996 Amendments of Max ANDERSSON
Amendment 38 #
2018/2855(RSP)
Paragraph 5
5. Takes the view that the digital age requires electoral laws to be adapted to this new digital reality and suggests Member States introduce an obligatory system of introduce an obligatory system of digital imprints for electronic campaigning and advertising. Any form of political advertising should include easily accessible and understandable information on the publishing organisation and who is legally responsible for spending so that it is clear who sponsored campaigns, similar to existing requirements for printed campaign materials currently in place in various Member States; insists that transparency should also include complete information about the criteria for selecting the target group of the specific political advertising and the expected size of the target group;
Amendment 41 #
2018/2855(RSP)
Paragraph 7
7. Recommends all online platforms dalls that the processing of personal data for political advertistingu ish political uses of their online advertising products a different purpose and therefore requires a separate legal basis such as consent from thei one for commercial usesadvertising;
Amendment 44 #
2018/2855(RSP)
Paragraph 8
8. Believes that the requirement to verify the identity, location and sponsor of political advertisements recently introduced by Facebook in the US is a good initiative which will increase transparency and contribute to the fight against election meddling by foreign actors; urges Facebook to introduce the same requirements for political advertisements in Europe; calls on the Member States to adjust their electoral laws to this effect;
Amendment 77 #
2018/2855(RSP)
Paragraph 23
Amendment 82 #
2018/2855(RSP)
Paragraph 24
24. Takes the view that data protection authorities should have the same, if not more technical expert knowledge as those organisations under scrutiny. Suggests this objective could be reached by introducing funding by a levy on the sector concerned;
Amendment 83 #
Amendment 85 #
2018/2598(RSP)
Paragraph 14 b (new)
Amendment 86 #
2018/2598(RSP)
Paragraph 14 b (new)
14b. Underlines that 80% of people displaced by climate change are women, and that women are in general more impacted by climate change than men; stresses that women’s empowerment as well as their full and equal participation and leadership are vital for climate action; calls on the EU and the Member States to mainstream gender perspective into climate policies, and to promote the participation of indigenous women and women rights defenders within the UNFCC framework;
Amendment 274 #
2018/2279(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18 a. Calls on the Commission to add data related to the SDGs to the high-value datasets as defined in the Directive on open data and public sector information and to encourage the Member States to publish all reports on the SDGs under a free license;
Amendment 65 #
2018/2170(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Parliament shall lay down rules governing the transparency of its Members' financial interests in the form of a Code of Conduct which shall be adopted by a majority of its component Members and attached to these Rules of Procedure as an annex4 . The Code of Conduct shall include provisions on the transparency and accountability of Members’ general expenditure allowance. It shall provide for adequate penalties in the case of breaches of paragraphs 2, 2a, 2b and 2c, including penalties related to the inability to be elected as office-holders of Parliament or of one of its bodies, the inability to be appointed as a rapporteur or the inability to participate in an official delegation; __________________ 4 See Annex I.
Amendment 67 #
2018/2170(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Article 11 – paragraph 2
Article 11 – paragraph 2
2. Members shouldall adopt the systematic practice of only meeting interest representatives that have registered in the Transparency Register established by means of the Agreement between the European Parliament and the European Commission on the transparency register5 . __________________ 5 Agreement of 16 April 2014 between the European Parliament and the European Commission on the transparency register for organisations and self-employed individuals engaged in EU policy- making and policy implementation (OJ L 277, 19.9.2014, p. 11).
Amendment 68 #
2018/2170(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Article 11 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Members shall publish on Parliament’s website all scheduled meetings with interest representatives falling within the scope of the Transparency Register. The Bureau shall provide for the necessary infrastructure on Parliament's website.
Amendment 69 #
2018/2170(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Article 11 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 2 b (new)
2 b. Members shall use their general expenditure allowance in a transparent and accountable way, in line with the principle of sound financial management, with the principle of purpose specification and with the principles governing the funding of European political parties.
Amendment 70 #
2018/2170(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Article 11 – paragraph 2 c (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 2 c (new)
2 c. Members shall publish, on an annual basis, an overview of how they have used their general expenditure allowance, broken down by category of expenditure, keep all the receipts of items of expenditure, use a separate bank account for their payment, and return any unused sums at the end of each parliamentary term. The Bureau shall lay down provisions in order to ensure annual sample checks.
Amendment 71 #
2018/2170(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Article 11 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 11 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
In parliamentary debates, Members shall not resort to defamatory, racist or xenophobic language or behaviour, nor shall they unfurl bannershate speech or discriminatory language based on sex, race, colour, nationality, ethnic or social origin, genetic features, language, religion or beliefs, political or other opinions, membership of a national minority, property, birth, disability, age or sexual orientation.
Amendment 82 #
2018/2170(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 130b – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Rule 130b – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 85 #
2018/2170(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 130b – paragraph 2
Rule 130b – paragraph 2
2. On receipt of the written replyanswer, if Members or a political group or groups reaching at least the low threshold so request, the major interpellation shall be placed on the final draft agenda of Parliament in accordance with the procedure provided for in Rule 149. A debate must be held if a committee, a political group or at least five per cent of Parliament’s component Members so demand and subject to paragraph 3a.
Amendment 87 #
2018/2170(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 130b – paragraph 5 a (new)
Rule 130b – paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. The number of major interpellations debated during the same part-session shall not exceed three and no political group shall be entitled to submit major interpellations for two consecutive part-sessions. If debates are requested for more than three major interpellations during the same part-session, the Conference of Presidents shall include them in the final draft agenda in the order in which it received those requests for debate.
Amendment 98 #
2018/2170(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 198 – paragraph 4
Rule 198 – paragraph 4
4. The request to set up a committee of inquiry must precisely specify the subject of the inquiry and include a detailed statement of the grounds for it. Parliament, on a proposal from the Conference of Presidents, shall decide whether to set up a committee and, if so, its composition, in accordance with Rule 199.
Amendment 99 #
2018/2170(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Article 201 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 201 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. All input pertaining to the subject matter of a committee file received by rapporteurs and committee chairs from individuals and organisations falling within the scope of the Transparency Register shall be collected and disclosed by Parliament. The Bureau shall provide for necessary infrastructure for the disclosure of such input.
Amendment 100 #
2018/2170(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 205 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Rule 205 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. The minutes of the committee coordinators' meetings shall be translated into the official languages and distributed to all Members of the committee. Those minutes shall be made accessible to the public, with the exception of certain items in respect of which the committee coordinators have exceptionally, for reasons of confidentiality, as laid down in Article 4(1) to (4) of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 57a decided otherwise. _________________ 57a Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents (OJ L 145, 31.5.2001, p. 43).
Amendment 102 #
2018/2170(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 211 – title
Rule 211 – title
Public hearings and plenary debates on citizens’ initiatives
Amendment 104 #
2018/2170(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 211 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Rule 211 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. A full debate shall be placed on the final draft agenda of Parliament in accordance with the procedure provided for in Rule 149 for a part-session following the public hearing in the responsible committee and prior to the expiry of the period provided for in Article 10(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) No 211/2011. The debate shall be wound up with a resolution. That resolution may contain a recommendation to the Commission on the action to take.
Amendment 9 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 8 a (new)
Citation 8 a (new)
8a having regard to its resolution of 11 April 2018 on protection of investigative journalists in Europe: the case of Slovak journalist Jan Kuciak and Martina Kušnírová
Amendment 12 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 8 a (new)
Citation 8 a (new)
- having regard to its resolution of 29 November 2018 on The Cum Ex Scandal: financial crime and the loopholes in the current legal framework;
Amendment 19 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 19 a (new)
Citation 19 a (new)
- having regard to the infringement procedures against 21 Member States for having not or only partially transposed AMLD4 into national law of which three are currently at the stage of court referrals (Romania, Ireland and now Luxembourg), with one on hold (Greece), nine at the stage of Reasoned Opinions, and eight at the stage of Letters of Formal Notice,
Amendment 20 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 20 a (new)
Citation 20 a (new)
- having regard to the Commission Communication on strengthening the Union framework for prudential and anti- money laundering supervision,
Amendment 21 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 21 a (new)
Citation 21 a (new)
- having regard to the Recommendation of the EBA to the Maltese FIAU,
Amendment 22 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 21 b (new)
Citation 21 b (new)
- having regard to the Formal Opinion to the Maltese FIAU of the Commission,
Amendment 26 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 25 a (new)
Citation 25 a (new)
- having regard to reports on tax avoidance and tax evasion as challenges for governance, social protection and development in developing countries1a, and gender equality and taxation policies in the EU1b; _________________ 1a Report on tax avoidance and tax evasion as challenges for governance, social protection and development in developing countries (2015/2058(INI)) (http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/get Doc.do?pubRef=- //EP//TEXT+REPORT+A8-2015- 0184+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN) 1b Gender equality and taxation policies in the EU (2018/2095(INI)) (https://oeil.secure.europarl.europa.eu/oei l/popups/ficheprocedure.do?lang=&refere nce=2018/2095(INI)
Amendment 41 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Notes that money laundering, tax evasion and tax avoidance have important economic, political, and social impacts, including loss of tax revenue, productivity loss, unfair competition and inequality, and incentivise certain economic outcomes that undermine both the countries’ political stability and social contract; stresses that the negative effects on public resources also impact the realisation of the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs);
Amendment 45 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1 b. Notes with regret that tax fraud, tax evasion and aggressive tax planning are important factors causing income and wealth inequality, and have shifted the tax burden from rich individuals to poorer citizens, from capital income to labour income and consumption, from MNEs to SMEs and from the financial sector to the real economy; notes that this has resulted in weaker and less efficient tax-and- transfer systems that are essential to finance public goods and stabilise the economy;
Amendment 47 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1 c. Notes that tax evasion and tax avoidance are major contributors to gender inequality in the Union and globally as they limit the resources available to governments to increase equality at national and international level; calls on the Commission, the Council and the Member States to include a gender perspective in the formulation of its proposal to tackle tax evasion;
Amendment 51 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Stresses that during the work of the TAX3 Special Committee more revelations concerning financial crimes, tax evasion and tax avoidance have come to light, particularly connected to cases such as those of the ABLV Bank in Latvia, the murder of investigative journalists Ján Kuciak and Martina Kušnírová, the Danske Bank in Denmark and Estonia or the Cum Ex scandal involving at least 11 EU countries; stresses that as a result of the Panama Papers scandal, four people have been charged in the US;
Amendment 60 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomes the fact that during its current term the Commission has put forward 22 legislative proposals aimed at closing some of the loopholes, improving the fight against financial crimes and aggressive tax planning, and enhancing tax collection efficiency and tax fairness; calls for the swift adoption of initiatives that have not yet been finalised before the end of this legislature, particularly the key legislative proposals for public Country by Country reporting, Common Corporate tax Base and Common Consolidated Corporate tax base and digital taxation; and for careful monitoring of the implementation to ensure efficiency and proper enforcement, in order to keep pace with the versatility of tax fraud, tax evasion and aggressive tax planning;
Amendment 63 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Regrets that the Council has repeatedly failed to pass the measures that are necessary to require transnational corporations to fulfil their part of the social contract; notes that such failure undermines faith in the ability of democratic politicians to solve issues of injustice that are deeply troubling for our citizens;
Amendment 70 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3 b. Regrets that due to resistance of Member States, several legislative proposals in the field of tax justice have not been adopted yet to the detriment of European citizens.
Amendment 75 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Deplores again ‘the lack of reliable and unbiased statistics on the magnitude of tax avoidance and tax evasion [and] stresses the importance of developing appropriate and transparent methodologies to quantify the scale of these phenomena, as well as their impact on countries’ public finances, economic activities and public investments’; notes that transparency in general is central to the fight against money laundering, tax evasion and tax avoidance, and that some jurisdictions have interest in keeping the secrecy at place;
Amendment 84 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls on the Council and Member States to prioritise projects, notably with the support of the Fiscalis programme, aimed at quantifying the magnitude of tax avoidance in order to better address the current tax gap; urges the Commission and Member States to analyse their tax gaps in the EU and Member States including VAT gaps in order to design tax policies in an effective manner.
Amendment 86 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Calls on the Member States to estimate their tax gaps, and publish the results annually;
Amendment 91 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Highlights that close to 40 % of MNEs’ profits are shifted to tax havens globally each year and recognizes that certain jurisdictions within the EU, namely Luxemburg, Ireland and the Netherlands, are regular receivers of financial flows and reported profits generated elsewhere in the Union due to their very low or zero corporate, dividend and capital gains tax rates, and special tax provisions25 ; _________________ 25 Tørsløv, Wier and Zucman ‘The missing profits of nations’, National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper 24701, 2018.
Amendment 94 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8 a. Notes the tendency of corporations to produce their own estimates of ETRs - often based on bogus methods - which are then used to influence policy in a way that diminishes their tax liabilities;
Amendment 98 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Recalls that the fight against tax evasion and fraud tackles illegal acts, whereas the fight against tax avoidance addresses situations that are a priori within the limits of the law but against its spirit and could be considered illegal; however, recalls with concern that this strict distinction ignores the existence of grey areas and fails to take sufficient account of the ability of powerful players to change tax law to suit themselves;
Amendment 107 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Recalls that ATP describes the setting of a tax design aimed at reducing tax liability by using the technicalities of a tax system or of mismatches between two or more tax systems that go against the spirit of the law and could be considered illegal;
Amendment 111 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10 a. Notes that the growing role of intangible assets in the MNE value chain and harmful R&D tax incentives are conducive to aggressive tax planning.;
Amendment 123 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Stresses the similarity between corporate tax payers and high-net-worth individuals in the use of corporate structures and similar structures such as trusts and offshore locations for the purpose of ATP; recalls the role of intermedia, in this regard, that for the wealthy most of their income arrives in setting up such schemethe form of capital gains rather than earnings;
Amendment 128 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Welcomes the Commission’s assessment and inclusion of ATP indicators in its 2018 European Semester country reports; calls for such assessment to become a regular feature in order to ensure a level playing field in the EU internal market with a clear follow-up, as well as the greater stability of public revenue in the long run; regrets that so far no recommendations to end harmful tax practices have been put forward by the Commission in the course of the European Semester country reports, calls on the Commission to ensure full transparency of this exercise, including the follow-up, and to give countries concrete recommendations regarding the fight against aggressive tax planning strategies;
Amendment 143 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Reiterates its call on companies, as taxpayers, to fully comply with their tax obligations and refrain fromstop any forms of aggressive tax planning leading to BEPS, and to consider fair taxation strategy as an important part of their corporate social responsibilityto recognise their business is enabled by tax-funded social, legal and physical infrastructure and public services, and to embrace fair taxation strategy as an important part of their corporate social responsibility; reminds them that rising inequality and the gap between the wealthy and corporate elites is undermining the cohesion of societies and faith in democratic politics;
Amendment 149 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14 a. Urges Member States to review and update bilateral taxation agreements between Member States and with third countries to close loopholes that incentivise tax-driven trading practices with the purpose of tax avoidance;
Amendment 156 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Recalls that taxes must be paid in the jurisdictions where the actual economic activity and value creation takes place or, in case of indirect taxation, where consumption takes place; especially since it is required to fund the public services that the corporations themselves depend on;
Amendment 157 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15 a. Deplores the drop in nominal corporate tax rates all over Europe in recent years and the proliferation of incentives to lower the effective tax rate (ETR) compared to the statutory corporate tax rate; notes with concern that, regarding effective tax rates in the EU, in addition to Luxembourg (2.2%), the lowest ETRs are to be found in Hungary (7.5%), Bulgaria (9.5%), Cyprus (9.6%) as well as in the Netherlands (10.4%) and Latvia (10.6%) and that most countries appear to tax MNEs regressively: the larger the MNE, the lower the ETR;
Amendment 159 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 b (new)
Paragraph 15 b (new)
15 b. Acknowledges the harmful consequences that tax competition between jurisdictions and the resulting "race to the bottom" have on public revenues and the progressivity of taxation; underlines that the further lowering of corporate taxes will eventually put the sustainability of the Union's public finances at stake; calls on the European Commission to propose a Directive that ensures minimum effective corporate tax rates of at least 20% in the European Union;
Amendment 173 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16 a. Acknowledges that special tax and deduction regimes, including those in non-EU countries like Switzerland, bear substantial responsibility for the global downward spiral of corporate taxes rates; notes that the effective tax rate is much lower than nominal rates in most EU countries, and important disparities and pressure on lower tax rates lead to a race to the bottom;
Amendment 175 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 b (new)
Paragraph 16 b (new)
16 b. Regrets that profit shifting is often used by companies to put pressure on governments and employees, demanding weaker regulation and labour standards with the excuse of low profit margins, even though the company is operating successfully;
Amendment 192 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Acknowledges that the G20/OECD- led BEPS project was meant to tackle in a coordinated manner the causes and circumstances creating BEPS practices, by improving the coherence of tax rules across borders, reinforcing substance requirements and enhancing transparency and certainty; regrets that OECD BEPS Action Plan concerns only tax base competition and does not address tax rate competition;
Amendment 196 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Notes that the G20/OECD 15-point BEPS action plan is being implemented and monitored and further discussions are taking place, in a broader context than just the initial participating countries, through the Inclusive Framework; notes with regret however that BEPS so far failed to deliver on the most effective solution against the base erosion and profit shifting, deplores the fact that OECD still remain rather an exclusive club of countries rather that an open global platform that could keep up with the pace and deliver the solutions to minimise the negative impacts and risks of globalisation; calls on Member States to support a reform of both the mandate and the functioning of the Inclusive Framework to ensure that remaining tax loopholes and unsolved tax questions such as the allocation of taxing rights among countries are covered by the current international framework to combat BEPS practices;
Amendment 204 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Points out that some countries have recently adopted unilateral countermeasures against harmful tax practices (such as the UK’s Diverted Profits Tax and the Global Intangible Low- Taxed Income (GILTI) provisions of the US tax reform) to ensure that the foreign income of MNEs is duly taxed at a minimum effective tax rate in the parent’s country of residence; calls for an EU assessment of these measures and a legislative proposal, if appropriate, considering the negative potential tax base and strategic spillovers the US reform can have on the EU;
Amendment 225 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Reiterates its call for a clear definition of permanent establishment, including the concept of a ‘significant digital presence’, so that companies cannot artificially avoid having a taxable presence in a Member State in which they have economic activity;
Amendment 239 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Emphasises that the EU actions aimed at addressing BEPS and ATP have equipped tax authorities with an updated toolbox to ensure fair tax collection; stresses that tax authorities should be responsible for making effective use of the tools without imposing an additional significant burden on responsible taxpayers, particularly SMEs;
Amendment 245 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Recognises that the new flow of information to tax authorities following the adoption of ATAD I and DAC4 creates the need for adequate resources to ensure the most efficient use of such information and to effectively reduce the current tax gap; notes that there are continuing loopholes in the DAC regime that need to be closed1; __________________________ [1] Greens/EFA Report Reporting taxation: Analysing loopholes in the EU’s automatic exchange of information and how to close them, October 15 2018
Amendment 247 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28 a (new)
Paragraph 28 a (new)
28 a. Is concerned by the trend amongst some Member States of facilitating onshoring of IP from low tax Third Countries to EU Member States, through the provision of amortisation relief on IP acquirement, the proliferation of ‘patent boxes’ providing reduced taxation rates on certain IP profits, high or complete capital allowances for intellectual property and the introduction or extension of research and development credits1; notes that this while may conform with the BEPS actions’ substance requirements, it is in contrast with the spirit of BEPS; reiterates concerns expressed by the European Parliament2 and European Commission in relation to revenue losses associated with such measures3; _______________________ [1] Eurodad et. al., Tax Games: the Race to the Bottom, Europe’s role in supporting an unjust tax system 2017, December 2017, pp. 22 – 24; and IMF, Fiscal Monitor: Acting Now, Acting Together, April 2016, p 44. [2] European Parliament resolution of 25 November 2015 on tax rulings and other measures similar in nature or effect, OJ C 366, 27.10.2017, p. 26, paragraph 117. [3] European Commission, DG TAXUD, Tax Policies in the European Union. 2016 Survey, 26 October 2016, 2.1.3 R&D tax incentives, p 2.
Amendment 250 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28 c (new)
Paragraph 28 c (new)
28 c. Calls on EU Institutions and Member States to support a global tax reform based on the principles of formulary apportionment as included in the CCCTB proposal;
Amendment 254 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Welcomes the fact that Member States’ tax systems and overall tax environment have become part of the European Semester in line with Parliament’s call to that effect29 ; welcomes the studies and data drawn up by the Commission30 that allow situations that provide economic ATP indicators to be better addressed, and give a clear indication of the exposure to tax planning as well as furnishing a rich data base for all Member States on the phenomenon; calls on the Commission to make full use of this information and give concerned countries precise recommendations in its Specific Country Recommendations’ (SCRs) reports; urges Member States to swiftly follow the Commission's recommendations to fight ATP; _________________ 29 European Parliament resolution of 25 November 2015 on tax rulings and other measures similar in nature or effect, OJ C 366, 27.10.2017, p. 51, paragraph 96. 30 Referred to above. The studies provide an overview of Member States’ exposure to ATP structures affecting their tax base (erosion or increase), although there is no stand-alone indicator of the phenomenon, a set of indicators seen as a ‘body of evidence’ nevertheless exists.
Amendment 268 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Calls on the Commission to issue a proposal aimed at repealoutlawing patent boxes, and calls on Member States to favour non- harmful and, if appropriate, direct support for R&D; reiterates, in the meantime, its call to ensure that current patent boxes establish a genuine link to economic activity, such as expenditure tests, and that they do not distort competition; welcomes the improved definition of R&D costs in the common corporate tax base (CCTB) proposal;
Amendment 269 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 a (new)
Paragraph 32 a (new)
32 a. Calls on both the EU institutions and Member States to ensure public procurement contracts do not facilitate tax avoidance or benefit ATP by suppliers. Member States should monitor and ensure that companies or other legal entities involved in tenders and procurement contracts do not participate in tax evasion and avoidance by interacting with financial intermediaries established in offshore centres and tax havens, or by facilitating illicit capital flows, and to increase their transparency policies by requiring annual public country-by-country reporting, tracing beneficial ownership and controlling transfer pricing in order to ensure the transparencyof investments and prevent tax evasion and tax avoidance; calls on the Commission to clarify existing procurement practice under the EU procurement directive, and if necessary, propose an update to it that does not prohibit the application of tax related considerations as criteria for exclusion or even as selection criteria in public procurement1. ______________ [1] Initiatives such as www.tenderhaven.eu have attempted to introduce more transparency.
