversity of both - the US and Europe;
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion
Recital D e (new)
Recital D e (new)
De. recalling that the protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights is an issue central to securing the European cultural and creative industries while maintaining incentives for companies to develop new service and business models and for artists and creators to innovate;
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion
Recital D f (new)
Recital D f (new)
Df. maintaining that international cooperation is the only way to combat piracy, counterfeiting and the violation of IPRs.
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point a
Paragraph 1 – point a
(a) ensure, via a general clause in thethat the TTIP agreement, is in full compliance with the GATS and the UNESCO Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions, that the parties to the agreement reserve the right to adopt or maintain any measure (in particular of a regulatory and/or financial nature) with respect to the protection or promotion of cultural and linguistic diversity, media pluralism and media freedom, and to preserve or develop, in accordance with the principle of technological neutrality, a regime for audiovisual services in line with democratic, social and cultural requirements;
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas nine EU Member States have concluded bilateral investment protection agreements with the USA granting US undertakings the right to bring complaints against those Member States, and whereas over 1,400 bilateral agreements betweensigned by EU Member States already contain numerous ISDS clauses;
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas international agreements are a basis for legal certainty, transparency and predictability and whereas there have been many cases in which the EU and other States have brought legal action against the USA under the aegis of the WTO because the USA was believed to have failed to comply with its international obligations, notes that in some cases the US continues to refuse to respect WTO panel rulings, in clear contradiction of its commitments under WTO law;
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
(aa) look to establish in TTIP the right balance between the necessary protection and sustainability of creation with the need to foster the development of new services and business models;
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point a b (new)
Paragraph 1 – point a b (new)
(ab) ensure that the EU cultural and creative sector maintains and enhances its ability to access a large market of 300m consumers with high purchasing power and that EU producers and creators are guaranteed, wherever possible, non- discriminatory market access or equivalent treatment to US producers;
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point a
Paragraph 1 – point a
a. Considers that the Commission’s proposals for reform initiatives relating to investment protection accord with the European Parliament resolution on the future European international investment policy (2010/2203(INI)); observes, however, that the reservations felt by the publicbrought forward should be taken into account in these reforms;
Amendment 37 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes the TTIP’s strategic importance in strengthening and shaping global trade and economic governance based on the values shared by the EU and the US, particularly in an increasingly multipolar world; notes that its impact would go beyond the bilateral implications by facilitating the establishment of common regulations and rules that could later be adopted at global level within the World Trade Organisation’s parameters;
Amendment 38 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point b
Paragraph 1 – point b
b. Observes that the reforms incorporated in CETA for mechanisms for the settlement of disputes between States and investors are welcome and represent the right approach and must be developed further for TTIP; in clarifying issues relating to the right to regulate, the functioning of arbitral panels as well as leaving open the possibility of an appeals mechanism and must be developed further for TTIP; urges the Commission to ensure full disclosure and regular communication concerning the development-process of said reforms;
Amendment 51 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point c
Paragraph 1 – point c
c. Observes that existing dispute settlement mechanisms work well but also display weaknesses and that therefore improvements are needed and they, providing investors with a means to ensure state compliance under international law, but significant improvements are needed in terms of precise legal drafting which must be modernised in order to improve their legitimacy and the institutionalisation of mechanisms for the settlement of disputes between States and investors, so that they can then also be taken as a model for other partnerships;
Amendment 59 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point d
Paragraph 1 – point d
d. Calls on the Commission, in this context, to take account of and to supplement, firstly, the constructive contributions made by the public consultation on TTIP, and, secondly, the dispute settlement mechanisms incorporated in CETA, in order to establish clear structures, impartial procedures, a lawful and balanced pool of judges selected by States and a clear code of conduct for judges, to increase the transparency and, legitimacy and neutrality of such dispute settlement procedures, to limit the scope for legal action in order to prevent forum shopping, to maintain the democratic legitimacy of national and European legislatures for amendments to legislation with defined standards and levels and to assess the feasibility of establishing a permanent court and a multilateral appeal system in TTIP;
Amendment 72 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point f
Paragraph 1 – point f
f. Calls on the Commission to ensure that in the future dispute settlement mechanism in TTIP it is guaranteed that decisions on individual cases will not replace the national law of the contracting parties which is in force; or reunder it ineffective, and that amemine any fundaments by future legislation – provided that they are not made retroactive – cannot be coal principle or protective standard guarantested under such a dispute settlement mechanismEuropean and International law;
Amendment 79 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point g
Paragraph 1 – point g
g. Calls on the Commission to ensure that clearly defined rules on regulatory cooperation and coherence are comprehensively incorporated in TTIP; these should aim at ensuring the highest levels of transparency on mutual consultation and exchanges of best practices on important regulatory initiatives, as well as the use of better regulatory approaches, including impact assessments, evaluations and reviews of existing measures;
Amendment 87 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Believes that this agreement should be accompanied by a deepening of transatlantic parliamentary cooperation, and that the strengthening of trade and investment links through the TTIP should lead in the future to an enhanced political framework to improve global cooperation between the EU and the US; considers that abolition of the visa regime which still applies to five EU Member States – Poland, Bulgaria, Romania, Cyprus and Croatia – will be seen by the Union as a mark of goodwill on the part of the USA, and that it will make for stronger and closer economic and political cooperation between the two partners;
Amendment 90 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point i
Paragraph 1 – point i
i. Notes that TTIP gives contracting parties the option of increasingRecalls the crucial importance of intellectual property to the EU economy and requests that TTIP allow for increased levels of protection of EU intellectual property, including in re rights to support research and innovation on both sides of the Atlantion to third States.c, ensuring that those who create high quality innovative products can continue to do so;
Amendment 106 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – subparagraph i a (new)
Paragraph 1 – subparagraph i a (new)
(a) take measures to guarantee that the inclusion in the final TTIP agreement of provisions for investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) will have to give European investors in the USA the highest possible levels of legal protection and certainty, and that it will not permit any impairment of the right of the EU and its Member States to adopt and apply measures in the public interest and objectives for, inter alia, social policy, the protection of the environment, public health and safety and the stability of the financial system;