Amendment 286 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
33. Welcomes the re-launch of the CCCTB project in a two-step approach, with the Commission’s adoption of interconnected proposals on CCTB and CCCTB; calls on the Council to swiftly adopt them, taking into consideration Parliament’s opinion that already includes the concept of virtual permanent establishment that would close the remaining loopholes allowing tax avoidance to take place and level the playing field in light of digitalisationdeplores the continued refusal of certain Member States to support this proposal and the failure of EU solidarity that this refusal represents;
Amendment 289 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 a (new)
Paragraph 33 a (new)
33 a. Urges the Council to adopt these legislative proposals as soon as possible and before the end of this legislature, taking into consideration Parliament’s opinion that already includes the concept of virtual permanent establishment; considers that the deployment of this legislation would significantly contribute to closing the remaining loopholes and level the playing field in light of digitalisation and the growing role of intangible assets in the MNE value chain, which have exacerbated the problems with transfer pricing systems; however, expresses concern about the inclusion of a super-deduction for research and development1; ________________ [1] Council of the European Union, Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee, ECO/419,5.4 (http://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/docu ment/ST-12848-2017-INIT/EN/pdf)
Amendment 315 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
35. Welcomes the digital tax package adopted by the Commission on 21 March 2018; calls on the Council to swiftly adopt these proposalsdeplores the slow approach by the Council and its inability to come to an agreement on this package yet; points out that this already led to the distortion of the Single Market as national solutions have been put in place in different Member States and warns that the distortion risks worsening as other Member States consider to put in place national digital taxes; calls on the Council to adopt these proposals as soon as possible and before the end of this legislature, taking into account Parliament’s opinion on them;
Amendment 320 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35 a (new)
Paragraph 35 a (new)
35 a. Recalls that the digital services under the scope of the digital tax package should be the processing and sale of data, online advertisement, digital interfaces and the provision of digital content; deplores that the Council is currently considering a proposal that is much less ambitious in scope than the Commission’s proposal and than the Parliament’s position;
Amendment 328 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
Paragraph 36
36. Understands that the so-called interim solution is not optimal; believnotes that it will help speed up the search for a better solution at global level, while levelling the playing field in local markets to some extent and preventing further distortion of EU Single Market; insists on the need to take a more optimal and long-term approach by adopting the Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Basis (CCCTB) with a digital factor in the formula apportionment, as voted by the Parliament in March 2018, together with the new definition of a Significant Digital Presence (SDP); strongly believes that it is the best way to tackle tax evasion of digital multinationals and deplores that these files are not progressing in the Council;
Amendment 335 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 a (new)
Paragraph 36 a (new)
36a. Reiterates its call on the Commission to use the power vested in the article 116 TFEU and to make proposals in the area of taxation under this article, in particular for the adoption of the Digital Services Tax (DST) and the CCCTB; believes that the conditions set out in Article 116 are met since there is a clear evidence that competition in the internal market between digital and traditional firms is distorted and that the Council failed to come to an agreement to eliminate the distortion;
Amendment 347 #
2018/2121(INI)
38a. Calls on the Commission to tackle existing loopholes in automatic exchange of information, particularly coming from the DAC3 revision; stresses in this regard that this should cover national rulings and rulings with natural persons, that information should be made public, and that information on rulings should be better exchanged with third countries;
Amendment 350 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39
Paragraph 39
39. Reiterates, furthermore, its call to ensure simultaneous tax audits of persons of common or complementary interests (including parent companies and their subsidiaries), and its calcalls on the Commission to present a legislative proposal to further enhance tax cooperation between Member States through an obligation to answer group requests on tax matters;
Amendment 355 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40
Paragraph 40
40. Emphasises that not only information exchanges between, but also the sharing of best practices among tax authorities contribute to more efficient tax collection; calls on the Commission and the Member States to give priority to the sharing of best practices among tax authorities;
Amendment 360 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42
Paragraph 42
42. Welcomes the automatic exchange of financial account information based on the global standard which has been developed by the OECD with Andorra, Liechtenstein, Monaco, San Marino and Switzerland; calls on the Commission and the Member States to upgrade the Treaty provisions so as to match the DAC as amended; regrets that Andorra, Liechtenstein, San Marino and Switzerland are moving from secrecy jurisdictions to low taxation jurisdictions, and still have harmful regimes according to the Council assessment on the EU list;
Amendment 370 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44 a (new)
Paragraph 44 a (new)
Amendment 378 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44 b (new)
Paragraph 44 b (new)
44b. Calls on the Commission to assess the state of play of all potentially harmful taxation agreements and any possible loophole in the EU rules on common taxation of parent companies and their subsidiaries, to come up with new upgraded policy measures to tackle dividend arbitrage practices and to take the necessary steps to prevent traders from exploiting loopholes in the law;
Amendment 383 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44 c (new)
Paragraph 44 c (new)
44c. Calls on the Commission to make a proposal to strengthen the DAC6 in order to require the mandatory disclosure of dividend arbitrage schemes and all information on capital gains, including the granting of dividend and capital gains tax refunds;
Amendment 398 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45
Paragraph 45
45. Stresses that the proposal for public CBCR was submitted to the co-legislators just after the Panama papers scandal on 12 April 2016, and that Parliament adopted its position on it on 4 July 2017; recalls that the latter called for an enlargement of the scope of reporting and protection of commercially sensitive information; deplores the lack of progress and cooperation from the Council since 2016; urges for progress to be made in the Council so that it enters immediately into negotiations with Parliament as soon as possible and find agreement before the end of this legislature;
Amendment 406 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45 a (new)
Paragraph 45 a (new)
45a. Notes that transparency is still lacking in numerous areas of taxation in the EU not limited to the corporate taxation; calls on the Commission and on Member States to collect and publish data on non-doms and CBI/RBI schemes; calls on the Commission to present a proposal to make the publication of tax rulings mandatory;
Amendment 408 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45 b (new)
Paragraph 45 b (new)
45b. Calls on the Commission to issue a proposal that would oblige Member States to ensure that economic operators participating in public procurement procedures comply with a minimum level of transparency regarding tax, particularly public CBCR and transparent ownership structures;
Amendment 409 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45 c (new)
Paragraph 45 c (new)
45c. Reminds Member States of the legal base of the proposal for public CBCR as found in the impact assessment of the Commission published 12 April 2016; recalls that the measures on corporate tax transparency cannot be regarded as relating to fiscal provisions affecting the establishment or functioning of the internal market in the sense of Article 115 TFEU;
Amendment 413 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 47
Paragraph 47
47. Calls on the Commission to assess possible measures to discourage Member States from granting such State aid in the form of a tax advantage, and to develop a robust method for measuring such indirect state aid;
Amendment 419 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48 a (new)
Paragraph 48 a (new)
48a. Is concerned by the lack of transparency of tax rulings and notes that the tax rulings investigated by the Commission were only available to them because of revelations by investigative journalists, civil society organisations and trade unions.
Amendment 424 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 49
Paragraph 49
49. Notes that despite the fact that the Commission found McDonald’s benefited from double non-taxation on certain of its profits in the EU, no decision under EU State Aid rules could be issued, as the Commission concluded that the double non-taxation stemmed from a mismatch between Luxembourg and US tax laws and the Luxembourg-United States double taxation treaty38 ; calls on the Commission to put forward a legislative proposal to harmonise double taxation treaties of Member States and terminate existing mismatches in the qualification of profits and expenses; _________________ 38 http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP- 18-5831_en.htm
Amendment 433 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 51
Paragraph 51
51. Reiterates its calls to the European Commission for guidelines clarifying what constitutes tax-related State aid and ‘appropriate’ transfer pricing, with a view to removing legal uncertainties for both compliant taxpayers and tax administrations, and providing a framework for Member States’ tax practices accordingly;
Amendment 436 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 51 a (new)
Paragraph 51 a (new)
51a. Points out that the scope of state aide cases proves the urgent need to for a systemic change and approval of EU-wide reforms to curb tax avoidance including mandatory public Country-by-Country Reporting, Common Corporate Tax Base and Common Consolidate Corporate Tax Base or digital taxation; calls for a reform of the European State Aid framework in order to make tackling tax avoidance schemes between multinationals and Member States faster and more effective;
Amendment 441 #
Amendment 445 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 52
Paragraph 52
52. Notes that there is no single definition of letterbox companiesshell companies; notes, however, that they are characterised by the absence of real economic activity in the Member State of registration, and are a means for treaty abuse or treaty shopping, usually used with the purpose of circumventing labour laws and social contributions, aggressive tax planning and tax evasion, money laundering and/or terrorist financing;
Amendment 448 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 52 a (new)
Paragraph 52 a (new)
52a. Notes that shell companies offer anonymity to its ultimate beneficiaries and allow them to abuse tax treaties; notes in this regard that the central register on the beneficial ownership foreseen in AMLD4 covers shell companies but regrets that the threshold for disclosure (25% of shareholding) will not prevent owners from remaining hidden; highlights that shell companies can be used as a vehicle for money laundering, tax evasion and tax avoidance; calls on the Commission to propose an amendment to the AMLD5 requiring obliged entities to file a suspicious transaction report whenever they enter into business or help setting up a shell company;
Amendment 452 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 53
Paragraph 53
53. Points out national measures to specifically ban commercial relationships with letterboxshell companies; highlights, in particular, the Latvian legislation which defines a letterboxshell company as an entity having no actual economic activity and holding no documentary proof to the contrary, as being registered in a jurisdiction where companies are not required to submit financial statements, and/or as having no place of business in its country of residence;
Amendment 454 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 53 a (new)
Paragraph 53 a (new)
53a. Notes that Latvia adopted in May 2018 a law banning financial institutions, as well as intermediaries, from cooperating and doing business with shell companies; calls on the Commission to put forward a legislative proposal to introduce the Latvian legislation in EU legislation and to encourage all EU Member States to follow this example;
Amendment 468 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 55
Paragraph 55
55. Underlines that a high share of foreign direct investment held by special purpose entities (SPEs) exists in several Member States, particularly in Malta, Luxembourg and the Netherlands;41 highlights that foreign direct investments through SPEs can be considerably affected by small legislative changes, whether domestically or abroad, affecting tax revenues and financial stability of the concerned countries and of the EU as a whole; _________________ 41 Kiendl Kristo I. and Thirion E., op. cit., p.23.
Amendment 486 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 58
Paragraph 58
58. Urges the Commission and the Member States to establish coordinated, binding, enforceable and substantial economic activity requirements as well as expenditure tests;
Amendment 490 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 59
Paragraph 59
59. Calls on the Commission to carry out, within two years, fitness checks of the interconnected legislative and policy initiatives aimed at addressing the use of letterboxshell companies in the context of tax fraud, tax evasion, aggressive tax planning and money laundering; calls on the Commission to make a proposal to ban shell companies in the EU, regarding that their use is associated with aggressive tax planning indicators;
Amendment 495 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 59 a (new)
Paragraph 59 a (new)
Amendment 502 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 61
Paragraph 61
61. Regrets, however, that every year, large amounts of the expected VAT revenue are lost because of fraud; highlights that according to the Commission’s statistics, the VAT gap in 2016 amounted to EUR 147 billion, which represents more than 12 % of the total expected VAT revenue43 ; notes that the Commission estimates that around EUR 50 billion – or EUR 100 per EU citizen each year – is lost to cross-border VAT fraud44 ; while the Europol estimates around 60 billion EUR of the VAT gap is connected to VAT fraud, partly used also organised crime and terrorism financing; _________________ 43 Study and Reports on the VAT Gap in the EU-28 Member States: 2018 Final Report / TAXUD/2015/CC/131. 44 See Commission press release: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-17- 3443_en.htm
Amendment 504 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 61 a (new)
Paragraph 61 a (new)
61a. Highlights with concern that the VAT gap in 2016 amounted to EUR 147 billion; notes that the Commission estimates that around EUR 50 billion each year is lost to cross-border VAT fraud and that the proceeds from criminal activity in the EU are estimated to amount to EUR 110 billion per year; notes that the UNODC estimates that between 2 and 5% of global GDP is laundered each year;
Amendment 506 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 62
Paragraph 62
62. Calls for additional statistics to estimate the VAT gap; stresses that there is no common approach to data collection and sharing within the EU; urges the Commission to ensure that harmonised statistics are collected and published regularly in Member States;
Amendment 510 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 63
Paragraph 63
63. Underlines that the feature of the current VAT (transitional) regime of applying an exemption to intracommunity supplies and exports within the EU has been abused by fraudsters, in particular in the VAT carousel fraud; stresses that cash transactions still remain a very high risk regarding VAT fraud;
Amendment 535 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 70 a (new)
Paragraph 70 a (new)
70a. Regards with concern the Council's adoption of a Proposal to amend the common system of value added tax as regards the temporary application of a generalised reverse charge mechanism (GRCM) in relation to supplies of goods and services above a certain threshold of 2 October 2018, which allows for a GRCM with much weaker criteria than those approved by the European Parliament; acknowledges that a generalised application of the RCM shifts the tax liability to the retail stage, transforming the VAT system into a Sales Tax, jeopardising the in-built faithful reporting incentives of the VAT fractional payments system by concentrating the risk of fraud at the end of the value chain; notes that this creates risks for other types of fraud to arise, through underreporting of sales volumes and the exploitation of the variability of VAT rates across Member States, and that VAT fraud can be passed on to neighbouring countries, creating market disruptions in those borders where some Member States apply GRCM and others do not; calls on the Commission to closely monitor the application and consequences of this new legislation;
Amendment 560 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 76
Paragraph 76
76. Calls on the Commission and Member States to ensure that EPPO towill begin operating as soon as possible and by 2022 at the latest; calls for exemplary sanctions to be pronounced; considers that anyone engaged in an organised VAT fraud scheme should be severely sanctioned in order to avoid a perception of impunity;
Amendment 568 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 78 a (new)
Paragraph 78 a (new)
78a. Highlights the importance of the implementation of a register of beneficial owners as an important tool to tackle VAT fraud; stresses the need and calls on Member States to create specialised units of police and tax services as well as to appoint specialised prosecutors and judges to deal with this type of fraud;
Amendment 583 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 81
Paragraph 81
81. Emphasises that natural persons do not generally exercise their freedom of movement for the purposes of tax fraud, tax evasion and aggressive tax planning; underlines, however, that some natural persons have a tax base large enough to span several tax jurisdictions; with high income and/or high wealth use inconsistent definitions of tax residence, special regimes and insufficient enforcement within or beyond the EU to achieve double non-taxation of their income
Amendment 588 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 82
Paragraph 82
82. Regrets that even without shifting tax residence high net worth individuals (HNWI) and ultra HNWI (UHNWI) continue to have the possibility to shift their earnings and funds or their purchases through different tax jurisdictions to obtain substantially reduced or zero liability by using the services of wealth managers and other intermediaries; deplores that some EU Member States have implemented tax schemed to attract high net worth individuals and create space for double non-taxation;
Amendment 592 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 83
Paragraph 83
83. Notes with regret that corporate tax fraud, tax evasion and aggressive tax planning contribute to shifting the tax burden on to honest and fair taxpayers, undermining the social contract and requiring law-abiding citizens to contribute a higher proportion of their earnings to the exchequer, as well as increasing inequality between those benefiting from the schemes and those who do not;
Amendment 594 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 83 a (new)
Paragraph 83 a (new)
83a. Notes that the threat of tax evasion and avoidance has created a race to the bottom regarding taxation of wealth, inheritance and capital incomes visible in the fact that – even without all the loopholes and avoidance strategies – the headline rates for labour income are usually higher than for effortless income from wealth and capital throughout the EU;
Amendment 595 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 83 b (new)
Paragraph 83 b (new)
83b. Recognizes that low top marginal rates, whether on labour income or on capital income, incentivise certain behaviour from Chief Executive Officers that result in poorer corporate economic governance and increased income inequality;
Amendment 601 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 84
Paragraph 84
84. Deplores the fact that some Member States, such as Portugal, have created tax regimes allowing non-nationals to obtain income tax benefits, hereby undermining other Member States’ tax base and fostering harmful policies which discriminate against their own citizens; these regimes offer benefits such as such as non-taxation of foreign possessions and income, lump-sum tax on foreign income, tax-free allowances on a part of incomes earn in the country, lower tax rate on pensions remitted to the country;
Amendment 605 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 84 a (new)
Paragraph 84 a (new)
84a. Reminds that the Commission in its communication of 2001 suggested to include special regimes for expatriates in its list of harmful tax practices1 but has not provided any data on the scope of the problem since; calls on the Commission to reactivate its work on this issue and to start by collecting information on the users and costs of existing regimes, including the costs of double non-taxation of cross-border capital income that is usually ignored by cost estimates of national tax agencies. __________________ [1] COM (2001) 260: Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament and the Economic and Social Committee Tax policy in the European Union - Priorities for the years ahead (https://eur- lex.europa.eu/procedure/EN/164839)
Amendment 615 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 85
Paragraph 85
85. Observes that a majority of Member States have adopted citizenship by investment (CBI) or residency by investment (RBI) schemes57 , generally known as visa or investor programmes, by which citizenship or residence is granted to non-EU citizens, whether they are from EU or non-EU countries, in exchange for financial investment; observes that these programmes do not necessarily require applicants to spend time on the territory in which the investment is made; _________________ 57 18 Member States have some form of RBI scheme in place, including four Member States that operate CBI schemes in addition to RBI schemes: Bulgaria, Cyprus, Malta, Romania. 10 Member States have no such schemes: Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Hungary, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia and Sweden. Source: study entitled ‘Citizenship by investment (CBI) and residency by investment (RBI) schemes in the EU‘, EPRS, October 2018, PE: 627.128; ISBN: 978-92-846-3375-3.
Amendment 623 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 86 a (new)
Paragraph 86 a (new)
86a. Notes that Citizenship by investment and residency by investment schemes in Member States such as Latvia, Austria or the UK have been used by a significant number of actors originating from Russia and countries under Russian influence; deplores that the secrecy surrounding these money flows has significantly increased the political, economic and security risks for European countries, particularly the risks of money laundering.
Amendment 624 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 86 b (new)
Paragraph 86 b (new)
86b. Notes that CBI and RBI schemes offered by third countries might pose EU security risks regarding visa issuing, and may increase the potential for tax evasion; highlights that, according to the OECD, CBI and RBI schemes are even more problematic when implemented by low or no-taxation jurisdiction and when no minimum presence is required;
Amendment 631 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 87
Paragraph 87
87. Stresses that CBI and RBI schemes carry significant risks, including a devaluation of EU citizenship and the potential for corruption, money laundering and tax evasion as well as security risks; reiterates its concern that citizenship or residence could be granted through these schemes without proper or indeed any customer due diligence (CDD) having been carried out by competent authorities; notes that the obligations contained in AMLD5 subjecting obliged entities to consider CBI or RBI applicants as a high-risk factor in the course of their due diligence process do not mitigate the risks associated with the schemes and should not constitute a way to absolve Member States from their responsibility to establish, abide by and monitor enhanced due diligence standards; notes that several formal investigations into corruption and money laundering have been launched at national and EU level directly related to CBI and RBI schemes; underlines that, at the same time, the economic sustainability and viability of the investments provided through these schemes remain uncertain; notes that one Member State’s decision to implement CBI and RBI schemes have spillover effects on other EU Member States;
Amendment 640 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 88 a (new)
Paragraph 88 a (new)
88a. Deplores that the financial benefits of such schemes accrue to a limited number of Member States whereas the potential costs of providing services to those who buy them may be borne by other states, creating an injustice across the Union;
Amendment 643 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 89
Paragraph 89
89. Worries that there is very little transparency in relation to the number and origin of applicants, the numbers of individuals granted citizenship or residency by these schemes and the amount invested through these schemes; appreciates the fact that somenotes that only a minority of Member States make explicit the name and nationalities of the individuals who are granted citizenship or residency under these schemes; calls on the Member States implementing these schemes to publish and share with other EU countries the names of all applicants, or at least the names of the politically exposed persons;
Amendment 653 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 90
Paragraph 90
90. Is concerned that according to the OECD, CBI and RBI schemes could be misused to undermine the common reporting standard (CRS) due diligence procedures, leading to inaccurate or incomplete reporting under the CRS, in particular when not all jurisdictions of tax residence are disclosed to the financial institution; notes that in the OECD’s view, the visa schemes which are potentially high-risk for the integrity of the CRS are those that give a taxpayer access to a low personal income tax rate of less than 10 % on offshore financial assets, and do not require a significant physical presence of at least 90 days in the jurisdiction offering the golden visa scheme; is concerned that Malta and Cyprus have schemes59 among those that potentially pose a high risk to the integrity of CRS; notes with concern that Member States that offer this kind of schemes and refuse at the same time to receive information from other non-EU Member States via CRS create a loophole in automatic exchange of information systems; _________________ 59 The Cypriot Citizenship by Investment: Scheme for Naturalisation of Investors by Exception, the Cypriot Residence by Investment, the Maltese Individual Investor Programme, and the Maltese Residence and Visa programme.
Amendment 659 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 91
Paragraph 91
91. Concludes that the potential economic benefits of CBI and RBI schemes do not offset the serious money laundering and tax evasion risks they present; calls on Member States to phase out allban existing CBI or RBI schemes as soon as possible; stresses that, in the meantime, Member States should properly ensure that enhanced CDD on applicants for citizenship or residence through these schemes is duly carried out, as required by AMLD5nd monitored by competent authorities; and urges the Commission to identify legislative instruments to set and impose EU – wide harmonised standards of these schemes; calls on Member States to ensure that competent authorities bear the ultimate responsibility for assessing due diligence findings and decision-making, and make explicit the name and the nationalities of the individuals who are granted citizenship or residency under these schemes; calls on the Commission to monitor rigorously and continuously the proper implementation and application of CDD within the framework of CBI and RBI schemes until they are repealed in each Member State and start infringement procedures;
Amendment 667 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 92
Paragraph 92
92. Calls on Member States to prevent conflicts of interest linked to CBI and RBI schemes, which might arise when private firms which assisted the government in the design, management and promotion of these schemes, also advised and supported individuals by screening them for suitability and filing their applications for citizenship or residence; calls on Member States to require physical presence in the country as a condition for benefiting from CBI and RBI schemes before the phase out;
Amendment 675 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 93
Paragraph 93
93. Urges the Commission to finalise its study on CBI and RBI schemes in the Union; urges the Commission to examine whether, and, if so, which of these schemes posed a threat to EU legislation; calls on the Commission to assess the risks associated with the selling of citizenship and residence as part of its next Supranational Risk Assessment; urges the Commission to also assess the risks associated with the adoption of visa- waiver agreements with third countries that have CBI or RBI schemes in place; calls on the Commission to expand the scope of obliged entities covered by AMLD5 to include all agents or firms acting as intermediaries in the trade of citizenship and residency or acting as advisors in residence and citizenship planning; calls on the Commission to establish mechanisms for coordinating information sharing between Member States on rejected applications; calls on the Commission to assess the extent to which these schemes have been used by EU citizens;
Amendment 686 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 95
Paragraph 95
95. Notes that free ports within the EU can be established under the ‘free zone’ procedure; notes that free zones are enclosed areas within the customs territory of the Union where non-Union goods can be introduced free of import duty, other charges (i.e. taxes) and commercial policy measures; highlights with concern that free ports can be also used for the purpose of tax evasion;
Amendment 694 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 97
Paragraph 97
97. Notes that, apart from secure storage, the motivations for the use of free ports include a high degree of secrecy and the deferral of import duties and indirect taxes such as VAT or user tax; recognizes that the purpose of free ports is not to constitute a place for the safe and tax-free storage of value for the wealth of individuals while it has been found that they are frequently used as such;
Amendment 697 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 99
Paragraph 99
99. Observes that under the Union Customs Code, customs warehouses are on an almost identical legal footing with free ports; recommends, therefore, they be put on an equal footing with free ports under legal measures aimed at mitigating money laundering and tax evasion risks therein, such as AMLD5; considers that warehouses should be equipped with the adequate staff to be able to undertake the necessary scrutiny of the operations that they host;
Amendment 700 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 101
Paragraph 101
101. Notes that under DAC5, as of 1 January 2018, direct tax authorities have ‘access upon request’ to a broad information set with regard to ultimate beneficial ownership (UBO) information collected under the AMLD; notes that EU AML legislation is built on the trust in reliable CDD research and the diligent reporting of suspicious transactions by obliged entities, which will become AML gatekeepers; notes with concern that ‘access upon request’ to information held by free ports may only have very limited effect in specific cases63 ; takes the view that direct tax offices should be able to fish into UBO data as part of their surveillance tasks; _________________ 63 EPRS study entitled ‘Money Laundering and tax evasion risks in free ports’, October 2018, PE: 627.114; ISBN: 978-92- 846-3333-3.
Amendment 710 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 102 a (new)
Paragraph 102 a (new)
102 a. Calls on the Commission to begin the process and propose concrete steps for the phasing out of the system of free ports in Europe;
Amendment 712 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 103
Paragraph 103
Amendment 715 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 103 a (new)
Paragraph 103 a (new)
103 a. Points out that tax amnesties represent a high risk of decreased tax compliance in the long run and a threat to the rule of law and the fight against money laundering;
Amendment 716 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 103 b (new)
Paragraph 103 b (new)
103 b. Calls on the Member States to refrain from further using tax amnesties as this measure only represents a source of quick tax collection in the short run while has a significantly negative impact on the overall tax systems;
Amendment 726 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 106 a (new)
Paragraph 106 a (new)
106 a. Call on Member States to do group requests and to harmonise the definition of tax crimes; call on the Commission to eliminate any obstacles in administrative and legal cooperation;
Amendment 727 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 106 b (new)
Paragraph 106 b (new)
106 b. Calls on the Commission to assess and presents proposals to close loopholes in the DAC2, particularly by including hard assets and cryptocurrencies in the scope of the directive, by prescribing sanctions for non-compliance or false reporting from financial institutions, as well as by including more types of financial institutions and types of accounts that are not being reported at the moment, such as pension funds;
Amendment 728 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 106 c (new)
Paragraph 106 c (new)
106 c. Considers that coordinated on-site inspections and joint audits should be part of the European framework of cooperation between tax administrations;
Amendment 737 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 108 a (new)
Paragraph 108 a (new)
108 a. Notes that, according to AMLD4, the Commission shall identify high risk third countries presenting strategic deficiencies in their regime on anti-money laundering and countering terrorist financing; welcomes in this regard the adoption by the Commission in June 2018 of the methodology for identifying high risk third countries; urges the Commission to publish first results as soon as possible, and acknowledges that, in the meantime, the Commission uses the list from the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), however excluding Serbia, which is on the FATF list;
Amendment 741 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 109
Paragraph 109
109. Deplores the fact that a large number of Member States have failed to fully or partially transpose AMLD4 into their domestic legislation within the set deadline, and that for this reason, infringement procedures have had to be opened by the Commission against them, including referrals before the Court of Justice of the European Union67 ; calls on these Member States to swiftly remedy this situation; reminds Member States of their legal obligation to respect the deadline of 10 January 2020 for the transposition of AMLD5 into their domestic legislation; and calls on the Commission to ensure that the AMLD5 is transposed fully in a timely manner or to consider using the legal tool of a regulation instead; _________________ 67 On 19 July 2018, the Commission referred Greece and Romania to the Court of Justice of the European Union for failing to transpose the fourth Anti-Money Laundering Directive into their national law. Ireland had transposed only a very limited part of the rules and was also referred to the Court of Justice. Moreover, on 8 November 2018, the Commission adopted a negative opinion on the Maltese Financial Intelligence Analysis Unit and required it to continue taking additional measures to fully comply with its obligations.
Amendment 746 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 110
Paragraph 110
110. Recalls the crucial importance of CDD as part of the know-your-customer (KYC) obligation which consists of obliged entities having to properly identify their customers and the source of their funds as well as the ultimate beneficial owners of the assets, including the immobilisation of anonymous accounts; notes that adequate resources within tax administrations are necessary for the effective implementation of this obligation;
Amendment 758 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 112
Paragraph 112
112. Recalls that KYC and CDD continues throughout the business relationship, and that customers’ transactions have to be monitored for suspicious or unusual activities; recalls, in this context, the obligation for obliged entities to promptly inform national FIUs, on their own initiative, of transactions suspected of ML, associate predicate offences or terrorist financing; is concerned that AMLD5 continues to allow for managing directors to be registered as beneficial owners while the real beneficial owner of a company or trust is not known; calls on the Commission to present a legislative proposal to end the practice of accepting the ultimate beneficial owners to hide behind straw men and to urge other jurisdictions at international level to do the same; calls on the Member States when transposing AMLD5 into national law to ensure that obliged entities terminate the business relationship with another company whose ultimate beneficial owners are not known;
Amendment 782 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 116 a (new)
Paragraph 116 a (new)
116 a. Is aware that the 500 euro note, the issuing of which has been abandoned by the ECB, continues to be used for money laundering and criminal activities; notes that some Member States are considering banning it; recalls that for such a measure to be effective the ban needs to be extended to all countries where the euro is accepted as a currency;
Amendment 791 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 117
Paragraph 117
117. Is aware that the current AML legal framework has so far consisted of directives and is based on minimum harmonisation, which has led to different national supervisory and enforcement practices in the Member States; calls on the Commission to assess, in the context of a future revision of the AML legislation, in the required impact assessment, whether a regulation would be a more appropriate legal act than a directive; calls, in this context, for a swift transformation into a regulation of the AML legislation if the impact assessment so advises; calls on the Commission to make, in the meantime, full use of the instruments at hand to enforce AML legislation in the Member States, starting with formal opinions and ending with infringement procedures or to consider the legal tool of a regulation instead;
Amendment 796 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 117 a (new)
Paragraph 117 a (new)
117 a. Deplores cases such as the Russian Laundromat, the Danske Banks case, the ABLV case and the Azerbaijan Laundromat that have demonstrated how hundreds of billions of euros of dirty Russian money connected to Russian ruling elites and oligarchs have been laundered via EU banks and offshore jurisdictions;
Amendment 799 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 117 b (new)
Paragraph 117 b (new)
117 b. Notes with concern that undetected flow of Russian money to Europe can create political, economic and security risks that have become clearly visible in cases such as the Salisbury attacks or the case of Cambridge Analytica and other interference in the democratic process in Europe;
Amendment 800 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 117 c (new)
Paragraph 117 c (new)
117 c. Calls on the Commission and the Council to ensure that the issues of money laundering and illicit financial flows are given an adequate degree of attention in EU sanction programmes in order to cut oligarchs off from their funds; calls for an EU wide Magnitsky Act to freeze assets of human rights violators; considers that it is time to end the free flow of money from Russia to EU banks; calls on the European Commission to explore the option of reversing the burden of proof so that Russian-origin money is considered suspect until proven otherwise;
Amendment 805 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 121
Paragraph 121
121. Concludes that the current level of coordination of anti-money laundering and combating the financing of terrorism (AML/CFT) supervision of financial institutions, particularly in AML/CFT situations with cross-border effects, is not sufficient to address current challenges in this sector and that the Union’s ability to enforce coordinated AML rules and practices is currently inadequate; acknowledges that smaller EU Member States have been targeted for money laundering as a result of their lack of capacity to police illegal flows adequately; calls therefore for a new centralised system at EU level for AML/CFT supervision, with proper resources; calls on the Commission to develop specialized trainings for FIUs, particularly with respect to capacities in smaller Member States;
Amendment 810 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 122
Paragraph 122
122. Calls for an assessment of long- term objectives leading to an enhanced AML/CFT framework as mentioned in the ‘Reflection Paper on possible elements of a Roadmap for seamless cooperation between Anti Money Laundering and Prudential Supervisors in the European Union’, such as the establishment at EU level of a mechanism to better coordinate the activities of AML/CFT supervisors of financial sector entities, notably in situations where AML/CFT concerns are likely to have cross-border effects, and a possible centralisation of AML supervision via an existing or new Union body empowered to enforce harmonised rules and practices in EU Member States;
Amendment 817 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 124
Paragraph 124
124. Stresses that ESAs, and in particular the EBA, should be provided with sufficient resource capacity to carry out their oversight functions and improve AML supervision; notes the recommendation to the Maltese FIAU of the EBA pointing to uncertainties in the current banking legislation preventing the EBA from taking further actions to effectively enforce the Union law and calls on Member States to swiftly transpose the recently adopted changes to the Capital Requirements Directive into national law;
Amendment 828 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 126
Paragraph 126
126. Recalls that pursuant to AMLD5 Member States are obliged to set up automated centralised mechanisms enabling swift identification of holders of bank and payment accounts, and to ensure that any FIU is able to provide information held in those centralised mechanisms to any other FIU in a timely manner; calls on the Member States to speed up the establishment of these mechanisms so that Member States’ FIUs are able to cooperate effectively with each other in order to detect and counteract money-laundering activities; recalls that EU FIUs are strongly encouraged to use the FIU.net system; highlights that information sharing between FIUs and Law Enforcement Agencies, including with Europol, should be improved;
Amendment 843 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 127
Paragraph 127
127. Highlights that in order to fight effectively against money laundering activities, cooperation is essential not only between Member States’ FIUs but also between Member States’ FIUs and the FIUs of third countries; calls on the Commission to engage actively with Member States to find mechanisms to improve and enhance the cooperation of Member States’ FIUs with the FIUs of third countries; calls on the Commission to take opportune action in this regard at the relevant international forums, such as the OECD and the Financial Action Task Force (FATF); considers that in any resulting agreement proper consideration should be given to the protection of personal data in accordance with Directive (EU) 2016/680;
Amendment 850 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 128
Paragraph 128
128. Points out that the non- standardisation of suspicious transaction report formats and non-standardisation of suspicious transaction report thresholds among Member States and with respect to the different obliged entities leads to difficulties in the processing and exchange of information between FIUs; calls on the Commission to explore mechanisms to set up standardised reporting formats for obliged entities in order to facilitate the exchange of information between FIUs in cases with a cross-border dimension; and to reflect on the standardisation of suspicious transaction thresholds
Amendment 857 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 129 a (new)
Paragraph 129 a (new)
129 a. Considers the established swift information exchange by the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) of the United States Department of the Treasury as a model for the EU and calls on the Commission to put forward a legislative proposal to set up a European Financial Intelligence Unit (EFIU) to facilitate coordination, including the exchange of information between FIUs within the Union; considers that this EFIU shall coordinate, assist and support Member Sates FIUs in cross-border cases, shall lend support to those Member States especially in maintaining and developing the technical infrastructure for ensuring the exchange of information, assisting them in joint analysis of cross-border cases and strategic analysis, and shall coordinate the work of Member States FIUs for cross-border cases; requires the Commission to provide the EFIU with adequate financial, human and technical resources in order to fulfil its tasks;
Amendment 865 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 130
Paragraph 130
130. Welcomes the fact that AMLD5 has broadened the list of obliged entities to include providers engaged in exchange services between virtual currencies and fiat currencies, custodian wallet providers, art traders and free ports; calls on the Commission to further broaden the list of obliged entities to include agents and service providers engaged in the trade of citizenship and residency or acting as advisors in residence and citizenship planning;
Amendment 875 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 133
Paragraph 133
133. Notes that the Union’s AML legislation obliges Member States to establish central registers containing complete beneficial ownership data for companies and trusts, and that it also provides for their interconnection; welcomes the fact that AMLD5 obliges Member States to ensure that the information on beneficial ownership of companies is accessible in all cases to any member of the general public; deplores that the information on beneficial ownership of trusts is, as a general rule, subject to legitimate interest and calls, therefore, on Member States to make use of the option in AMLD5 to grant open access also to information on trusts, and calls on the Commission to put forward a legislative proposal to amend AMLD5 to make open access to information of trusts compulsory; stresses that the interconnection of registers should be ensured by the Commission; considers that the Commission should closely monitor the functioning of this interconnected system and assess within a reasonable time whether it is working properly and whether it should be supplemented by the establishment of an EU public register of beneficial ownership;
Amendment 877 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 133
Paragraph 133
133. Notes that the Union’s AML legislation obliges Member States to establish central registers containing complete beneficial ownership data for companies and trusts, and that it also provides for their interconnection; welcomes the fact that AMLD5 obliges Member States to ensure that the information on beneficial ownership is accessible in all cases to any member of the general public; calls on Member States to establish freely accessible and open data registers; stresses that the interconnection of registers should be ensured by the Commission; calls on the Commission to develop and issue technical guidelines to facilitate convergence of format, interoperability and interconnection of Member States’ registers considers that the Commission should closely monitor the functioning of this interconnected system and assess within a reasonable time whether it is working properly and whether it should be supplemented by the establishment of an EU public register of beneficial ownership;
Amendment 883 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 133 a (new)
Paragraph 133 a (new)
133 a. Is concerned of the poor quality of the beneficial ownership information collected in the national registers and calls on the EBA to monitor the correctness of the information;
Amendment 889 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 136
Paragraph 136
136. Underscores the problem of money laundering through investment in real estate in European cities through foreign shell companies; recognises that these type of practices have serious externalities on house prices in local markets that negatively affect the access to affordable housing of the residents in those cities; recalls that the Commission should assess the necessity and proportionality of harmonising the information in the land and real estate registers and assess the need for the interconnection of those registers; calls on the Commission, if appropriate, to accompany the report with a legislative proposal; is concerned that money laundering is also done through life insurance contracts and financial instruments and is, therefore, of the opinion that beneficial ownership information on these assets should also be available to authorities; is of the opinion that also beneficial owner should be registered in real estate registers and not only mere legal owners possibly hiding the ultimate beneficial owner and calls on the Commission to put forward a legislative proposal to amend the AMLD5 in this regard;
Amendment 896 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 138
Paragraph 138
138. Underlines the positive potential of new distributed ledger technologies, such as blockchain technology; notes at the same time the increasing abuse of new payment and transfer methods based on these technologies to launder criminal proceeds, to evade taxes or to commit other financial crimes; acknowledges the need to monitor technological developments to ensure that legislation addresses in an effective manner the abuse of new technologies and anonymity, which facilitates criminal activity;
Amendment 903 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 138 a (new)
Paragraph 138 a (new)
138 a. Notes that because of the anonymity provided to users by virtual currencies, transactions cannot be monitored by authorities, increasing the risk of money laundering and tax evasion; stresses in this regard that virtual currencies can be used to circumvent the exchange of information system;
Amendment 905 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 138 b (new)
Paragraph 138 b (new)
138 b. Acknowledges that the decentralised aspect of virtual currencies and the lack of clear intermediaries complicates regulation activities; welcomes the fact that AMLD5 includes some virtual currencies’ actors; regrets however that some important actors are not covered by anti-money laundering rules, like cryptocurrency exchanges, trading platforms, or software or hardware wallets;
Amendment 906 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 138 c (new)
Paragraph 138 c (new)
138 c. Calls on the Commission to issue a proposal for a EU regulation of virtual currencies, including licensing requirements and uplifting anonymity;
Amendment 926 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 141
Paragraph 141
141. Recalls that EU AML legislation requires Member States to lay down sanctions for breaches of anti-money laundering rules; stresses that these sanctions must be effective, proportionate and dissuasive; recalls that EU AML legislation requires Member States to publish information and statistics on AML enforcement actions, and in particular that a decision imposing an administrative sanction or measure for breach of EU AML legislation shall be published by the competent authorities on their official website immediately after the person sanctioned is informed of that decision and that the publication shall include at least information on the type and nature of the breach and the identity of the persons responsible; urges Member States to also publish the nature and value of the sanctions imposed; calls on Member States to also apply sanctions and measures to the members of the management body and to other natural persons who under national law are responsible for a breach of anti-money laundering rules;
Amendment 935 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 145
Paragraph 145
145. Takes note of the Methodology for identifying high-risk third countries under Directive (EU) 2015/849 published on 22 June 2018 (SWD(2018)0362) and calls on the Commission to make the blacklisting process fully transparent to the public;
Amendment 947 #
2018/2121(INI)
147. Is worried about the accelerating corporate, dividend or capital gains tax race to the bottom worldwide in terms of nominal tax rate76 77 ; _________________ 76 The average corporate income tax rate across the OECD dropped from 32.5 % in 2000 to 23.9 % in 2018. Overall, 22 of the 38 countries surveyed in the latest tax policy reform 2018 report from the OECD now have combined statutory corporate income tax rates equal to or below 25 %, compared with only six in 2000. Source: OECD and Selected Partner Economies, Tax Policy Reforms 2018. 77 It is also worth noting that the EU 28 are already well below this level, with an average corporate income tax rate in 2018 of 21.9 %, down from 32 % in 2000, according to the Commission: Taxation Trends in the European Union - Data for the EU Member States, Iceland and Norward, 2018 Edition (page 36) and Taxation Trends in the European Union - Data for the EU Member States, Iceland and Norward, 2015 Edition (page 147).
Amendment 951 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 149
Paragraph 149
149. Calls on the Commission to conduct a mapping exercise to analyse the extent of reciprocity in the exchange of information between the US and Member States; calls on the Council to give a mandate to the Commission to negotiate an agreement with the US to ensure reciprocity in the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA); calls on the Commission and Council to consider sanctions, like withholding tax on payments of EU-source income or the introduction on the list of non-cooperative jurisdictions for tax purposes, if the US does not ensure reciprocity in the FATCA;
Amendment 960 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 150
Paragraph 150
150. Recalls the importance of a common EU list of non-cooperative jurisdictions for tax purposes (hereinafter ‘EU list’) based on comprehensive, transparent, robust, objectively verifiable and commonly accepted criteria that is regularly updated, accompanied by appropriate and dissuasive countermeasures;
Amendment 966 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 151
Paragraph 151
151. Welcomes the adoption by the Council of the first EU list on 5 December 2017 and the ongoing monitoring of the commitments made by third countries; is of the opinion that also EU countries should be included in the screening of non- cooperative jurisdictions for tax purposes; notes that the list has been updated several times on the basis of the assessment of those commitments; underlineregrets that this assessment is based on criteria deriving from a technical scoreboard and that Parliament had no legal involvement in this process; calls in this context on the Commission and the Council to inform Parliament in detail ahead of any proposed change to the list; calls on the Council to publish a regular progress report regarding black- and grey-listed jurisdictions as part of the regular update from the CoC Group to the Council;
Amendment 978 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 152
Paragraph 152
152. Deeply regrets the lack of transparency during the initial listing process; welcomes, however, the improvement in transparency made by the disclosure of letters sent to jurisdictions screened by the CoC Group, as well as the set of commitment letters received; calls for all remaining undisclosed letters to be made publicly available to ensure scrutiny and proper implementation of commitments; recommends to put countries that refuse to disclose their commitment letter on the blacklist;
Amendment 980 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 152 a (new)
Paragraph 152 a (new)
152 a. Recommends that the blacklisting process be made by a panel of independent experts rather than by the CoC group, so as to increase the objectivity and transparency of the EU list and to make it free from any political interference; believes that a more transparent and objective EU list will improve the credibility of the EU in its fight against tax havens;
Amendment 983 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 153
Paragraph 153
153. Welcomes the recent clarifications from the CoC Group on fair taxation criteria, especially regarding the lack of economic substance for jurisdictions having no corporate income tax rate or a rate close to 0 %; calls on the Member States to work towards the gradual improvement of the EU listing criteria to cover all harmful tax practices79 , including criteria like the advantages given to non- residents or the transparency of the tax ruling system; _________________ 79 Work on fair taxation criteria 2.1 and 2.2 of Council conclusions 14166/16 of 8 November 2016.
Amendment 996 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 154 b (new)
Paragraph 154 b (new)
154 b. Notes that the negotiations between the EU and Switzerland on the revision of the bilateral approach to reciprocal market access are still ongoing; calls on the Commission to ensure that the final agreement between the EU and Switzerland contains a tax good governance clause including specific rules on State aid under the form of a tax advantage, transparency requirements regarding the automatic exchange of information on taxation and beneficial ownership as well as anti-money laundering provisions;
Amendment 998 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 154 a (new)
Paragraph 154 a (new)
154 a. Is concerned that Austrian residents who hold bank accounts with credit institutions in Liechtenstein are not affected by the Act on Common Reporting Standards if their capital incomes are yielded from asset structures (private foundations, establishments, trusts and the like), and the credit institution in Liechtenstein takes care of the taxation in accordance with bilateral treaties; calls on Austria to change its law in this regard so as to close the loophole of the CRS;
Amendment 1009 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 155 a (new)
Paragraph 155 a (new)
155 a. Calls for the setting up of dissuasive and EU-wide harmonised sanctions for the blacklisted countries; recommends that the coordinated denunciation by Member States of bilateral tax treaties with those countries be considered as one of the last resort sanctions;
Amendment 1014 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 156 a (new)
Paragraph 156 a (new)
156 a. Notes that sanctions and countermeasures are essential to fight against money laundering, tax evasion and tax avoidance; notes in this regard that the economic weight of the European Union is a strength and can be a deterrent for tax havens and non-cooperative jurisdictions that would politically and economically suffer from such sanctions;
Amendment 1018 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 158
Paragraph 158
158. Reiterates its call for the EU to have a leading role in the global fight against tax evasion, aggressive tax planning and money laundering, in particular through Commission initiatives in all related international forums; considers that the EU should also lead by example, and calls on the Commission to ensure that those with a commercial or vested interest in promoting tax avoidance and tax evasion should not have a role in guiding or advising the EU's policy- making on these matters;
Amendment 1032 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 159 a (new)
Paragraph 159 a (new)
159 a. Calls on the Commission to take a leading role in the global debate and to urgently explore the ways for the pricing of digital assets; encourages the EU institutions to take the lead in the taxing of Tech Giants to speed up the work at OECD and UN levels; recalls, however, that the EU shall not wait for a global solution and shall immediately act;
Amendment 1033 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 159 b (new)
Paragraph 159 b (new)
159 b. Asks Member States to delegate to the Commission the power to renegotiate on their behalf the tax treaties with third countries, so as to integrate the new definition of a significant digital presence in a harmonised way once it is adopted at EU level; strongly believes it is essential in order to avoid creating any loopholes in the international tax environment;
Amendment 1037 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 160
Paragraph 160
160. Calls for a global summit on remaining necessarythe urgently needed fundamental global tax reforms in order to enhance tax revenue collection, ensure an equitable tax system, strengthen international cooperation and put pressure on all countries, in particular their financial centres, to comply with transparency and fair taxation standards; calls for the Commission to take the initiative for such a summit and for the summit to allow for the establishment of the abovementioned global tax body;
Amendment 1044 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 161
Paragraph 161
161. Believes that supporting developing countries in combating tax evasion and aggressive tax planning, as well as corruption and secrecy that facilitate illicit financial flows, is of the utmost importance for strengthening policy coherence for development in the EU and improving developing countries’ tax capacities and domestic resource mobilisationretain and mobilise their own resources for sustainable economic development;
Amendment 1050 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 161 a (new)
Paragraph 161 a (new)
161 a. Notes that the intensity of losses due to tax avoidance is substantially greater in low and middle-income countries, especially in sub-Saharan Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean, and in South Asia compared to other regions1; notes furthermore that bilateral tax treaties signed by developing countries with developed countries negatively impact their tax revenues2; ____________________ [1] Cobham, A and Petr Janský (2017) Global Distribution of Revenue Loss from Tax Avoidance https://www.wider.unu.edu/sites/default/fil es/wp2017-55.pdf [2] http://www.actionaid.org/publications/imp act-tax-treaties-revenue-collection-case- study-developing-and-least-developed
Amendment 1060 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 164
Paragraph 164
164. Welcomes the participation on an equal footing of all countries involved in the Inclusive Framework, which brings together over 115 countries and jurisdictions to collaborate on the implementation of the OECD/G20 BEPS Package; calls on the Member States to support a reform of both the mandate and functioning of the Inclusive Framework to ensure that developing countries’ interests are taken into consideration; recalls the exclusion of over 100 developing countries in negotiating the BEPS actions; recalls calls from the Group of 77 (G77) and developing countries for global reform and decision-making to take place within a global tax body under the auspices of the UN;
Amendment 1062 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 165
Paragraph 165
165. Recalls that public development aid should be directed to a greater extent towards the implementation of an appropriate regulatory framework and the bolstering of tax administrations and institutions responsible for fighting illicit financial flows; calls for this aid to be provided in the form of technical expertise in relation to resource management, financial information and anti-corruption rules; calls for this aid to also favour regional cooperation against tax fraud, tax evasion, aggressive tax planning and money laundering; stresses that this aid should include support to civil society and media in developing countries to ensure public scrutiny over domestic tax policies;
Amendment 1064 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 166
Paragraph 166
166. Expects the Commission to come up with adequate resources to implement the ‘Collect More – Spend Better’ approach, notably through its flagships programmes81 ; calls on the Commission to further develop the element of fairness of tax systems under the ‘Collect more’ pillar, focusing on progressive taxation in order to distribute tax contributions fairly and bridge economic and gender inequalities; _________________ 81 European Commission discussion paper: A Contribution to the Third Financing for Development Conference in Addis Ababa.
Amendment 1068 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 167
Paragraph 167
167. Recalls the need for fair treatment of developing countries when negotiating tax treaties, taking into account their particular situation and ensuring a fair allocation of tax rights according to genuine economic activity and value creation; calls, in this regard, for adherence to the UN model tax convention to be used as a minimum standard and for transparency around treaty negotiations to be ensured; acknowledges that the OECD model tax treaty grants more rights to the country of residence, favouring European and North-American multinational companies; calls on EU Member States to consider as well the Model Double Taxation Agreement developed by the African Tax Administration Forum (ATAF);
Amendment 1070 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 167 a (new)
Paragraph 167 a (new)
167 a. Calls on Member States to undertake spillover analyses when negotiating tax treaties with developing countries and when adopting its tax policies; urges the Commission to consider spillover effects of EU tax regulations, in line with the Policy Coherence for Development and produce an impact assessments of European tax policies on developing countries, in order to take better into account negative spillovers on developing countries and the special needs of those countries;
Amendment 1073 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 167 b (new)
Paragraph 167 b (new)
167 b. Notes the particular importance of transparency, including through public CBCR and public registers of beneficial owners, given the limited capacity of developing countries to meet requirements through existing exchange of information procedures; calls on the EU and its Member States to enforce the principle that listed or unlisted multinational companies of all countries and sectors, and especially those companies extracting natural resources, must adopt CBCR as a standard, requiring them to publish, as part of their annual reporting and on a country-by-country basis for each territory in which they operate, the names of all subsidiaries and their respective financial performance, relevant tax information, assets and number of employees, and to ensure that this information is made publicly available, while minimising administrative burdens by excluding micro-enterprises; calls on the European Union and its Member States to ensure that, when negotiating tax and investment treaties with developing countries, income or profits resulting from cross-border activities should be taxed in the source country where value is extracted or created;
Amendment 1088 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 170 a (new)
Paragraph 170 a (new)
170 a. Recalls the article 79 of the Political Declaration Setting Out The Framework For The Future Relationship Between the European Union and The United Kingdom and insists that the future relationship must ensure open and fair competition and that provisions to ensure this should cover State Aid, competition, social and employment standards, environmental standards, climate change, and relevant tax matters, building on the level playing field arrangements provided for in Withdrawal Agreement and commensurate with the overall economic relations;
Amendment 1094 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 170 b (new)
Paragraph 170 b (new)
170 b. Notes with concerns the fact the United Kingdom was ranked 2nd biggest conduit for tax havens after The Netherlands1, and ranked 23rd on the 2018 Financial Secrecy Index, accounting for 17% of the global market in off shorefinancial services; deplores the fact the UK remains in the centre of a largenetwork of British secrecy jurisdictions, notably the Crown Dependencies Jersey, Guernsey and the Isle of Man and to Overseas Territories including tax havens such as Cayman Islands, British Virgin Islands or Bermuda; underlines that the Cayman Islands ranked on the 3rd place, Guernsey on the 10th place, British Virgin Islands on 16th and Jersey on 18th place of the respective index; ________________ [1] Offshore Financial Centers and the five largest value conduits in the world, July 2017, University of Amsterdam. http://corpnet.uva.nl/ofcs/
Amendment 1095 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 170 c (new)
Paragraph 170 c (new)
170 c. Notes that 90 % of the biggest global companies have a presence in a UK tax haven; states that the very light regulation in the past in the area of tax and money laundering encouraged criminal around the globe to use the UK and the City of London for their illegal activities; underlined that according to the National Crime Agency GBP 90 billion – about 4% of UK’s GDP – is laundered into the UK annually, large number coming from Russia;
Amendment 1096 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 170 d (new)
Paragraph 170 d (new)
170 d. Demands that the future deal must include a tax good governance clause and that the UK abides by exiting and ongoing EU tax legislation in return to any access to Single Market for those offering financial, legal or accountancy services;
Amendment 1098 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 170 e (new)
Paragraph 170 e (new)
170 e. Notes that Brexit will create a divergence of policies against financial crimes, tax evasion and tax avoidance between the EU and the United Kingdom, which will constitute new economic, fiscal and security risks; stresses the urgency to approve the necessary reforms in these areas and the need to reassess the financial agreements with the UK that will become a third country vis-à-vis the EU in the event of Brexit, both regarding London as a global financial center as well as its Overseas territories;
Amendment 1099 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 170 f (new)
Paragraph 170 f (new)
170 f. Calls on the Council to promptly assess the situation of Gibraltar once the Brexit is effective to include the territory in the EU list of non-cooperative jurisdictions as it is obviously non- compliant with the Council’s criteria;
Amendment 1114 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 172 a (new)
Paragraph 172 a (new)
172 a. Notes that double taxation treaties between Member States and developing countries do not usually promote source taxation, therefore benefiting multinational corporations at the expense of mobilisation of domestic resources by developing countries; notes that the lack of domestic resource mobilisation prevents fully financed public services such as healthcare or education in these countries, which disproportionately impacts women and girls; urges the Member States to mandate the Commission to review existing double taxation treaties so as to examine and address these problems, and to ensure that future double taxation treaties include gender equality provisions in addition to general anti-abuse provisions;
Amendment 1128 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 177 a (new)
Paragraph 177 a (new)
177 a. Reiterates the need for enhanced cooperation between tax administrations and financial supervisors for a joint and effective surveillance of the role of financial intermediaries and in the light that some tax-driven financial instruments may pose a risk to financial market stability and market integrity;
Amendment 1131 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 177
Paragraph 177
177. Welcomes the broad definition of both ‘intermediary’ and ‘reportable cross- border arrangement’ in the recently adopted DAC683 ; calls on all Member States to deliberately apply the EU reporting obligation also to purely domestic cases; _________________ 83 OJ L 139, 5.6.2018, p. 1.
Amendment 1146 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 178 a (new)
Paragraph 178 a (new)
178 a. Recognizes that the divergent interests between the commercial interests of the tax avoidance industry and the public mandate of the EU to minimise tax avoidance can clash in situations where conflicts of interest arise, such as public procurement contracts that require the provision of paid advice, the provision of informal or unpaid advice via official advisory and expert groups, and via revolving doors;
Amendment 1151 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 178 b (new)
Paragraph 178 b (new)
178 b. Calls on the Commission and Member States to ensure that those with a commercial or vested interests in promoting tax avoidance and tax evasion, such as big accountancy firms like Deloitte, PWC, EY and KPMG, do not have an advising role in policies to fight tax avoidance and evasion; for instance, restricting their membership in advisory and expert groups, not commissioning tax-related studies and impact assessments to these actors, regulating revolving doors, and implementing full lobby transparency rules;
Amendment 1154 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 178 c (new)
Paragraph 178 c (new)
178 c. Stresses the role played by intermediaries as facilitators and beneficiaries of ATP schemes and deplores that such intermediaries develop bespoke schemes for customers in a way that undermines the cohesion of society and operate with a business model that runs counter to the social contract;
Amendment 1156 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 179
Paragraph 179
179. Reiterates that financial institutions, advisors and other intermediaries that knowingly, systematically and repeatedly facilitate, engage or participate in money laundering or tax evasion activities should face effective, proportional and dissuasive penalties, their licences to operate should undergo serious revision and, where applicable, be prestricvented from operating in the single marketSingle Market; re-iterates its request that self-regulating professions such as lawyers and auditors should be subject to an independent oversight and calls on the Commission to put forward a proposal to amend AMLD5 in this regard;
Amendment 1171 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 181
Paragraph 181
181. Worries that whistle-blowers are often discouraged from reporting their concerns for fear of retaliation; considers that the recognition in AMLD5 of the right of whistle-blowers to present a complaint in a safe manner to the respective competent authorities when exposed to a threat or retaliation and of their right to an effective remedy constitutes a significant improvement of the situation of individuals reporting suspicions of money laundering or terrorist financing internally within the company or to a FIU; calls on Member States to implement fully-fledged whistleblower protection when transposing the AMLD5 into national law;
Amendment 1178 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 182 a (new)
Paragraph 182 a (new)
182 a. Welcomes the European Commission’s April 2018 publication of a horizontal proposal on whistleblower protection; regrets that EU staff members were not incorporated in the scope; recognizes that EU staff members are not currently afforded the same level of protections as in the proposal; urges all EU institutions, agencies, and bodies to immediately address this situation by adapting their internal rules in line with international best practices for the protection of whistleblowers;
Amendment 1188 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 185
Paragraph 185
185. Strongly condemns acts of violence against journalists; recalls with dismay that in recent years journalists involved in the investigation of dubious activities with a money laundering component have been murdered in Malta and Slovakia85 ; underlines that according to the Council of Europe, abuses and crimes committed against journalists have a deeply chilling effect on freedom of expression and amplify the phenomenon of self- censorship; _________________ 85 Daphne Caruana Galizia, killed in Malta on 16.10.2017; Ján Kuciak, killed together with his partner Martina Kušnírová, in Slovakia on 21.2.2018.
Amendment 1193 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 186
Paragraph 186
186. Urges theCalls on Maltese authorities to deploy all available resources to make progress in identifying the instigator of the murder of Daphne Caruana Galizia;
Amendment 1197 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 187 a (new)
Paragraph 187 a (new)
187 a. Calls on Slovak authorities to fully investigate cases of large-scale tax evasion schemes, VAT frauds and money laundering cases brought to light by Jan Kuciak´s investigations;
Amendment 1199 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 187 b (new)
Paragraph 187 b (new)
187 b. Calls on the Commission and Bulgaria to ensure the protection of Bulgarian investigative journalists in the context of the scandal revealed by Bivol, related to the use of shell companies to misuse EU funds in the country;
Amendment 1201 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 188
Paragraph 188
188. Deplores the fact that investigative journalists are often victims of abusive lawsuits intended to censor, intimidate and silence them by burdening them with the costs of legal defence until they are forced to abandon their criticism or opposition; recalls that these abusive lawsuits constitute a threat to fundamental democratic rights, such as to freedom of expression, freedom of the press and freedom to disseminate and receive information; calls on the Commission and Member States to put in place mechanismslegislative and non- legislative proposals to protect journalists and to prevent strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPP); considers that these mechanisms should take duly into consideration the right to a good name and reputation; calls on the Commission to assess the possibility of taking legislative action in this area;
Amendment 1208 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 188 a (new)
Paragraph 188 a (new)
188 a. Calls on the European Commission to set up a financial support scheme for investigative journalism as soon as possible, including a permanent and dedicated budget line for the support of independent, quality media and investigative journalism in the post-2020 MFF;
Amendment 1210 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 188 b (new)
Paragraph 188 b (new)
188 b. Regrets that the Bulgarian Presidency of the Council of the EU refused to participate in a TAX3 committee hearing, failing to comply with the principle of sincere cooperation enshrined in the artcilec 4 of the TEU;
Amendment 1213 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 189
Paragraph 189
189. Welcomes the work done by the Platform for Tax Good Governance; notes that the mandate of the Platform applies until 16 June 2019; calls for it to be extended or renewed to ensure that civil society concerns and expertise are heard by Member States and the Commission, but considers that intermediaries with a commercial interest in tax avoidance should no longer be members; encourages the Commission to broaden the scope of the experts invited to the Expert Group on Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing (EGMLTF) to include experts from the private sector (business and NGOs) so long as they do not have a commercial interest in these issues;
Amendment 1222 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 192 a (new)
Paragraph 192 a (new)
192 a. Deplores that the Council failed to cooperate with the TAX3 Committee by not allowing the access to its documents or by doing so with a significant delay, and thus failed to comply with principle of sincere cooperation and breach of article 4 of TEU; deplores that the Bulgarian Presidency repeatedly refused to come to speak to the Committee about matters concerning the tax agenda;
Amendment 1223 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 193
Paragraph 193
193. Notes the increased communication from the CoC Group and welcomes in particular the biannual publication of its report to the Council, as well as the letters sent to jurisdictions and commitments received in the context of the EU listing process of the EU tax blacklist;
Amendment 1227 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 196 a (new)
Paragraph 196 a (new)
196 a. Calls on the CoC Group to take further measures to ensure transparency of its meetings particularly recording and publishing minutes of meetings including the positions of the different Member States on the discussed agenda;
Amendment 1229 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 197
Paragraph 197
197. Believes that the mandate of the CoC Group needs to be updated, since it addresses matters beyond the assessment of harmful EU tax practices, which is more than simply providing technical input to the decisions made by the Council; calls on the extension of the scope of the CoC Group, to enable it to deal with personal taxation issues, including CBI/RBI schemes, special schemes provided by Member States, and amnesties; calls, based on the nature of the work undertaken by the Group which is also of a political nature, for such tasks to be brought back under a framework which enables democratic control or supervision, starting by applying transparency; urges the CoC Group to apply transparency principles to its decision-making process, publishing not only the final position of the Group but also the positions of its members;
Amendment 1238 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 201
Paragraph 201
201. Takes note of the persons who refused to participate in TAX3 committee hearings as referred to in Annex XX; requests to deny non-cooperative parties the access to the European Parliament and calls on the Council and the Commission to do the same;
Amendment 1275 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 206
Paragraph 206
206. Stresses that all scenarios should be envisaged and not only shifting from unanimity to qualified majority voting through a passerelle clause, since the latter clause also requires unanimity in the Council to be triggered; calls on the Commission to issue its proposal before the end of its current mandate, early 2019;
Amendment 1283 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 208
Paragraph 208
208. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the European Council, the Council, the Commission, the ESAs, EPPO, the ECB, Moneyval, the Member States, the national parliaments, the UN, the G20, the FATF and the OECD.
Amendment 8 #
2018/2114(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
E a. whereas Article 8 TFEU establishes the principle of gender mainstreaming by stating that ‘In all its activities, the Union shall aim to eliminate inequalities, and to promote equality, between men and women’;
Amendment 9 #
2018/2114(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that mechanisms to ensure the accountability of agencies are incorporated in the Treaties, in the founding regulations of agencies, in the case-law of the European Court of Justice, as well as in the Joint Statement and the Common Approach; points, in particular, at the important role of regulations in order to provide the European Parliament with binding mechanisms to scrutinise decentralised agencies and at the non- binding nature of the Joint Statement and the Common Approach;
Amendment 10 #
2018/2114(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Denounces the provisions in the Joint Statement and the Common Approach regarding the location and relocation of agencies and bodies in view of Parliament’s prerogatives as co- legislator under the ordinary legislative procedure;
Amendment 18 #
2018/2114(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls therefore for a thorough assessment of the implementation ofreview of the the Common Approach in all its aspects, including regarding the compatibility of the measures included with the European Parliament co-decision powers and with detailed analytical papers similar to those produced in 2010;
Amendment 19 #
2018/2114(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Proposes that, giveon the pbassage of timeis of a review of the Common Approach, fresh consideration should be given to drawing up an Interinstitutional Agreement on agencies and that such agreement should contain provisions on a five-yearly review of the principles governing the establishment and functioning of agencies, and of the relationship between an agency and the institutions of with a special focus on transparency measures, procedures to avoid conflict of interest and ensure gender balance among the Mmember State in which it is located, drawing upon the expertise of a group of eminent persons of the governing and advisory bodies, and the implementation of gender mainstreaming in all the activities of the agencies;
Amendment 20 #
2018/2114(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Stresses that an Interninstitutional Agreement on agencies should provide a general framework on the principles governing the establishment and functioning of the agencies that should respect the European Parliament powers in co-decision procedures, in particular in the adoption of the founding regulations of agencies;
Amendment 23 #
2018/2114(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Proposes in that context also thatthat, in the framework of the five-yearly review and in addition to the work done by the European Parliament committees on the scrutiny of the agencies falling in their area of competencies, Parliament holds an annual debate on the functioning and governance of agencies, preceded by a debate in the Committee on Constitutional Affairs;
Amendment 7 #
2018/2096(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the European Parliament works with a high degree of transparency at all stages of the legislative procedure, including the committee stage, making it possible for citizens, the media and stakeholders to clearly identify different positions within Parliament and the origin of specific proposals, as well as to follow the processes leading to compromises and the adoption of final decisions;
Amendment 25 #
2018/2096(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Shares the view of the Ombudsman that ensuring that citizens are able to follow the progress of legislation is a legal requirement under the Treaties and a basic democratic requirement;
Amendment 31 #
2018/2096(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Emphasises that transparency at all stages of the legislative process is essential to enable citizens, media, and stakeholders to hold their elected representatives and governments accountable, to guarantee citizens participation right, as enshrined in Article 10 (3) TEU, and to ensure the fundamental right to freedom of information, as enshrined in Article 11 of the Charter;
Amendment 35 #
2018/2096(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Believes that a high degree of transparency acts as a safeguard against the emergencespread of speculation, fake news and conspiracy theories;
Amendment 40 #
2018/2096(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Recalls that the European Parliament represents the interests of European citizens in a fullyn open and transparent manner, and welcomes the substantial progress made by the Commission in improving its transparency standards, inter alia in the conduct of international negotiations and its interactions with interest representatives; noteregrets that the Council does not yet follow comparable transparency standards;
Amendment 44 #
2018/2096(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Points out that the work of the preparatory bodies of the Council, i.e. the Committees of Permanent Representatives (Coreper I + II) and, more than 150 working groups, informal bodies like the Financial Services Committee, the Eurozone Working-group or preparatory bodies like the Economic and Financial Committee, is an integral part of the Council’s decision-making procedure and play a key role in the legislative process;
Amendment 55 #
2018/2096(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Notes that the Council does not proactively publish most documents related to legislative files, and that available information is presented in a register which is incomplete and not user-friendly; welcomes in this regard the progress made by the Commission, Parliament and the Council in the creation of a joint database for legislative files; calls on all the European Institutions involved in the creation of this joint database to publish a detailed template;
Amendment 59 #
2018/2096(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Considers the Council’s practice of systematically classifying documents distributed in its preparatory bodies relating to legislative files as ‘LIMITE’ to be a violation of CJEU case law1 and of the legal requirement that there should be the widest possible public access to legislative documents; Reminds that the “LIMITE” marking has no legal basis and is not part of the possible classification under regulation 1049/2001 nor under the Council Decision of 23 September 2013 on the security rules for protecting EU classified information, while its use by the Council has a detrimental effect on the right of public access to documents; __________________ 1. For the principle of the widest possible public access, see: Joint Cases C-39/05 P and C-52/05 P Sweden and Turco v. Council [2008] ECLI:EU:C:2008:374, para 34; Case C-280/11 P Council v. Access Info Europe [2013] ECLI:EU:C:2013:671, para 27; and Case T-540/15 De Capitani v. Parliament [2018] ECLI:EU:T:2018:167, para 80
Amendment 62 #
2018/2096(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Deplores the fact that following the judgement of the Court of Justice in Access Info in 2013, COREPER decided that as a rule, the drafter of the document should record Member States´ names in documents relating to on-going legislative procedures “where appropriate”; Deems it unacceptable that the positions taken in the preparatory bodies of the Council by individual Member States are neither published nor systematically recorded, making it impossible for citizens, media and stakeholders to effectively scrutinise the behaviour of their elected governments;
Amendment 68 #
2018/2096(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Points out that this lack of information also hampers the ability of national parliaments to control the actions of national governments in the Council, and enables members of national governments to distance themselves in the national sphere from decisions made at the European level which they shaped and took themselves; considers it irresponsible on the part of members of national governments to undermine trust in the European Union by ‘blaming Brussels’ for decisions they themselves were involved in; demands an immediate end to this practice and a systematic public debriefing during legislative negotiations;
Amendment 70 #
2018/2096(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Considers that a closer cooperation between national parliaments and the European Parliament can help to close gaps in accountability of national ministers and heads of state and government for their legislative activities in the Council;
Amendment 71 #
2018/2096(INI)
11b. Commits itself to propose, in line with Article 9 of Protocol No. 1 of the Treaty on the role of national parliaments of the EU and Rule 142 of its Rules of Procedure, to national parliaments to exchange any documents one parliament might have access to that are of interest for other parliaments as well, if necessary with precautions regarding the classification status of such documents; propose to provide for necessary infrastructure for such exchange if enough national parliaments reply positively to the European Parliament’s invitation;
Amendment 72 #
2018/2096(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 c (new)
Paragraph 11 c (new)
11c. Calls on the Commission to grant access to the Parliament to the so-called “flash reports” produced by Commission representatives attending meetings of the Council;
Amendment 75 #
2018/2096(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Considers it incompatible with democratic principles that, in interinstitutional negotiations between the co-legislators, the lack of transparency in the Council leads to an imbalance with regard to available information and thus to a structural advantage of the Council over the European Parliament; reiterates its call for the improvement of the exchange of documents and information between Parliament and the Council and for access to be granted to representatives of Parliament as observers to meetings of the Council and its bodies, in particular in the case of legislation in a way equivalent to which the Parliament grants access to the Council to its meetings;
Amendment 79 #
2018/2096(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Demands that the Council, as one of the two components of the European legislature, aligns its working methods with the standards of a parliamentary democracy and participatory democracy as required under the Treaty, rather than acting like a diplomatic forum;
Amendment 88 #
2018/2096(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 – point b
Paragraph 16 – point b
(b) to develop clear and publicly available criteria for how it designates documents as ‘LIMITE’, in line with EU lawreform its internal guidelines on ‘LIMITE’ documents, which have no solid legal basis and which are incompatible with the transparency required under the TEU so that they respect the principle according to which LIMITE status can only be given to a preliminary draft that does not have an author yet and that does not produce any effect in the legislative procedure;
Amendment 91 #
2018/2096(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. Deplores the Council’s practice of encoding some documents as “WK” (working document), DS (document de séance) and MD (meeting document) even during legislative procedures, and using this system not to register those documents; reminds that, according to Articles 11 and 12 of Regulation 1049/2001 the registration of a document is mandatory;
Amendment 92 #
2018/2096(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 b (new)
Paragraph 16 b (new)
16b. Considers that references to professional secrecy cannot be used to systematically retain documents from being registered and disclosed;
Amendment 93 #
2018/2096(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 c (new)
Paragraph 16 c (new)
16c. Highlights that since the 2007 Joint Declaration on practical arrangements for the codecision procedure, the General Court and the CJEU have adopted several judgments classifying the right of access to documents as described by Article 42 of the Charter, article 15 TFEU and Regulation 1049/01 as an expression of participative democracy in the EU;
Amendment 94 #
2018/2096(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 d (new)
Paragraph 16 d (new)
16d. Reminds that according to the CJEU (case C-57/16P) the Commission’s impact assessments should be considered legislative documents and should be directly accessible and considers that the same principle applies to impact assessments prepared by the co-legislator during the legislative procedure;
Amendment 95 #
2018/2096(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 e (new)
Paragraph 16 e (new)
16e. Reminds that according to the CJEU (T-540/15), trilogue tables form part of the legislative process and shall therefore be directly accessible to the public, unless there is a reasonably foreseeable – and not purely hypothetical – likelihood of the protected interest being undermined and highlights that under Regulation 1049/2001 the decision- making process must risk be seriously undermined (Case T-211/00); Reminds that this also applies to documents containing opinions for internal use as part of deliberations and preliminary consultations;
Amendment 96 #
2018/2096(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 f (new)
Paragraph 16 f (new)
16f. Considers that the Parliament, regardless of the positions taken by the other Institutions, shall apply the provisions of Article 12 of Regulation 1049/2001 to all trilogues documents;
Amendment 97 #
2018/2096(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 g (new)
Paragraph 16 g (new)
16g. Is of the opinion that the practice of first reading agreements, that has become the common practice to adopt European legislation, should be better legally framed in order to make it comply with transparency and accountability requirements;
Amendment 98 #
2018/2096(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 h (new)
Paragraph 16 h (new)
16h. Suggests, for this purpose, to review the current joint declaration on practical arrangements for the codecision procedure, which was agreed before the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, and the Better Law Making inter-institutional agreement with a view to formalising the first reading agreements;
Amendment 99 #
2018/2096(INI)
16i. Is of the opinion that such a revision should ensure that first reading agreements comply with some minimum requirements such as: – The definition of a common public inter-institutional calendar – A general rule according to which negotiations should only start after the adoption of mandates for negotiations, accessible to the public both in the Parliament and in the Council; – The proactive publication of the relevant documents on the register of the Parliament and of the Council not later than 10 days after the Trilogue meeting ; This documents should include agendas, participant lists, negotiating positions and proposals for compromises before the meetings, detailed minutes of meetings or updated four column documents after the meetings;
Amendment 100 #
2018/2096(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 j (new)
Paragraph 16 j (new)
16j. Takes note of some national laws obliging government to send documents, including internal documents on legislative considerations internally, to national archives after a number of years where they are made accessible to the public; takes note that some Member States had to discount on rules regarding the public access to documents to adapt to internal rules of Council; calls on Member States to implement these laws in the best interest of citizens’ access to documents; reminds of its own rules to send all Parliament documents to the EU archive after the end of the next term; calls on Council to adopt a similar rule to publish Council documents after two Commission terms; calls on Council to compare national rules and to align national disclosure rules according to the best practise in the interest of citizens’ access to documents;
Amendment 14 #
2018/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Underlines the risks pertaining to a growing mixed traffic among traditional and autonomous driving vehicles, thus calling for more on site tests in order to support future-proof Research & Development for public and private enterprises and bodies, but also to provide concrete data helping to duly adapt the civil liability rules.
Amendment 27 #
2018/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Welcomes the Commission proposals to regulate the protection of vehicles against cyber-attacks and to equip autonomous cars with data recorders to help determine the cause of accidents; calls on the Commission to further clarify rules on the protection and sharing of the data collected by those vehicles, including data that indirectly identify persons, and access to such data, while fully respecting the GDPR rules and enabling interoperability between systems; considers that the owners of autonomous vehicles should have access to the data recording their driving behaviours, in accordance with the GDPR but also for the purpose of their right of defence when their liability is engaged.
Amendment 29 #
2018/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Highlights that the issue of setting standards and granting interoperability is key for future competition in the field of autonomous driving vehicles manufacturing; recommends the creation of independent trusted entities to retain the means necessary to provide services to the users of autonomous driving vehicles, such as maintenance and repairs, including software updates fixing malfunctions, vulnerabilities and security loopholes, especially in the case where such maintenance is no longer carried out by the original supplier; suggests creating an obligation for manufacturers to supply these independent trusted entities with comprehensive design instructions including source code, similar to the legal deposit of publications to a national library;
Amendment 31 #
2018/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
Amendment 34 #
2018/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Notes that data generated during autonomous transport are automatically generated and are by nature not creative, thus making copyright protection or the right on databases inapplicable.
Amendment 12 #
2018/2009(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas this non-binding exercise has the merits of identifying both positive and negative trends and of offering a forum for peer learning and exchange of best practices across the Union;
Amendment 15 #
2018/2009(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas giving information about the justice system in a user-friendly manner is a pre-requisite to access to justice;
Amendment 55 #
2018/2009(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Notes that in specific areas of EU law, such as copyright and privacy legislation, the correct and efficient application of the legislation may need understanding of not just the law but also of technological developments; therefore underlines that continuous and systematic training of judges and other legal experts is needed to ensure a coherent and high quality application and efficient enforcement of EU law;
Amendment 59 #
2018/2009(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 b (new)
Paragraph 9 b (new)
9b. Notes that the specialisation of judges and courts seem to have positive effect on efficiency as well as quality of the justice system; asks the Commission to examine this further in next year's exercise;
Amendment 64 #
2018/2009(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Agrees that availability of online information in a user-friendly manner contributes significantly to the accessibility of justice for citizens and businesses; calls on Member States to systematically publish judgments rendered, in particular in Intellectual Property Right cases, to enable and facilitate peer learning and legal and other research and to contribute to the coherent application of EU law;
Amendment 2 #
2018/0805(CNS)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Recalls its proposal, attached to its resolution on the reform of the electoral law of the European Union, for the European Parliament to have the power, after consulting the Council, to determine the electoral period;
Amendment 12 #
2018/0332(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) IAgainst the background of several petitions and numerous initiatives from citizens, parliamentary questions and a public hearing on the matter, the European Parliament, in its resolution of 8 February 2018, the European Parliament called on the Commission to conduct an assessment of the summer-time arrangements provided by Directive 2000/84/EC and, if necessary, to come up with a proposal for its revision. That resolution also confirmed that it is essential to maintain a harmonised approach to time arrangements throughout the Union.
Amendment 13 #
2018/0332(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) The Commission has examined available evidence, which points to the importance of having harmonised Union rules in this area to ensure the proper functioning of the internal market and avoid, inter alia, disruptions to the scheduling of transport operations and the functioning of information and communication systems, higher costs to cross-border trade, or lower productivity for goods and services. Evidence is not conclusive as to whether the benefits of summer-time arrangements outweigh the inconveniences linked to athat there are no significant benefits from the biannual change of time, although numerous scientific studies, including the European Parliamentary Research Service study of October 2017 on EU summer-time arrangements under Directive 2000/84/EC, have indicated the existence of negative effects on human health. From an economic perspective, bi- annual change of time. implies additional costs and administrative burdens for many sectors.
Amendment 20 #
2018/0332(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) A lively public debate is taking place on summer-time arrangements andpublic consultation on summer- time arrangements held by the Commission in July-August 2018 received 4.6 million responses, which is the largest number ever received in any Commission consultation, indicated that it is the citizens preference to stop bi-annual clock changes. Also, some Member States have already expressed their preference to discontinue the application of such arrangements. In the light of these developments, it is necessary to continue safeguarding the proper functioning of the internal market and to avoid any significant disruptions thereto caused by divergences between Member States in this area. Therefore, it is appropriate to put an end in a coordinated way to summer-time arrangements.
Amendment 32 #
2018/0332(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) This Directive should not prejudice the right of each Member State to decide on the standard time or times for the territories under its jurisdiction and falling under the territorial scope of the Treaties, and on further changes thereto. However, in order to ensure that the application of summer-time arrangements by some Member States only does noavoid any significant disruptions of the functioning of the internal market, Member States should refrain from changing the standard time in any given territory under their jurisdiction for reasons related to seasonal changes, be such change presented as a change of time zone. Moreover, in order to minimise disruptions, inter alia, to transport, communications and other concerned sectors, they should notify the Commission in due time of theirMember States that intentiond to change their standard time and subsequently apply the notified changes. The Commission should, on the basis of that notification, inform all other Member States so that they can take all necessary measures. Itshould notify the Commission and the other Member States in due time of their intention to allow for coordination. The Commission should also inform the general public and stakeholders by publishing this information. It should also assess the impact on the functioning of the internal market of the envisaged changes of standard time.
Amendment 34 #
2018/0332(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5 a (new)
Recital 5 a (new)
(5a) For the purpose of ensuring a harmonised implementation of this directive, Member States should coordinate in advance their decision on the envisaged standard times via the establishment of a coordination mechanism, in order to avoid that Member States opt for different standard times within a time zone. The coordination mechanism should consist of one designated representative of each Member State and one representative of the Commission. The Commission should facilitate the coordination and should provide assessment on the effects that the notified decision would have on the proper functioning of the internal market. The decision to apply the envisaged time change or not remains within the competence of the Member States after having consulted with the Commission and other Member States.
Amendment 38 #
2018/0332(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 6 b (new)
Recital 6 b (new)
(6b) The Commission should order an expert analysis including a recommendation on whether permanent summer-time or permanent winter-time would be most beneficial, taking into account nature, health and social aspects as well as geographical differences among Member States.
Amendment 44 #
2018/0332(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) This Directive should apply from 1 April30 March 201920, so that the last summer- time period subject to the rules of Directive 2000/84/EC should start, in every Member State, at 1.00 a.m., Coordinated Universal Time, on 3129 March 201920. Member States that, after that summer-time period, intend to adopt a standard time corresponding to the time applied during the winter season in accordance with Directive 2000/84/EC should change their standard time at 1.00 a.m., Coordinated Universal Time, on 275 October 201920, so that similar and lasting changes occurring in different Member States take place simultaneously. It is desirable that Member States take the decisions on the standard time that each of them will apply as from 201920 in a concerted and coordinated manner.
Amendment 54 #
2018/0332(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 2
Article 1 – paragraph 2
2. Notwithstanding paragraph 1, Member States may still apply a seasonal change of their standard time or times in 201920, provided that they do so at 1.00 a.m., Coordinated Universal Time, on 275 October 201920. The Member States shall notify this decision in accordance with Article 2.
Amendment 60 #
2018/0332(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1
1. Without prejudice to Article 1, if a Member State decideintends to change its standard time or times in any territory under its jurisdiction, it shall notify the Commission at least 6 months before the change takes effectnd all other Member States at latest on 27 March 2020. Where a Member State has made such a notification and has not withdrawn it at least 6 months before the date of the envisaged changeby 24 July 2020, the Member State shall apply this change.
Amendment 62 #
2018/0332(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2
Article 2 – paragraph 2
2. Within 1 month of the notification, the Commission shall inform the other Member States thereof and publish that informationNot later than 10 April 2020, the Commission shall publish all notifications that it has received in the Official Journal of the European Union.
Amendment 65 #
2018/0332(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 a (new)
Article 2 a (new)
Amendment 66 #
2018/0332(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission shall report to the European Parliament and to the Council on the implementation of this Directive by 31 December 20245 at the latest. In this implementation report, a special emphasis shall be put on the effects on human health.
Amendment 70 #
2018/0332(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 2
Article 3 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall provide the Commission with the relevant information by 30 April 20245 at the latest.
Amendment 72 #
2018/0332(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Member States shall adopt and publish, by 1 April30 March 201920 at the latest, the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive. They shall forthwith communicate to the Commission the text of those provisions.
Amendment 81 #
2018/0332(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
They shall apply those provisions from 1 April30 March 201920.
Amendment 82 #
2018/0332(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Directive 2000/84/EC is repealed with effect from 1 April30 March 201920.
Amendment 64 #
2018/0227(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) The advanced digital technologies supported by this Programme, such as high performance computing, cybersecurity, data protection and artificial intelligence are now sufficiently mature to move beyond the research arena and be deployed, implemented and scaled- up at Union level. Just as the deployment of these technologies require a Union response so does the skills dimension. Training opportunities in advanced digital skills need to be scaled up, increased and made accessible throughout the EU. Failing this could impede the smooth deployment of advanced digital technologies and hamper the overall competitiveness of Union’s economy. The actions supported by this programme are complementary to those supported by the ESF, ERDF and Horizon Europe programmes.
Amendment 68 #
2018/0227(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 34 a (new)
Recital 34 a (new)
(34a) On 6 October 2017, EU Ministers in Tallinn stated that the European digital strategy should be based on collaboration and interoperability, including the use of open licensing policies and open standards. The programme should, therefore, demand or incentivise open source solutions in order to allow reuse, increase trust and secure transparency. This will have a positive impact on the sustainability of funded projects.
Amendment 70 #
2018/0227(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 43
Recital 43
(43) Reflecting the importance of tackling climate change in line with the Union’s commitments to implement the Paris Agreement and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, this Programme wishall contribute to mainstream climate actions and lead to the achievement of an overall target of 25% of the EU budget expenditures supporting climate objectives74 . Relevant actions wishall be identified during the Programme’s preparation and implementation by way of optimizing output of climate investment, and reassessed in the context of the relevant evaluations and review processes. _________________ 74 COM(2018) 321 final, page 1
Amendment 72 #
2018/0227(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) ‘Digital Innovation Hub’ means legal entity designated or selected in an open and competitive procedure in order to fulfil the tasks under the Programme, in particular providing access to technological expertise and experimentation facilities, such as equipment and software tools to enable the digital transformation of the industry. The detailed conditions to be fulfilled in order to be designated as ‘Digital Innovation Hub’ and the tasks to be executed, shall be harmonised and announced in due time in order to allow for proper preparation and implementation of the actions.
Amendment 79 #
2018/0227(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) support the uptake of advanced digital skills for the European citizens, giving proper consideration to social and economic transformations brought by the digitalisation and the gender perspective.
Amendment 81 #
2018/0227(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) deploy, coordinate at the Union level and operate an integrated world-class exascale77 supercomputing and data infrastructure in the Union that shall be accessible on a non- commercial basis that shall be accessible to public and private users and for publicly funded research purposes; _________________ 77 Billions of billions of floating operations per second
Amendment 82 #
2018/0227(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) deploy, coordinate at the Union level and operate an integrated world-class exascale77 supercomputing and data infrastructure in the Union that shall be accessible on a non-commercial basis to public and private users and for publicly funded research purposes; _________________ 77 Billions of billions of floating operations per second
Amendment 83 #
2018/0227(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) deploy and operate a post- exascale78 infrastructure, encourage the development of European hardware and software necessary for such deployment, including the integration with quantum computing technologies, and develop new research infrastructures for computing science. _________________ 78 A thousand times faster than exascale A thousand times faster than exascale
Amendment 84 #
2018/0227(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) build up and strengthen ethical core artificial intelligence capacities in the Union, including secure data resources and libraries of algorithms in compliance with dthe General Data pProtection lRegisulation including the principles of security and privacy by design;
Amendment 85 #
2018/0227(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) build up and strengthen core artificial intelligence capacities in the Union, including data resources and libraries of algorithms in compliance with data protection legislation and the principles of security and privacy by design;
Amendment 87 #
2018/0227(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) make those capacities accessible to all businesses and public administrations;
Amendment 89 #
2018/0227(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) reinforce and network existing ethical artificial intelligence testing and experimentation facilities in Member States;
Amendment 91 #
2018/0227(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) support, together with Member States, the procurement of advanced cybersecurity equipment, tools and data infrastructures in order to achieve a common high level of cybersecurity at the European level, in full compliance with data protection legislation and the fundamental rights;
Amendment 92 #
2018/0227(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) support the best use and the increase of European knowledge, capacity and skills related to cybersecurity;
Amendment 95 #
2018/0227(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
The financial intervention by the Union under Specific Objective 4. Advanced Digital skills shall support the development of advanced digital skills in areas supported by this programme, thus contributing to increase Europe’s talent pool, reducing the digital divide amongst European regions, eliminating the gender specific issues, fostering greater professionalism, especially with regard to high performance computing, big data analytics, data protection competencies, cybersecurity, distributed ledger technologies, robotics and artificial intelligence. The financial intervention shall pursue the following operational objectives:
Amendment 96 #
2018/0227(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) support the design and delivery of more long-term and requalification trainings and courses for students, the workforce, IT professionals and the workforce, researchers and academics;
Amendment 98 #
2018/0227(COD)
(b) support the design and delivery of short-term trainings and courses for the workforce and entrepreneurs, including small business leaders and the workforceinnovators;
Amendment 100 #
2018/0227(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) support on-the-job trainings and traineeships for students, youngworkforce and entrepreneurs and graduates.
Amendment 103 #
2018/0227(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) deploy, operate and maintain trans- European interoperable state of the art Digital Service Infrastructures (including related services) in complementarity with national and regional actions;
Amendment 104 #
2018/0227(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) facilitate the development, update and use of solutions and frameworks by European public administrations, businesses and citizens, including open source and the re- use of interoperability solutions and frameworks;
Amendment 106 #
2018/0227(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point h
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point h
(h) support cooperation towards achieving a European ecosystem for trusted infrastructures using distributed ledger services and applications, including support for interoperability and standardisation and fostering the deployment of EU cross- border applications;
Amendment 113 #
2018/0227(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Planning, development and procurement in the programme shall be done with a view to enhance European Union competitiveness in medium and long term. Priority shall be given to actions that increase the strategic potential and limit the dependence on suppliers and products from outside the European Union.
Amendment 117 #
2018/0227(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Actions including technology transfers outside the European Union are not permitted. With a view to ensure long term strategic security objectives an opportunity evaluation shall be done for participations of entities not having their main establishment in the European Union.
Amendment 121 #
2018/0227(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 16 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. For the purpose of the establishment of the network mentioned in paragraph 1, each Member State shall designate candidate entities based on harmonised rules, through an open and competitive process, on the basis of the following criteria:
Amendment 129 #
2018/0227(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
Article 20 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
(da) the impact on the climate and the environment;
Amendment 130 #
2018/0227(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 20 – paragraph 1 – point e
Amendment 133 #
2018/0227(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part 2 – paragraph 2 – point 1
Annex I – part 2 – paragraph 2 – point 1
1. Creation of Common European Data spaces that aggregate public information across Europe and become a data input source for AI solutions. The spaces would also be open to public and private sector. For increased usage, data within a space should be made interoperable as much as possible through use of open formats and open standards, both in the interactions between public and private sectors, within sectors and across sectors (semantic interoperability).
Amendment 134 #
2018/0227(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part 2 – paragraph 2 – point 2
Annex I – part 2 – paragraph 2 – point 2
2. Development of common European libraries of algorithms that are open source and would be accessible to all. Companies and public sector would be able to identify and acquire whichever solution would work best for their needs.
Amendment 135 #
2018/0227(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part 2 – paragraph 2 – point 3
Annex I – part 2 – paragraph 2 – point 3
3. Co-investment with Member States in world class reference sites for experimentation and testing in real setting focusing on the applications of AI in essential sectors such as health, earth/environment monitoring, mobility, security, manufacturing or finance, as well as in other areas of public interest. The sites should be open to all actors across Europe and connected to the Network of Digital Innovation Hubs. They should be equipped with large computing and data handling facilities as well as latest AI technologies including emerging areas such as ethics, neuromorphic computing, deep learning and robotics.
Amendment 10 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) Those rights and values must continue to be promoted andcultivated, protected, promoted, enforced and shared among the citizens and peoples and be at the heart of the EU project, as the deterioration of those rights and values in any Member State can have detrimental effects on the Union as a whole. Therefore, a new Justice, Rights and Values Fund, comprising the Rights and Values and the Justice programmes shall be created in the EU budget. At a time where European societies are confronted with extremism, radicalism and divisions, it is more important than ever to promote, strengthen and defend justice, rights and EU values: human rights, respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law. This will have profound and direct implications for political, social, cultural and economic life in the EU. As part of the new Fund, the Justice Programme will continue to support the further development of Union area of justice and cross-border cooperation. The Rights and Values Programme will bring together the 2014-2020 Programme Rights, Equality and Citizenship established by Regulation (EU) No 1381/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council8 and the Europe for Citizens programme established by Council Regulation (EU) No 390/20149 , (hereafter 'the predecessor Programmes'). _________________ 8 Regulation (EU) No 1381/2013 of the Regulation (EU) No 1381/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 establishing a Rights, Equality and Citizenship Programme for the period 2014 to 2020 (OJ L 354, 28.12.2013, p. 62) 9 Council Regulation (EU) No 390/2014 of 14 April 2014 establishing the ‘Europe for Citizens’ programme for the period 2014- 2020 (OJ L 115, 17.4.2014, p.3)
Amendment 13 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) The Justice, Rights and Values Fund and its two underlying funding programmes will focus primarily on people and entities, which contribute to make our common values, rights and rich diversity alive and vibrant. The ultimate objective is to nurture and sustain a rights-based, equal, open, inclusive and democratic society. That includes a vibrant civil society by funding activities that promote a vibrant, well-developed, self-reliant and empowered civil society. Such activities include advocacy for the promotion and protection of our common values, encouraging people's democratic, civic and social participation and fostering peace and the rich diversity of European society, based on our common values, history and memory. Article 11 of the Treaty of the European Union further specifirequires that the institutions shall maintain an open, transparent and regular dialogue with civil society and shall, by appropriate means, give citizens and representative associations the opportunity to make known and publicly exchange their views in all areas of Union action. The Commission should maintain a regular dialogue with the beneficiaries of the Programme as well as other relevant stakeholders by setting up a Civil Dialogue Group.
Amendment 17 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4 a (new)
Recital 4 a (new)
(4 a) Full respect and promotion of the rule of law and democracy is fundamental to building people's trust in the Union. Respect for the rule of law within the Union is a prerequisite for the protection of fundamental rights, as well as for upholding all rights and obligations enshrined in the Treaties. The way in which the rule of law is implemented in the Member States plays a vital role in ensuring mutual trust among Member States and their legal systems. The Programme should therefore promote and safeguard fundamental rights, democracy and the rule of law at local, regional, national and transnational levels.
Amendment 19 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4 b (new)
Recital 4 b (new)
(4 b) The 'rule of law', as one of the Union values enshrined in Article 2 TEU, include the principles of legality, implying a transparent, accountable, democratic and pluralistic process for enacting laws; legal certainty; prohibition of arbitrariness of executive powers; effective judicial protection by independent courts, including of fundamental rights; separation of powers and equality before the law.
Amendment 27 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) Citizens should also be more aware of their rights deriving from citizenship of the Union, and should feel at ease about living, travelling, studying, working and volunteering in another Member State, and should feel able to enjoy and exercise all their citizenship rights, place their trust in equal access, full enforceability and protection of their rights without any discrimination, no matter where in the Union they happen to be. Civil society needs to be supportedtrengthened at all levels for the promotion, safeguarding and raising awareness of EU common values under Article 2 TEU and in contributing to the effective enjoyment of rights under Union law.
Amendment 31 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) The right to respect for his or her private and family life, home and communications (right to privacy) is a fundamental right enshrined in Article 7 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights. The protection of personal data is a fundamental right enshrined in Article 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Article 16 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. Compliance with the rules for the protection of personal data is subject to the control by independent supervisory authorities. The Unions’ legal framework, in particular Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council12 and Directive (EU) 2016/680 of the European Parliament and of the Council13 lay down provisions to ensure that the right to protection of personal data is effectively protected. These legal instruments entrust the national data protection supervisory authorities with the task of promoting public awareness and understanding of the risks, rules, safeguards and rights in relation to the processing of personal data. The Union should be able to conduct awareness- raising activities, support civil society organisations in advocating for data protection in line with Union standards, carry out studies and other relevant activities given the importance of the right to the protection of personal data in times of rapid technological developments. _________________ 12 13OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1-88. OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1-88. 13 OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 89-131. OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 89-131.
Amendment 34 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) Independent human rights bodies and civil society organisations play an essential role in promoting, safeguarding and raising awareness of the Union’s common values under Article 2 TEU, and in contributing to the effective enjoyment of rights under Union law, including the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU. As reflected in the European Parliament Resolution of 189 April 2018, an increase in funding and adequate financial support is key to the development of a conducive and sustainable environment for civil society organisations to strengthen their role and perform their functions independently and effectively. Complementing efforts at national level, EU funding should therefore contribute to support, empower and build , including through adequate core funding and simplified cost options, financial rules and procedures, the capacity of independent civil society organisations active in the promotion of human rights whose activities help the strategic enforcement of rights under EU law and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU, including through advocacy and watchdog activities, as well as to promote, safeguard and raise awareness of the Union’s common values at national level.
Amendment 38 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) TAs regards the implementation of the specific objectives of promoting gender equality and rights, promoting citizens’ engagement and participation in the democratic life of the Union at local, regional, national and transnational level as well as combating violence, the Programme should be open, subject to certain conditions, to the participation of European Free Trade Association (EFTA) members which are members of the European Economic Area (EEA) and EFTA members which are not members of the EEA and other European countries. Acceding countries, candidate countries and potential candidate countries benefiting from a pre-accession strategy should also be able to participate in the Programme.
Amendment 39 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) In order to ensure efficient allocation of funds from the general budget of the Union, it is necessary to ensure the European added value of all actions carried out, their complementarity to Member States’ actionsbearing in mind the particular Union added value inherent in any action, including actions carried out at local, regional, national and transnational level, directed at promoting and safeguarding our common values as enshrined in Article 2 TEU, their complementarity to Member States’ actions, where actions at Member State level are present, while consistency, complementarity and synergies shall be sought with funding programmes supporting policy areas with close links to each other, in particular within the Justice, Rights and Values Fund — and thus with the Justice Programme — as well as with Creative Europe programme, and Erasmus+ to realise the potential of cultural crossovers in the fields of culture, media, arts, education and creativity. It is necessary to create synergies with other European funding programmes, in particular in the fields of employment, internal market, enterprise, youth, health, citizenship, justice, migration, security, research, innovation, technology, industry, cohesion, tourism, external relations, trade and, development and climate.
Amendment 42 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) Regulation (EU, Euratom) No [the new FR] (the ‘Financial Regulation’) applies to this Programme. It lays down rules on the implementation of the Union budget, including the rules on grants, prizes, procurement, indirect implementation, financial assistance, financial instruments and budgetary guarantees. and demands full transparency on the use of resources, sound financial management and prudent use of resources. In particular, rules concerning the possibility for local, regional, national and transnational civil society organisations to be funded through multiannual operating grants, cascading grants, provisions ensuring fast and flexible grant-making procedures, such as a two-step-application procedure, user-friendly applications and reporting procedures should be operationalised and further strengthened as part of the implementation of this Programme
Amendment 44 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24 a (new)
Recital 24 a (new)
(24 a) In order to increase accessibility and provide guidance and practical information in relation to the Programme, each Member State should set up an independent National Contact Point with a view to providing assistance to both beneficiaries and applicants.
Amendment 47 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
Recital 25
(25) TIn relation to the implementation of the specific objectives of promoting gender equality and rights, citizens’ engagement and participation in the democratic life of the Union at local, regional, national and transnational level and combating violence, third countries which are members of the European Economic Area (EEA) may participate in Union programmes in the framework of the cooperation established under the EEA agreement, which provides for the implementation of the programmes by a decision under that agreement. Third countries may also participate on the basis of other legal instruments. A specific provision should be introduced in this Regulation to grant the necessary rights for and access to the authorizing officer responsible, the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) as well as the European Court of Auditors to comprehensively exert their respective competences.
Amendment 49 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
Recital 30
(30) In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of this Regulationsupplement this Regulation with a view to carrying out the Programme and ensuring effective assessment of its progress towards the achievement of its objectives, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be delegated to the Commission in respect of work programmes pursuant to Article 13 and indicators as indicated in Articles 14 and 16 and Annex II. It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level, and that those consultations be conducted in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making of 13 April 2016. In particular, to ensure equal participation in the preparation of delegated acts, the European Parliament and the Council receive all documents at the same time as Member States’ experts, and their experts systematically have access to meetings of Commission expert groups dealing with the preparation of delegated acts.
Amendment 50 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
Recital 31
Amendment 54 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1
1. The general objective of the Programme is to protect and promote rights and values as enshrined in the EU Treaties, including by supporting civil society organisationsdemocracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights as enshrined in Article 2 TEU, in particular by supporting and building the capacity of civil society organisations at local, regional, national and transnational level, in order to sustain open, rights-based, democratic, equal and inclusive societies.
Amendment 57 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point –a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point –a (new)
(-a) to promote and safeguard fundamental rights, democracy and the rule of law at local, regional, national and transnational level (Union values strand);
Amendment 61 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 a (new)
Article 2 a (new)
Article 2 a Union values strand Within the general objective set out in Article 2(1) and within the specific objective set out in point (-a) of Article 2(2), the Programme shall focus on: (a) protecting and promoting democracy and the rule of law, including ensuring the independence of the judiciary; effective judicial protection by independent courts, including of fundamental rights; transparency and non-arbitrariness by public authorities and law enforcement; providing support for independent human rights defenders and civil society organisations undertaking monitoring compliance with the rule of law, for whistle-blower defence and for initiatives that promote transparency, accountability, integrity and absence of corruption; (b) protecting, strengthening and promoting fundamental rights, including freedom of expression, peaceful assembly or association, media freedom and pluralism of the media, academic freedom, freedom of religion or belief and the right to privacy and family life; (c) supporting, empowering and building the capacity of independent civil society organisations active in the promotion of the values referred to in Article 2(1).
Amendment 62 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Within the general objective set out in Article 2(1) and within the specific objective set out in point (a) of Article 2(2), the Programme shall focus on:
Amendment 66 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) preventing and combating inequalities and discrimination on grounds of sex, racial, social or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age, language or sexual orientation, and supporting comprehensive policies to promote gender equality and anti- discrimination and their mainstreaming as well policies to combat racism and all forms of intolerance;
Amendment 69 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Within the general objective set out in Article 2(1) and within the specific objective set out in point (b) of Article 2(2), the Programme shall focus on:
Amendment 76 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Within the general objective set out in Article 2(1) and within the specific objective set out in point (c) of Article 2(2), the Programme shall focus on:
Amendment 80 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) supporting and protecting victims of such violence, including by facilitating and ensuring access to justice, access to victim support services and access to safe police reporting for all victims of violence.
Amendment 84 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point –a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point –a (new)
(-a) EUR [1 000 000 000] for the specific objectives referred to in point (-a) of article 2(2);
Amendment 87 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 (new)
The Commission should allocate at least 40% of the resources referred to in points (-a), (a) and (c) of paragraph 2 to the support of civil society organisations.
Amendment 90 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Resources allocated to a Member State under shared management may be transferred to the Programme in the following cases: (a) where the Commission activates the EU Rule of Law Framework; (b) where one third of the Member States, the European Parliament or the Commission submits a reasoned proposal to the Council in accordance with Article 7(1) TEU to determine that there is a clear risk of a serious breach by the Member State concerned of the values referred to in Article 2 TEU; (c) where one third of the Member States or the Commission submits a reasoned proposal to the European Council in accordance with Article 7(2) TEU to determine the existence of a serious and persistent breach by that Member State of the values referred to in Article 2 TEU. The Commission shall implement those resources directly in accordance with point (a) of Article 62(1) of the Financial Regulation or indirectly in accordance with point (c) of that paragraph. Where possible, those resources shall be used for the benefit of the Member State concerned.
Amendment 91 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 5 b (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 5 b (new)
5 b. The Commission may make a proposal to the Council to transfer the resources in accordance with paragraph 5a after consulting the European Parliament. A proposal by the Commission shall be deemed adopted by the Council unless the Council decides, by means of an implementing act, to reject such a proposal by qualified majority within one month of the submission of the Commission proposal.
Amendment 92 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 5 c (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 5 c (new)
5 c. The Commission shall keep the European Parliament informed of the implementation of paragraphs 5a and 5b. In particular, the Commission shall, when one of the conditions set out in paragraph 5a is fulfilled for a Member State, immediately inform the European Parliament and provide details of the Funds and programmes which could be subject to a transfer of resources. The European Parliament may invite the Commission for a structured dialogue on the application of paragraphs 5a and 5b.
Amendment 93 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. TFor the specific objectives referred to in points (a) and (c) of article 2(2), the Programme shall be open to the following countries provided that the conditions are met: (Excluding third countries from participating in funding for objectives relating to the newOr. en strand art 2(2)(-a)NEW on Union values.)
Amendment 98 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Actions contributing to the achievement of a general or specific objective specified in Article 2 may receive funding under this Regulation. In particular, activities listed in Annex I rticle 9 a (shall be eligible for funding.
Amendment 100 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 b (new)
Article 9 b (new)
Article 9 b Activities eligible for funding The general and specific objectives of the Programme set out in Article 2 will be carried out in particular, but not exclusively, by supporting the following activities as carried out by one or more eligible entities: (a) awareness raising, public education, promotion and dissemination of information to improve the knowledge of the policies, principles and rights within the areas covered by the Programme; (b) mutual learning through the exchange of good practices among stakeholders to improve knowledge and mutual understanding and civic and democratic engagement; (c) analytical monitoring, reporting and advocacy activities to improve the understanding of the situation in Member States and at Union level in the areas covered by the Programme as well as to improve the transposition and implementation of Union law, policies and common Union values within Member States, such activities to include for instance the collection of data and statistics; the development of common methodologies and, where appropriate, indicators or benchmarks; studies, researches, analyses and surveys; evaluations; impact assessment; the elaboration and publication of guides, reports and educational material; (d) training relevant stakeholders to improve their knowledge of the policies and rights in the fields covered and strengthening relevant stakeholders’ capability to advocate for the policies and rights in the fields covered; (e) promoting public awareness and understanding of the risks, rules, safeguards and rights in relation to the protection of personal data, privacy, and digital security, as well as addressing fake news and targeted misinformation through awareness raising, trainings, studies and monitoring activities; (f) bringing together Europeans of different nationalities and cultures by giving them the opportunity to participate in town-twinning activities and projects; (g) encouraging and facilitating active and inclusive participation in the construction of a more democratic Union as well as raising awareness and promoting and defending rights and values through support to civil society organisations; (h) financing the technical and organisational support to implement Regulation [(EU)No 211/2011], thereby underpinning the exercise by citizens of the right to launch and support European citizens’ initiatives; (i) supporting civil society organisations active in the areas covered by the Programme at all levels, as well as developing the capacity of European networks and civil society organisations to contribute to the development, awareness raising and monitoring of the implementation of Union law, policy goals, values and strategies; (j) enhancing knowledge of the programme and dissemination and transferability of its results and fostering citizen and civil society outreach, including by setting up and supporting independent programme desks; (k) strengthening the capacity and independence of human rights defenders and civil society organisations monitoring the situation of the rule of law and supporting actions at local, regional, national and transnational levels; (l) supporting whistleblower defence, including initiatives and measures to establish safe channels for reporting within organisations and to public authorities or other relevant bodies, as well as measures to protect whistleblowers against dismissal, demotion or other forms of retaliation, including through information and training for relevant public authorities and stakeholders; (m) supporting initiatives and measures to promote and protect freedom and pluralism of the media and to build capacity for the new challenges such as new media and countering hate speech; (n) support and build capacity for civil society organisations active in promoting and monitoring integrity and corruption, transparency and accountability of public authorities; (o) supporting civil society organisations active in the area of protection and promotion of fundamental rights, including support for actions to raise awareness of fundamental rights and contribute to human rights education.
Amendment 102 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2
Article 10 – paragraph 2
2. The evaluation committee may be composed of external experts. The composition of the evaluation committee shall ensure gender balance.
Amendment 103 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent 2
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent 2
— for the specific objectives referred to in points (a) and (c) of Article 2(2), a third country associated to the Programme;
Amendment 105 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. The Commission shall apply the partnership principle when deciding its priorities under the Programme and provide for a comprehensive involvement of stakeholders into planning, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of this Programme and its work programmes in accordance with Article 15a.
Amendment 109 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 2
Article 13 – paragraph 2
2. The work programme shall be adopted by the Commission by means of an implementing act. That implementing act shall be adopted in accordance with the advisory procedure referred to in Article 19Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 16 to supplement this Regulation by establishing the appropriate work programme.
Amendment 110 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1
Article 14 – paragraph 1
1. Indicators to report on progress of the Programme towards the achievement of the specific objectives set out in Article 2 shall, where applicable, be collected disaggregated by gender, age, educational background, occupation and other relevant factors. The list of indicators are set out in Annex II.
Amendment 112 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3
Article 14 – paragraph 3
3. The performance reporting system shall ensure that data for monitoring programme implementation and results are collected efficiently, effectively, and in a timely manner. To that end, proportionate and least burdensome reporting requirements shall be imposed on recipients of Union funds and Member States. In order to facilitate reporting requirements being met, the Commission shall make available user-friendly formats and provide orientation and support programmes particularly targeted to civil society organisations, who may not always have the know-how and adequate resources and staff to meet reporting requirements.
Amendment 115 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1
Article 15 – paragraph 1
1. Evaluations shall be gender mainstreamed, include a specific chapter for each strand and carried out in a timely manner to feed into the decision- making process.
Amendment 117 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 4
Article 15 – paragraph 4
4. The Commission shall communicate the conclusions of the evaluations accompanied by its observations, to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. The Commission shall make the evaluation public by publishing it on its website.
Amendment 118 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 a (new)
Article 15 a (new)
Article 15 a Civil Dialogue 1. In line with Article 11(2) TEU, the Commission shall set up a Civil Dialogue Group aimed at ensuring a regular dialogue with the beneficiaries of the Programme and other relevant stakeholders. 2. The Civil Dialogue Group shall carry out the following: (a) Maintain a regular dialogue on all matters relating to the Programme and its planning, implementation and evaluation; (b) Exchange experiences and good practices within the fields and objectives covered by the Programme; (c) Contribute to the dissemination of the Programme’s results; (d) Contribute to the preparation and implementation of any events or activities organised under the Programme; (e) Monitor and discussing policy developments in related fields. 3. The Civil Dialogue Group shall consist of the following organisations: (a) Organisations which have been selected to receive an operating or action grant under the Programme; (b) Organisations which have received an operating or action grant under the former "Europe for Citizens" Programme or “Daphne” Programme and have expressed their continued interest to take part to the dialogue; (c) Other organisations or stakeholders who have expressed an interest in the Programme or work in this policy area, but not necessarily supported by the Programme.
Amendment 121 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2
Article 16 – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 13 and 14 shall be conferred on the Commission until 31 December 2027.
Amendment 123 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 3
Article 16 – paragraph 3
3. The delegation of power referred to in Article 13 and 14 may be revoked at any time by the European Parliament or by the Council. A decision to revoke shall put an end to the delegation of power specified in that decision. It shall take effect the day following the publication of the decision in the Official Journal of the European Union or at a later date specified therein. It shall not affect the validity of any delegated acts already in force.
Amendment 124 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 4
Article 16 – paragraph 4
4. Before adopting a delegated act, the Commission shall consult experts designated by each Member State in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement of 13 April 2016 on Better Law-Making of 13 April 2016. The composition of the group of experts consulted shall ensure gender balance. When preparing and drawing up delegated acts, the Commission shall ensure a timely and simultaneous transmission of all documents, including the draft acts, to the European Parliament and the Council at the same time as to Member States' experts. Where they consider this necessary, the European Parliament and the Council may each send experts to meetings of the Commission expert groups dealing with the preparation of delegated acts to which Member States' experts are invited. To that end, the European Parliament and the Council shall receive the planning for the following months and invitations for all experts meetings.
Amendment 126 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 5
Article 16 – paragraph 5
5. As soon as it adopts a delegated act, the Commission shall notify it simultaneously to the European Parliament and to the Council. Based on the Interinstitutional Agreement of 13 April 2016 on Better Law-Making , citizens and other stakeholders may express their opinion on the draft text of a delegated act during a four-week period. The European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of Regions shall be consulted on the draft text, based on the experience of NGOs and local and regional authorities with respect to the implementation of the Programme.
Amendment 129 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 6
Article 16 – paragraph 6
6. A delegated act adopted pursuant to Article 13 and 14 shall enter into force if no objection has been expressed either by the European Parliament or by the Council within a period of two months of notification of that act to the European Parliament and the Council or if, before the expiry of that period, the European Parliament and the Council have both informed the Commission that they will not object. That period shall be extended by two months at the initiative of the European Parliament or of the Council.
Amendment 135 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 a (new)
Article 18 a (new)
Article 18 a National Contact Points Each Member State shall set up an independent National Contact Point with qualified staff tasked with providing the stakeholders and beneficiaries of the Programme with guidance, practical information and assistance regarding all aspects of the Programme, including in relation to the application procedure and proposal writing, distribution of documentation, partner search, training and other formalities.
Amendment 137 #
2018/0207(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I
Annex I
Amendment 22 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Citation 1
Citation 1
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Articles 16, 19 (2), 33, 43, 50, 53(1), 62, 77 (2), 78, 79, 83(1), 91, 100, 103, 109, 114, 153, 157, 168, 169, 192, 207 and 325(4) thereof and to the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, and in particular Article 31 thereof,
Amendment 44 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 19
Recital 19
Amendment 46 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) Persons who report information, particularly about threats or harm to the public interest obtained in the context of their work- related activities, make use of their right to freedom of expression. The right to freedom of expression, enshrined in Article 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the Charter’) and in Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), encompasses freedom of information as well as media freedom and pluralism.
Amendment 47 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) Persons need specific legal protection where they acquire the information they report through their work-related activities and theand their decision to refpore run thet it results in a risk of work-related or other retaliation (for instance, for breaching the duty of confidentiality or loyaltyUnion legislation on trade secrets). The underlying reason for providing them with protection is their position of economic vulnerability vis-à-vis the person on whom they de facto depend for work. When there is no such work-related power imbalance (for instance in the case of ordinary complainants or citizen bystanders) there is no need for protection against retaliationare reporting or on whom they de facto depend for work.
Amendment 48 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 25
Recital 25
(25) Effective enforcement of Union law requires that protection is granted to the broadest possible range of categories of persons, who, irrespective of whether they are EU citizens or third-country nationals, by virtue of work-related activities (irrespective of the nature of these activities, whether they are paid or not), have privilegedhave access to information about breaches that would be in the public’s interest to report and who may suffer retaliation if they report them. Member States should ensure that the need for protection is determined by reference to all the relevant circumstances and not merely by reference to the nature of the relationship, so as to cover the whole range ofall persons connected in a broad sense to the organisation where the breach has occurredto the report.
Amendment 52 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 27
Recital 27
(27) Protection should also extend to further categories of natural or legal persons, who, whilst not being 'workers' within the meaning of Article 45 TFEU, can play a key role in exposing breaches of the law and may find themselves in a position of economic vulnerability in the context of their work-related activitiesvis-à-vis the legal or natural person reported on. For instance, in areas such as product safety, suppliers are much closer to the source of possible unfair and illicit manufacturing, import or distribution practices of unsafe products; in the implementation of Union funds, consultants providing their services are in a privileged position to draw attention to breaches they witness. Such categories of persons, including self- employed persons providing services, freelance, contractors, sub-contractors and suppliers, are typically subject to retaliation in the form of early termination or cancellation of contract of services, licence or permit, loss of business, loss of income, coercion, intimidation or harassment, blacklisting/business boycotting or damage to their reputation. Shareholders and persons in managerial bodies, may also suffer retaliation, for instance in financial terms or in the form of intimidation or harassment, blacklisting or damage to their reputation. Protection should also be granted to candidates for employment or for providing services to an organisation who acquired the information on breaches of law during the recruitment process or other pre-contractual negotiation stage, and may suffer retaliation for instance in the form of negative employment references or blacklisting/business boycotting.
Amendment 54 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 29
Recital 29
(29) Effective detection and prevention of serious harm to the public interest requires that the information reported which qualifies for protection covers not only unlawful activities but also abuse of law, namely acts or omissions which do not appear to be unlawful in formal terms but defeat the object or the purpose of the law or constitute a danger or potential threat to the public interest.
Amendment 57 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 30
Recital 30
(30) Effective prevention of breaches of Union law requires that protection is also granted to persons who provide information about potential breaches, which have not yet materialised, but are likely to be committed. For the same reasons, protection is warranted also for persons who do not provide positive evidence but raise reasonable concerns or suspicions. At the same time, protection should not apply to the reporting of information which is already in the public domain or of unsubstantiated rumours and hearsay.
Amendment 66 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Citation 1
Citation 1
Having regard to Article 294(2) andthe Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Articles 16, 19 (2), 33, 43, 50, 53(1), 62, 77 (2), 78, 79, 83(1), 91, 100, 103, 109, 114, 153, 157, 168, 169, 192, 207 and 325(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union andthereof and to the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, and in particular Article 31 thereof,
Amendment 70 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 42
Recital 42
(42) Provided the confidentiality of the identity of the reporting person or its anonymity is ensured, it is up to each individual private and public legal entity to define the kind of reporting channels to set up, such as in person, by post, by physical complaint box(es), by telephone hotline or through an online platform (intranet or internet). However, reporting channels should not be limited to those amongst the tools, such as in-person reporting and complaint box(es), which do not guarantee anonymity nor confidentiality of the identity of the reporting person.
Amendment 71 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 43
Recital 43
(43) Third parties may also be authorised to receive reports on behalf of private and public entities, provided they offer appropriate guarantees of respect for independence, confidentiality or where relevant, anonymity, data protection and secrecy. These can be external reporting platform providers, external counsel or auditors or trade union representatives.
Amendment 72 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) Persons who work for an organisation or are in contact with it in the context of their work-related activities are often the first to know about threats or harm to the public interest which arise in this context. The purpose of this Directive is to create a climate of trust that enables whistleblowers to report observed or suspected breaches of law, wrongdoing and threats to the public interest. By ‘blowing the whistle’ they play a key role in exposing and preventing breaches of the law and in safeguarding the welfare of society. However, potential whistleblowers are often discouraged from reporting their concerns or suspicions for fear of retaliation.
Amendment 79 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 61
Recital 61
(61) The requirement of a tiered use of reporting channels, as a general rule, is necessary to ensure that the information gets to the persons who can contribute to the early and effective resolution of risks to the public interest as well as to prevent unjustified reputational damage from public disclosure. At the same time, some exceptions to its application are necessary, allowing the reporting person to choose the most appropriate channel depending on the individual circumstances of the case. Moreover, iIt is necessary to protect public disclosures taking into account democratic principles such as transparency and accountability, and fundamental rights such as freedom of expression and media freedom, whilst balancing the interest of employers to manage their organisations and to protect their interests with the interest of the public to be protected from harm, in line with the criteria developed in the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights57 . _________________ 57 One of the criteria for determining whether retaliation against whistleblowers making public disclosures interferes with freedom of expression in a way which is not necessary in a democratic society, is whether the persons who made the disclosure had at their disposal alternative channels for making the disclosure; see, for instance, Guja v. Moldova [GC], no 14277/04, ECHR 2008.
Amendment 81 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 62
Recital 62
Amendment 84 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) In certain policy areas, bBreaches of Union law may cause serious harm to the public interest, in the sense of creating significant risks for the welfare of society. Where weaknesses of enforcement have been identified in those areas, and whistleblowers are in a privileged position to disclose breaches, it is necessary to enhance enforcement by ensuring effective protection of whistleblowers from retaliation and introducingto ensure that there are effective reporting channels.
Amendment 84 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 63
Recital 63
Amendment 86 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 65
Recital 65
(65) Reporting persons should be protected against any form of retaliation, whether direct or indirect, taken by their employer or customer/recipient of services and by persons working for or acting on behalf of the latter, including co-workers and managers in the same organisation or in other organisations with which the reporting person is in contact in the context of his/her work-related activities, where retaliation is recommended or tolerated by the concerned person. Protection should be provided against retaliatory measures taken vis-à-vis the reporting person him/herself but also those that may be taken vis-à-vis the legal entity he/she represents, such as denial of provision of services, blacklisting or business boycotting. Protection against retaliation should also be granted to natural or legal persons closely linked to the reporting person, irrespective of the nature of the activities, and whether they are paid or not. Indirect retaliation also includes actions taken against relatives of the reporting person who are also in a work-related connection with the latter’s employer or customer/recipient of services and workers’ representatives who have provided support to the reporting person.
Amendment 87 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 77 a (new)
Recital 77 a (new)
(77 a) Following an individual assessment, any third country national who reports information falling into the scope of this directive and suffers from a well-founded fear of persecution or would face a real risk of suffering serious harm because of the report and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself or herself of the protection of that country can be considered as qualifying as a refugee or beneficiary of subsidiary protection in accordance with chapters II and III of Directive2011/95/EU
Amendment 89 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 78
Recital 78
(78) Penalties are necessary to ensure the effectiveness of the rules on whistleblower protection. Penalties against those who take retaliatory or other adverse actions against reporting persons can discourage further such actions. Penalties against persons who make a report or disclosure demonstrated to be knowingly false are necessary to deter further malicious reporting and preserve the credibility of the system. The proportionality of such penalties should ensure that they do not have a dissuasive effect on potential whistleblowers.
Amendment 93 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) Accordingly, common minimum standards ensuring effective whistleblower protection should apply in those acts and policy areas where i) there is a need to strengthen enforcement; ii) under-reporting by whistleblowers is a key factor affecting enforcement, and iii) breaches of Union law cause serious harmundermine to the public interest.
Amendment 95 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. With a view to enhancing the enforcement of Union law and policies in specific areas, this Directive lays down common minimum standards for the protection of persons reporting on the following unlawful activities or, abuse of law or threats to the public interest, including:
Amendment 96 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) The importance of whistleblower protection in terms of preventing and deterring breaches of Union rules on transport safety which can endanger human lives has been already acknowledged in sectorial Union instruments on aviation safety38 and maritime transport safety39 , which provide for tailored measures of protection to whistleblowers as well as specific reporting channels. These instruments also include the protection from retaliation of the workers reporting on their own honest mistakes (so called ‘just culture’). It is necessary to complement and expand upon the existing elements of whistleblower protection in these two sectors as well as to provide such protection to enhance the enforcement of safety standards for other transport modes, namely road and railway transport. _________________ 38 Regulation (EU) No 376/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 3 April 2014, on the reporting, analysis and follow-up of occurrences in civil aviation (OJ L 122, p. 18). 39 Directive 2013/54/EU, of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 20 November 2013, concerning certain flag State responsibilities for compliance with and enforcement of the Maritime Labour Convention (OJ L 329, p. 1), Directive 2009/16/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 23 April 2009, on port State control (OJ L 131, p. 57).
Amendment 97 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) Evidence-gathering, preventing, detecting and addressing environmental crimes and unlawful conduct or omissions as well as potential breaches against the protection of the environment remain a challenge and need to be reinforced as acknowledged in the Commission Communication "EU actions to improve environmental compliance and governance" of 18 January 201840 . Whilst whistleblower protection rules exist at present only in one sectorial instrument on environmental protection41 , the introduction of such protection appearis necessary to ensure effective enforcement of the Union environmental acquis, whose breaches can cause serious harm to the public interest with possible spill-over impacts across national borders. This is also relevant in cases where unsafe products can cause environmental harm. _________________ 40 COM(2018) 10 final. 41 Directive 2013/30/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 12 June 2013, on safety of offshore oil and gas operations (OJ L 178, p. 66).
Amendment 100 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) Enhancing the protection of whistleblowers would also favour preventing and deterring breaches of Euratom rules on nuclear safety, radiation protection and responsible and safe management of spent fuel and radioactive waste and would be reinforce the enforcement of existing provisions of the revised Nuclear Safety Directive44 on the effective nuclear safety culture and, in particular, Article 8 b (2) (a), which requires, inter alia, that the competent regulatory authority establishes management systems which give due priority to nuclear safety and promote, at all levels of staff and management, the ability to question the effective delivery of relevant safety principles and practices and to report in a timely manner on safety issues. _________________ 44 Council Directive 2014/87/Euratom of 8 July 2014 amending Directive 2009/71/Euratom establishing a Community framework for the nuclear safety of nuclear installations (OJ L 219, 25.7.2014, p. 42–52).
Amendment 100 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a – introductory part
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a – introductory part
a) breaches falling within the scope of the Union acts set out in the Annex (Part I and Part II) as regards, including but not limited to the following areas:
Amendment 103 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a – point ii
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a – point ii
(ii) financial services, prevention of money laundering and terrorist financing, corruption and organized crime;
Amendment 105 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a – point viii
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a – point viii
(viii) public health and public safety;
Amendment 106 #
2018/0106(COD)
(viii a) asylum and migration law;
Amendment 107 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a – point ix a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a – point ix a (new)
(ix a) employment and working conditions;
Amendment 108 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a – point ix b (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a – point ix b (new)
(ix b) tax fraud, tax evasion and tax optimisation;
Amendment 109 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a – point ix c (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a – point ix c (new)
(ix c) violations of human rights or of the rights enshrined in the European Charter of Fundamental Rights;
Amendment 110 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a – point ix d (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a – point ix d (new)
(ix d) company law;
Amendment 111 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b
b) competition law, especially breaches of Articles 101, 102, 106, 107 and 108 TFEU and breaches falling within the scope of Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 and Council Regulation (EU) No 2015/1589;
Amendment 112 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point d
d) breaches relating to the internal market, as referred to in Article 26(2) TFEU, particularly as regards acts which breach the rules of corporate tax or arrangements whose purpose is to obtain a tax advantage that defeats the object or purpose of the applicable corporate tax law.
Amendment 115 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 2
Article 1 – paragraph 2
2. Where specific rules on the reporting of breaches are provided for in sector-specific Union acts listed in Part 2 of the Annex, those rules shall apply. The provisions of this Directive shall be applicable for all matters relating to the protection of reporting persons not regulated in those sector-specific Union acts. This paragraph shall apply only in cases where the protection foreseen in sector- specific acts is higher than the one guaranteed by this Directive.
Amendment 116 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) Persons who report information, particularly about threats or harm to the public interest obtained in the context of their work- related activities, make use of their right to freedom of expression. The right to freedom of expression, enshrined in Article 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the Charter’) and in Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), encompasses freedom of information as well as media freedom and pluralism.
Amendment 117 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) Persons need specific legal protection where they acquire the information they report through their work-related activities and theand their decision to refpore run thet it results in a risk of work-related or other retaliation (for instance, for breaching the duty of confidentiality or loyaltyEU legislation on trade secrets). The underlying reason for providing them with protection is their position of economic vulnerability vis-à-vis the person on whom they de facto depend for work. When there is no such work-related power imbalance (for instance in the case of ordinary complainants or citizen bystanders) there is no need for protection against retaliationare reporting or on whom they de facto depend for work.
Amendment 118 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. This Directive shall apply to reporting persons workingand facilitators in the private or public sector who acquired information on breaches in a work-related context including, at least, the following:
Amendment 119 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a
a) persons having the status of worker, with the meaning of Article 45 TFEU, regardless of whether they are paid or unpaid;
Amendment 122 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Without prejudice to Articles 22a, 22b and 22c of Regulation No 31 (EEC), 11 (EAEC), this Directive shall also apply to the officials and the other servants of the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community who report information on any of the breaches referred to in Article 1.
Amendment 124 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2
Article 2 – paragraph 2
2. This Directive shall also apply to reporting persons whose work-based relationship is yet to begin in cases where information concerning a breach has been acquired during the recruitment process or other pre-contractual negotiation and whose work-based relationships that have terminated.
Amendment 130 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 1
(1) ‘breaches’ means actual or potential unlawful activities, omissions or abuse of law relating to the Union acts and, notably in areas falling within the scope referred to in Article 1 and in the Annex;
Amendment 133 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3
(3) ‘abuse of law’ means acts or omissions falling within the scope of Union law which do not appear to be unlawful in formal terms but defeat the object or the purpose pursued by the applicable rules or represent a danger or a potential danger to the public interest;
Amendment 135 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 4
(4) ‘information on breaches’ means evidenceinformation about actual breaches as well as reasonable suspicions about potential breaches which have not yet materialised;
Amendment 137 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 5
(5) ‘report’ means the provision of information relating to a breach which has occurred or is likely to occur in the organisation at which the reporting person works or has worked or in another organisation with which he or she is or was in contact through his or her work;
Amendment 138 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 8
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 8
(8) ‘disclosure’ means making information on breaches acquired within the work-related context available to the public domain;
Amendment 141 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 9
(9) ‘reporting person’ means a natural or legal person who reports or discloses information on breaches acquired in the context of his or her work-related activities;
Amendment 142 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 9 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 9 a (new)
(9 a) "facilitator" means a natural or legal person who contributes directly or indirectly to the reporting process;
Amendment 144 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 12
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 12
(12) ‘retaliation’ means any threatened or actual act or omission prompted by the internal or, external reporting which occurs in a work-related context andor disclosure and which causes or may cause unjustified detriment to the reporting person, suspected reporting person or their family members, relatives and facilitators;
Amendment 153 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2
Article 4 – paragraph 2
2. Such channels and procedures shall allow for reporting by employees of the entity. They mayshall allow for reporting by other persons who are in contact with the entity in the context of their work-related activities, referred to in Article 2(1)(b),(c) and (d), but the use of internal channels for reporting shall not be mandatory for these categories of persons.
Amendment 156 #
2018/0106(COD)
c a) private legal entities of any size whose conducted activities are likely to constitute a danger to the environment or to public health;
Amendment 160 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
a) channels for receiving the reports which are designed, set up and operated in a manner that ensures an acknowledgment of the receipt of a report within 5 working days, that ensures the confidentiality or anonymity of the identity of the reporting person and prevents access to non- authorised staff members;
Amendment 161 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d
d) a reasonable timeframe, not exceeding three monthirty days following the report, to provide feedback to the reporting person about the follow-up to the report;
Amendment 162 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 42
Recital 42
(42) Provided the anonymity or confidentiality of the identity of the reporting person is ensured, it is up to each individual private and public legal entity to define the kind of reporting channels to set up, such as in person, by post, by physical complaint box(es), by telephone hotline or through an online platform (intranet or internet). However, reporting channels should not be limited to those amongst the tools, such as in-person reporting and complaint box(es), which do not guarantee anonymity nor confidentiality of the identity of the reporting person.
Amendment 162 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
d a) the opportunity for the reporting person, with no obligation to do so, to look over, examine and comment on the final report at the end of the investigation, and that his/her comments must be included in the final report, and in the published version of the report, where applicable;
Amendment 164 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) physical meetings with the person or department designated to receive reports accompanied, if the reporting person requests it, by a union representative, by a representative of civil society or his/her legal representative.
Amendment 169 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point a
a) establish independent and autonomous external reporting channels, which are both secure and ensure confidentiality , for receiving and handling information provided by the reporting person and allow for anonymous reporting;
Amendment 170 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b
b) acknowledge receipt of the report within 5 working days, give feedback to the reporting person about the follow-up of the report within a reasonable timeframe not exceeding three months or six months in duly justified casewo months;
Amendment 171 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
b a) gives the reporting person the opportunity, without compelling him/her, to look over, examine and comment on the draft report over the course of the investigation, and the final report before it is published at the end of the investigation and, where relevant, take his/her comments into account;
Amendment 176 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 4
Article 6 – paragraph 4
4. Member States shall ensure that any authority which has received a report but does not have the competence to address the breach reported transmits it to the competent authority in line with clear procedures for handling all disclosed information securely with due regard to confidentiality or anonymity and that the reporting person is informed.
Amendment 182 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point c
c) physical meeting with dedicated staff members of the competent authority. accompanied, if the reporting person requests it, by a union representative by a representative of civil society or his/her legal representative.
Amendment 185 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 4
Article 7 – paragraph 4
4. Member States shall establish procedures to ensure that, where a report being initially addressed to a person whoor to an authority that has not been designated as responsible handler for reports that person is refrained from disclosing any information that might identify the reporting or the concerned person., clear procedures are established for handling all disclosed information securely with due regard to confidentiality or anonymity;
Amendment 187 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 62
Recital 62
Amendment 190 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 63
Recital 63
Amendment 204 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 74
Recital 74
(74) Action taken against reporting persons outside the work-related context, through proceedings, for instance, related to defamation, breach of copyright, trade secrets, confidentiality and personal data protection, can also pose a serious deterrent to whistleblowing. The protection of whistleblowers provided for in this Directive shall prevail over Directive (EU) 2016/943 of the European Parliament and of the Council58 exempts reporting persons from the civil redress measures, procedures and remedies it provides for that, in case the alleged acquisition, use or disclosure of the trade secret was carried out for revealingcan reasonably be assumed to serve as proof of actual misconduct, wrongdoing or illegal activity, provided that the respondent acted for the purpose of protecting the general public interest. Also in other proceedings, reporting persons should be able to rely on having made a report or disclosure in accordance with this Directive as a defence. In such cases, the person initiating the proceedings should carry the burden to prove any intent on the part of the reporting person to violate the law. _________________ 58 Directive (EU) 2016/943 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2016 on the protection of undisclosed know-how and business information (trade secrets) against their unlawful acquisition, use and disclosure (OJ L 157, 15.6.2016, p. 1).
Amendment 207 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. A reporting person shall qualify for protection under this Directive provided he or she has reasonable grounds to believe that the information reported was true at the time of reporting and that this information falls within the scope of this Directive regardless of the reporting channel chosen.
Amendment 210 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. A person who anonymously reported information on breach and whose identity was revealed shall also qualify for protection under this Directive.
Amendment 212 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2
Article 13 – paragraph 2
Amendment 215 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 4
Article 13 – paragraph 4
Amendment 217 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Member States shall take the necessary measures to prohibit any form of retaliation, whether direct or indirect, against reporting persons meeting the conditions set out in Article 13, or any kinds of actions, whether direct or indirect, that could discourage reporting persons from exercising the rights protected by this Directive, including in particular in the form of:
Amendment 224 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 8 a (new)
Article 15 – paragraph 8 a (new)
8 a. Member States shall ensure that, following an individual assessment, any third country national who reports information falling into the scope of this directive and suffers from a well-founded fear of persecution or would face a real risk of suffering serious harm because of the report and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself or herself of the protection of that country can be considered as qualifying as a refugee beneficiary of subsidiary protection in accordance with chapters II and III of Directive 2011/95/EU.
Amendment 227 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point d
d) breach the duty of maintaining the confidentiality of the identity of reporting persons or take actions that uncover or aim at uncovering the identity of the reporting persons in case of anonymous reporting.
Amendment 229 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a – introductory part
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a – introductory part
(a) breaches falling within the scope of the Union acts set out in the Annex (Part I and Part II) as regards, including but not limited to the following areas:
Amendment 229 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 2
Article 17 – paragraph 2
Amendment 253 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. This Directive shall apply to reporting persons workingand facilitators in the private or public sector who acquired information on breaches in a work-related context including, at least, the following:
Amendment 284 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 1
(1) ‘breaches’ means actual or potential unlawful activities, omissions or abuse of law relating to the Union acts and, notably in areas falling within the scope referred to in Article 1 and in the Annex;
Amendment 292 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3
(3) ‘abuse of law’ means acts or omissions falling within the scope of Union law which do not appear to be unlawful in formal terms but defeat the object or the purpose pursued by the applicable rules or represent a danger or a potential danger to the public interest;
Amendment 367 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Reporting channels, including digital mechanisms, and institutional arrangements shall provide for safe, secure, confidential and anonymous disclosures.
Amendment 374 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point a
a) establish independent and autonomous external reporting channels, which are both secure and ensure confidentiality, for receiving and handling information provided by the reporting person and allow for anonymous reporting;
Amendment 428 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. A reporting person shall qualify for protection under this Directive provided he or she has reasonable grounds to believe that the information reported was true at the time of reporting and that this information falls within the scope of this Directive, regardless of the reporting channel.
Amendment 435 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. A person reporting externallywho anonymously disclosed information that falls within the scope of this directive and whose identity was revealed shall also qualify for protection under this Ddirective where one of the following conditions is fulfilled :.
Amendment 436 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – point a
Amendment 437 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – point b
Amendment 449 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 4
Article 13 – paragraph 4
Amendment 494 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 a (new)
Article 16 a (new)
Article 16 a Rights of Persons Implicated Member States shall ensure that any findings or reports resulting from an assessment or an investigation of, or prompted by, one or more protected disclosure(s) does not unjustly prejudice any individual, whether directly or indirectly. The right to a fair hearing or trial shall also be fully respected.
Amendment 505 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 a (new)
Article 17 a (new)
Article 17 a No Waiver of Rights and Remedies The rights and remedies provided for under this Directive may not be waived or limited by any agreement, policy, form or condition of employment, including by any pre-dispute arbitration agreement. Any attempt to waive or limit these rights and remedies shall be considered void and unenforceable and may be subject to penalty or sanction.
Amendment 23 #
2018/0081(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) With regard to cadmium, a limit value of 0,001 mg/m3 may be difficult to be complied with in some sectors in the short term. A transitional period of sefiven years should therefore be introduced during which the limit value 0,004 mg/m3 should apply.
Amendment 24 #
2018/0081(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) With regard to beryllium, a limit value of 0,0002 mg/m3 may be difficult to be complied with in some sectors in the short term. A transitional period of fiveour years should therefore be introduced during which the limit value of 0,0006 mg/m3should apply.
Amendment 26 #
2018/0081(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 18 a (new)
Recital 18 a (new)
(18a) There is sufficient evidence of the carcinogenicity of diesel engine exhaust emissions. Diesel engine exhaust has been classified by the International Agency for Research on Cancer as carcinogenic (Group 1) to humans in 2012, based on sufficient evidence that exposure is associated with an increased risk for lung cancer. New diesel engine technology has changed the quality and quantity of diesel emissions and the associated cancer risks have been reduced but not eliminated. Due to the long transition time to switch from old to new diesel technology, a concomitant exposure to exhaust emissions from old and new diesel engines is expected to occur at work for the many years to come. Diesel engine exhaust emissions are process-generated and consequently they are not subject to classification in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council. On the basis of available information, including scientific and technical data, a limit value for diesel engine exhaust emissions should be established. It is therefore appropriate to include work involving exposure to diesel engine exhaust emissions in Annex I and to establish a limit value for diesel engine exhaust emissions in Annex III to Directive 2004/37/EC. The entries in Annex I and Annex III to that Directive should cover fumes from all types of diesel engine and are thus irrespective of whether the exhaust emissions are from old or new diesel engines. Elemental carbon is known as the relevant marker of exposure to diesel engine exhaust emissions.
Amendment 27 #
2018/0081(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 18 b (new)
Recital 18 b (new)
(18b) Certain polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) mixtures meet the criteria for classification as carcinogenic in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 and therefore are carcinogens as defined in Directive 2004/37/EC. Exposure to such mixtures may occur during work involving burning processes, such as from combustion engine exhaust, and high temperature combustion processes, among others. The existing entry 2 in Annex I to that Directive should therefore be extended to also cover other occupational exposure situations during which workers are exposed to these substances and their mixtures. In addition, on the basis of available information, including scientific and technical data, it is appropriate to establish a limit value for PAHs mixtures with benzo[a]pyrene as indicator in part A.
Amendment 31 #
2018/0081(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex – paragraph -1 (new)
Annex – paragraph -1 (new)
Directive 2004/37/EC
Annex I – point 5 a (new)
Annex I – point 5 a (new)
In Annex I of Directive 2004/37/EC the following point is added: “5a. Work involving exposure to diesel engine exhaust emissions”
Amendment 32 #
2018/0081(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex – paragraph -1 a (new)
Annex – paragraph -1 a (new)
Directive 2004/37/EC
Annex I – point 5 b (new)
Annex I – point 5 b (new)
In Annex I of Directive 2004/37/EC, the following point is added: “5b. Work involving exposure to polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons present in coal soot, coal tar or coal pitch and work involving exposure to carcinogenic polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, in particular in any burning process, such as from combustion engine exhaust, and high temperature combustion processes, among others.”
Amendment 33 #
2018/0081(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex – paragraph 1
Annex – paragraph 1
Directive 2004/37/EC
Annex III – point A – table – column “Transitional measures” – row 1
Annex III – point A – table – column “Transitional measures” – row 1
Limit value 0,004 mg/m3 until xx yyyy 202z [75 years]
Amendment 34 #
2018/0081(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex – paragraph 1
Annex – paragraph 1
Directive 2004/37/EC
Annex III – point A – table – column “Transitional measures” – row 2
Annex III – point A – table – column “Transitional measures” – row 2
Limit value 0,0006 mg/m3 until xx yyyy 202z [54 years]
Amendment 35 #
2018/0081(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex – paragraph 1
Annex – paragraph 1
Directive 2004/37/EC
Annex III – point A – table – column “Name of agent” – row 5 a (new)
Annex III – point A – table – column “Name of agent” – row 5 a (new)
Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons mixtures containing benzo[a]pyrene which are carcinogens within the meaning of the Directive
Amendment 36 #
2018/0081(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex – paragraph 1
Annex – paragraph 1
Directive 2004/37/EC
Annex III – point A – table – column “Limit values” – column “8 hours” – column “mg/m3” – row 5 a (new)
Annex III – point A – table – column “Limit values” – column “8 hours” – column “mg/m3” – row 5 a (new)
0,0000710a ________________ 10a benzo[a]pyrene as a marker of total PAH concentration
Amendment 37 #
2018/0081(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex – paragraph 1
Annex – paragraph 1
Directive 2004/37/EC
Annex III – point A – table – column “Name of agent” – row 5 b (new)
Annex III – point A – table – column “Name of agent” – row 5 b (new)
Diesel engine exhaust emissions
Amendment 38 #
2018/0081(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex – paragraph 1
Annex – paragraph 1
Directive 2004/37/EC
Annex III – point A – table – column “Limit values” – column “8 hours” – column “mg/m3” – row 5 b (new)
Annex III – point A – table – column “Limit values” – column “8 hours” – column “mg/m3” – row 5 b (new)
0,00001110b ________________ 10b measured as elemental carbon
Amendment 104 #
2017/2272(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Welcomes the inclusiveness of the UNFCCC’s process; considers that ensuring effective participation requires that the issue of vested or conflicting interests be addressed; supports the initiative by governments representing the majority of the world’s population to introduce a specific conflicts of interest policy and calls on the Commission to engage constructively in this process;
Amendment 119 #
2017/2272(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Regrets that the energy-security policy of the EU is based mainly on the diversification of hydrocarbons supplies and that public and private energy companies deeply influence in this respect the EU common foreign policy ; calls on the Council and the Commission to redefine the concept of “energy security” taking into account of climate-related aspects; takes the view that a genuine and effective climate diplomacy should go hand in hand with a gradual decarbonisation of the EU common foreign policy;
Amendment 243 #
2017/2272(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Calls on the EU to further intensify its relations with indigenous peoples and local and regional authorities in third countries to enhance thematic cooperation between cities and regions both within and outside of the EU; notes the role EU delegations in third countries can play in this regard;
Amendment 3 #
2017/2264(REG)
Article 174 – paragraph 8 – subparagraph 1
The President may decide, following the adoption or rejection of a particular amendment, that several other amendments of similar content or with similar objectives shall be put to the vote collectively. The President mayshall seek the agreement of Parliament before doing so if a political group or Members reaching at least the low threshold request it.
Amendment 1 #
2017/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 2 a (new)
Citation 2 a (new)
- having regard to the Commission communication of 19 May 2015 on ‘Better regulation for better results - An EU agenda’, (COM(2015) 215 final),
Amendment 3 #
2017/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 4 a (new)
Citation 4 a (new)
- having regard to the Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 240/2014 of 7 January 2014 on the European code of conduct on partnership in the framework of the European Structural and Investment Funds,
Amendment 22 #
2017/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J
Recital J
J. whereas the scope of the Urban Agenda includes in particular a pillar on Better Regulation, aimed at focusing on a more effective and coherent implementation of EU policies, legislation and legal instruments, while not aiming at initiating new legislation;
Amendment 26 #
2017/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital M
Recital M
M. whereas new challenges posed by security and immigration, and challenges relating torelating to urban poverty, the quality of public services, access to clean and affordable energy, provision of water, natural disasters and, environmental protection and migration and refugee policies, among others, demand a stronger commitment from cities when designing and implementing EU policies ;
Amendment 36 #
2017/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital P a (new)
Recital P a (new)
P a. whereas the European Commission invites, as part of an expanded Better Regulation Agenda, on an ad-hoc basis local authorities for Territorial Impact Assessment of future legislative proposals;
Amendment 37 #
2017/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital P b (new)
Recital P b (new)
P b. whereas it is important to involve local and regional authorities at the earliest part in policy-making cycle and to enhance them as an integral part in Territorial Impact Assessments;
Amendment 40 #
2017/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that there is no legal basis in the Treaties allowing cities to be formally involved in decision-making at EU level; believes, howeverBelieves, in line with the Treaty principles of sincere cooperation, subsidiarity and proportionality and respective of regional and local self- government, that the current institutional set-up allows for encouraging platforms of cooperation between cities, and between cities and their representative organisations and the decision-making bodies at both national and EU level;
Amendment 46 #
2017/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Recalls that at the level of secondary law, cities do have a certain role in the implementation of certain policies and instruments, such as in the area of the European structural and investment funds, and in particular the Partnership Principle;
Amendment 58 #
2017/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Amendment 66 #
2017/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Advocates the consolidation of the involvement of associations representing local authorities and urban interests in policy design, such as the Eurocities network and the Council of European Municipalities and Regions (CEMR) and others, and considers that such associations should become permanent consultants of EU policieskey partners of the EU Institutions by way of setteing a permanet structured dialogue mechanims particularly at the pre-legisaltive stage;
Amendment 71 #
2017/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Believes that this permanent structured dialogue mechanism with local and urban authorities representative organisations should be grounded in the Secretariat General of the Commission and expand the existing provisions of the 2015 Better Regulation package to enable them to contribute to territorial impact assessments, advice on the design and provide evidence on commissioned preparatory studies and evaluation, and provide regular technical expertise on the implementation at subnational level of EU legislation;
Amendment 79 #
2017/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Encourages the Council to consider launching meetings of the Council especially dedicated to urban matters; calls for cities and regions and their representative associations to have access to the Council working groups so that they can follow and more accurately provide input into the work of the Council in areas that impact them and their competences;
Amendment 91 #
2017/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. BStresses the importance of the role of civil society in the political life of the EU; believes that cities’ representation should not be limited to their official representatives participating in the management and consulting structures, and that cities – and not only capitals of the countries and regions – should become centres of debate on the future of the Union and its policies;
Amendment 102 #
2017/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Insists that such an objective will only be feasible if the debates and consultations are held in urban areas other than national or regional capitals, which may constitute an easily accessible forum for citizens living nearby;
Amendment 105 #
2017/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Proposes that this process should be arranged by Parliament and the Committee of the Regions, in cooperation with those European city councils recognised as fora for European debate, and that such fora should, in close cooperation with the Member States, be established in cities whose range of impact affects at least one million residents, so as to ensure the broadest possible participation;
Amendment 113 #
2017/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Suggests the establishment of a pilot programme of 54 European debate fora – two for each Member State ensuring a balanced territorial representation and the representation of cities of different size– to be held in non- capital cities;
Amendment 122 #
2017/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Believes that the consolidation of the cities’ position in shaping the EU policies does not undermine the trust in the Member States, as it reinforces multi-level governance and subsidiarity based on the bilateral trust between the EU, Member States and regional and local structurauthorities;
Amendment 123 #
2017/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16 a. Believes that given that, as there is a significant diversity of size and competences of cities across the EU, most of the above mentioned provisions are equally applicable to all subnational levels of government in addition to cities;
Amendment 11 #
2017/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas three-dimensional (3D) printing became accessible to the general public when 3D printers for individuals were placed on the market; whereas that market shouldwill likely, however, remain marginal in the medium term, taking into account the cost of printers and materials, the limited capacity of 3D printers designed for individual use, and the limited number and nature of materials made available to consumers;
Amendment 20 #
2017/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the majoritya growing part of the 3D- printed products being created are prototypesmore ready-to-be used or -commercialised items than mere prototypes as they used to be;
Amendment 23 #
2017/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. Whereas the use of 3-D printing is becoming more and more widespread in the society, notably in the education field, in citizen and start-up fora, such as ‘maker spaces’, as well as in the private sphere;
Amendment 48 #
2017/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas 3D-printing technology raises specific legal and ethical issues regarding intellectual property and, notably as regards civil liability, and rules; whereas those issues fall within the remit of the Committee on Legal Affairs;
Amendment 61 #
2017/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas not all 3D-printing production of objects is unlawful, nor are all operators in the sector producing counterfeit objects or infringes third party rights, proper sanctions should be implemented according to the law;
Amendment 65 #
2017/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
I. whereas, from a copyright point of view, useful distinctions should be made: for instance,, in particular between home printing for private use and printing for commercial use, andor for uses covered by copyright limitations and exceptions on the one hand, and printing for commercial use on the other hand; distinctions between B2B services and B2C services should also be taken into account.
Amendment 69 #
2017/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J
Recital J
J. whereas a report drawn up by France’s Higher Council for Literary and Artistic Property on 3D printing and copyright found that ‘the democratisation of 3D printing does not appear, to date, to be causing a huge problem with copyright infringement, which is the subject of this report; whereas it acknowledges that ‘the main risk of counterfeiting is with works of art’;
Amendment 71 #
2017/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
K. whereas as a result of the processes that it uses, 3D printing leads to what the industry has described as a kind of ‘fragmentation of the act of creating’ in that a protected work may be circulated digitally before it takes a physical form,; which makes it easier to copy and complicates the fereas this is not new to the industry which holds intellectual property rights against counterfeiting considerablynd has developed digital business models;
Amendment 73 #
2017/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital L
Recital L
Amendment 77 #
2017/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital L a (new)
Recital L a (new)
La. Whereas 3D printing has not fundamentally altered the way copyright applies; however, due scrutiny should be brought to how exclusive rights are allocated and implemented, in consideration of the large amount of open-source licenses governing the creation of software in this domain, and in compliance with uses allowed under intellectual property law;
Amendment 80 #
2017/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital M
Recital M
M. wWhereas the question of the relevance and applicability forof existing liability rules to the goods produced and forto the damage resulting from a defective file could, as regards consumers, be resolved with reference to Articles 10 and 14 of the Commission proposal on certain aspects of contracts for the supply of digital contentor from a defective function of the physical product resulting from it, arises, in a way similar to the questions highlighted by the European Parliament Resolution on Civil Law Rules on Robotics (A8-0005/2017);
Amendment 84 #
2017/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital M a (new)
Recital M a (new)
Ma. whereas the impact of 3-D printing on consumers’ rights and on consumer law in general should be carefully examined in light of Directive XXX on certain aspects of contracts for the supply of digital digital content;
Amendment 91 #
2017/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital O
Recital O
O. whereas general liability rules, including those on the liability of intermediary service providers as defined in articles 12 to 14 of the e-commerce Directive, also apply to 3D printing; whereas a specific liability regime could be envisaged for damage caused by an object created using 3D-printing technology, as the number of stakeholders involved in the process often makes it difficult for the victim to identify the person responsible; whereas those rules could make the creator or vendoseller of the 3D file liable, or the producer of the 3D printer, or the producer of the software used in the 3D printer, or the supplier of the materials used for printing, or even the person who creaprinted the object, depending on the cause of the defect discovered and on the damage that occurred;
Amendment 97 #
2017/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital P a (new)
Recital P a (new)
Pa. Whereas 3D printing has a role to play in reducing energy and natural resources consumption in the purpose of fighting the climate change; whereas the use of 3D printing would minimise waste in production and prolong lifespan of consumer products by enabling production of replacement parts at consumer level;
Amendment 98 #
2017/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital P b (new)
Recital P b (new)
Pb. Having regard to Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market;
Amendment 101 #
2017/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses that to anticipate problems relating to accident liability or intellectual property infringement, the EU will have toIs of the opinion that in order to anticipate the legal and ethical problems raised by 3D printing technologies, the EU should carefully consider adoapt newing legislation or tailor existing laws to the specific case of 3D technology; stresses that, in any case, the legislative response should avoid duplicating rules and should take inseek to acencount projects that are already under way; adds that innovation needs to be accompanied by law, without the law acting as a brake or a constraintrage innovation;
Amendment 108 #
2017/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 116 #
2017/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Notes that solutions of a legal nature cshould make it feasibleenable rights-holders to control the legal reproduction of 3D objects protected by copyright, for example, digital and 3D- printing providers could systematically display a notice on the need to respect intellectual property, a legal limit could be introduced on the number of private copies of 3D objects in order to prevent illegal reproduction, and a tax on 3D printing could be levied to compensate intellectual property rights holders for damages suffered as a result of private copies being made in 3Ds of protected 3D objects when exclusive rights apply;
Amendment 125 #
2017/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 132 #
2017/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Criticises the factNotes that at this stage, none of those options is wholly satisfactory on its own;
Amendment 133 #
2017/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
Amendment 139 #
2017/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Therefore calls on the Commission to give comprehensive consideration to every aspect of 3D-printing technology when taking the measures referred to in its communication (COM(2017)0707); stresses the importance of involving all stakeholders in that workendeavour, including SMEs and consumers;
Amendment 141 #
2017/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Notes the applicability, necessity and practicability of existing liability rules for intermediary service providers which transmit, cache or host and considers them appropriate for 3D printing service infrastructure.
Amendment 64 #
2017/0085(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) In order to provide greater possibility for parents to use parental leave as their children grow up, the right to parental leave should be granted until the child is at leastup to twelve years old. Member States should be able to specify the period of notice to be given by the worker to the employer when applying for parental leave and to decide whether the right to parental leave may be subject to a certain period of service. In view of the growing diversity of contractual arrangements, the sum of successive fixed-term contracts with the same employer should be taken into account for the purpose of calculating the period of service. To balance the needs of workers with those of employers, Member States should also be able to decide whether they define if the employer may be allowed to postpone the granting of parental leave under certain circumstances. In such cases, the employer should provide justification for the postponement. Given that flexibility makes it more likely that second parents, in particular fathers, will take up their entitlement to such leave, workers should be able to request to take parental leave on a full-time or part-time basis or in other flexible forms. It should be up to the employer whether or not to accept such a request for parental leave in other flexible forms than full-time. Member States should also assess if the conditions and detailed arrangements of parental leave should be adapted to the specific needs of parents in particularly disadvantaged situations.
Amendment 83 #
2017/0085(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1
This Directive applies to all workers, men and women, who have an employment contract or employment relationship as defined by the law, collective agreements and/or practice in force in each Member State.
Amendment 103 #
2017/0085(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that workers have an individual right to parental leave of at least four months to be taken before the child reaches a given age which shall be at leastup to twelve.
Amendment 45 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) Article 7 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union ("the Charter") protects the fundamental right of everyone to the respect for his or her private and family life, home and communications. Respect for the privacy of one’s communications is an essential dimension of this right. Confidentiality of electronic communications ensures that information exchanged between parties and the external elements of such communication, including when the information has been sent, from where, to whom, is not to be revealed to anyone other than to the parties involved in a communication. The principle of confidentiality should apply to current and future means of communication, including calls, internet access, instant messaging applications, in-platform messages between users of a social network, e-mail, internet phone calls and personal messaging provided through social media.
Amendment 53 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) The provisions of this Regulation particularise and complement the general rules on the protection of personal data laid down in Regulation (EU) 2016/679 as regards electronic communications data that qualify as personal data. This Regulation therefore does not lower the level of protection enjoyed by natural persons under Regulation (EU) 2016/679. Processing of electronic communications data by providers of electronic communications services should only be permitted in accordance withshould only be permitted in accordance with and on legal ground specifically provided under this Regulation.
Amendment 73 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) Electronic communications data should be treated as confidential. This means that any interference with the transmission of electronic communications data, whether directly by human intervention or through the intermediation of automated processing by machines, without the consent of all the communicating parties should be prohibited. The prohibition of interception of communications data should also apply during their conveyance, i.e. until receipt of the content of the electronic communication by the intended addressee, and when stored. Interception of electronic communications data may occur, for example, when someone other than the communicating parties, listens to calls, reads, scans or stores the content of electronic communications, or the associated metadata for purposes other than the exchange of communications. Interception also occurs when third parties monitor websites visited, timing of the visits, interaction with others, etc., without the consent of the end-user concerned. As technology evolves, the technical ways to engage in interception have also increased. Such ways may range from the installation of equipment that gathers data from terminal equipment over targeted areas, such as the so-called IMSI (International Mobile Subscriber Identity) catchers, to programs and techniques that, for example, surreptitiously monitor browsing habits for the purpose of creating end-user profiles. Other examples of interception include capturing payload data or content data from unencrypted wireless networks and routers, injecting ads or other content and analysis of customers´ traffic data, including browsing habits without the end- users' consent.
Amendment 84 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) The processing of electronic communications data can be useful for businesses, consumers and society as a whole. Vis-à-vis Directive 2002/58/EC, this Regulation broadens the possibilities for providers of electronic communications services to process electronic communications metadata, based on end- users consent. However, end-users attach great importance to the confidentiality of their communications, including their online activities, and that they want to control the use of electronic communications data for purposes other than conveying the communication. Therefore, this Regulation should require providers of electronic communications services to obtain end-users' consent to process electronic communications metadata, which should include data on the location of the device generated for the purposes of granting and maintaining access and connection to the service. Location data that is generated other than in the context of providing electronic communications services should not be considered as metadata. Examples of commercial usages of electronic communications metadata by providers of electronic communications services may include the provision of heatmaps; a graphical representation of data using colours to indicate the presence of individuals. This should be done in accordance with Article 25 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. To display the traffic movements in certain directions during a certain period of time, an identifier ismay be necessary to link the positions of individuals at certain time intervals. This identifier would be missing if anonymous data were to be used and such movement could not be displayed. Such usage of electronic communications metadata could, for example, benefit public authorities and public transport operators to define where to develop new infrastructure, based on the usage of and pressure on the existing structure. Where a type ofWhen processing of electronic communications metadata, in particular using new technologies, and taking into account the nature, scope, context and purposes of the processing, is likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of natural persons, a data protection impact assessment and, as the case may be, a consultation of the supervisory authority should take place prior to the processing, in accordance with Articles 35 and 36 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
Amendment 93 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) Terminal equipment of end-users of electronic communications networks and any information relating to the usage of such terminal equipment, whether in particular is stored in or emitted by such equipment, requested from or processed in order to enable it to connect to another device and or network equipment, are part of the private sphere of the end-users requiring protection under the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Given that such equipment contains or processes information that may reveal details of an individual's emotional, political, social complexities, including the content of communications, pictures, the location of individuals by accessing the device’s GPS capabilities, contact lists, and other information already stored in the device, the information related to such equipment requires enhanced privacy protection. Furthermore, the so-called spyware, web bugs, hidden identifiers, tracking cookies and other similar unwanted tracking tools can enter end-user's terminal equipment without their knowledge in order to gain access to information, to store hidden information and to trace the activities. Information related to the end-user’s device may also be collected remotely for the purpose of identification and tracking, using techniques such as the so-called ‘device fingerprinting’, often without the knowledge of the end-user, and may seriously intrude upon the privacy of these end-users. Techniques that surreptitiously monitor the actions of end-users, for example by tracking their activities online or the location of their terminal equipment, or subvert the operation of the end-users’ terminal equipment pose a serious threat to the privacy of end-users. Therefore, any such interference with the end-user's terminal equipment should be allowed only with the end-user's consent and for specific and transparent purposes. Users should receive all relevant information about the intended processing in clear and easily understandable language. Such information should be provided separately from the terms and conditions of the service.
Amendment 134 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 3
Article 1 – paragraph 3
3. The provisions of this Regulation particularise and complement Regulation (EU) 2016/679 by laying down specific rules for the purposes mentioned in paragraphs 1 and 2. Except where otherwise provided for in this Regulation, the provisions of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 shall apply when personal data is processed.
Amendment 141 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1
1. This Regulation applies to the processing of electronic communications data carried out in connection with the provision and the use of electronic communications services and to information related to the terminal equipment of end-users.:
Amendment 142 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a (new)
(a) the processing of electronic communications data carried out in connection with the provision and the use of electronic communications services, irrespective of whether a payment from the end-user is required.
Amendment 143 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b (new)
(b) the processing of information related to or processed by the terminal equipment of end-users.
Amendment 144 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c (new)
(c) the placing on the market of hardware and software permitting electronic communications by end-users, including the retrieval and presentation of information on the Internet;
Amendment 145 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point d (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point d (new)
(d) the provision of publicly available directories of users of electronic communication;
Amendment 146 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point e (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point e (new)
(e) the sending of commercial electronic communications concerning direct marketing to end-users.
Amendment 147 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point c
Amendment 148 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point d
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point d
(d) activities of competent authorities for the purposes of the prevention, investigation, detection or prosecution of criminal offences or the execution of criminal penalties, including the safeguarding against and the prevention of threats to public security, without prejudice to article 11;
Amendment 150 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 3
Article 2 – paragraph 3
3. The processing of electronic communications data by the Union institutions, bodies, offices and agencies insofar as they are not publicly available and not originating or having as destination publicly available communications services, is governed by Regulation (EU) 00/0000 [new Regulation replacing Regulation 45/2001].
Amendment 151 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. This Regulation applies to: (a) communications services to the activities referred to in Article 2 where the user or end-user is in the Union, irrespective of whether a payment of the end-user is required; (b) (c) related to the terminal equipment of end- users located in the Un or where the communications services, hardware, software, directories, or direct marketing commercial electronic communications are provided from the territory of the Union. the provision of electronic the use of such services; the protection of information.
Amendment 158 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 4
Article 3 – paragraph 4
4. The representative shall have the power to answer questions and provide information in addition to or instead of the provider it represents, in particular, to supervisory authorities, and end-users, on all issues related to processing electronic communications datathe activities referred to in Article 2 for the purposes of ensuring compliance with this Regulation.
Amendment 159 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 5
Article 3 – paragraph 5
5. The designation of a representative pursuant to paragraph 2 shall be without prejudice to legal actions, which could be initiated against a natural or legal person who processes electronic communications data in connection with the provision of electronic communications services from outside the Union to end-users inundertakes the activities referred to in Article 2 from outside the Union.
Amendment 180 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Chapter 2 – title
Chapter 2 – title
PROTECTION OF ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS OF NATURAL AND LEGAL PERSONS AND OF INFORMATION STORED INPROCESSED BY AND RELATED TO THEIR TERMINAL EQUIPMENT
Amendment 182 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – title
Article 5 – title
Confidentiality of electronic communications data
Amendment 183 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Amendment 189 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Electronic communications data shall be confidential. Any processing of electronic communications data, including interference with electronic communications data such as by listening, tapping, storing, monitoring, scanning or other kinds of interception, surveillance or processing of electronic communications data, regardless of whether this data is in transit or stored, by persons other than the end-users, shall be prohibited, except when permitted by this Regulation.
Amendment 192 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Confidentiality of electronic communications shall also apply to data related to or processed by terminal equipment and to machine-to-machine communication.
Amendment 197 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Providers of electronic communications networks and services may process electronic communications data only if:
Amendment 203 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) it is strictly necessary to achieve the transmission of the communication, for the duration necessary for that purpose; or
Amendment 206 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) it is strictly necessary to maintain or restore the security ofavailability, integrity and confidentiality of the respective electronic communications networks and or services, or to detect technical faults and/or errors in the transmission of electronic communications, for the duration necessary for that purpose.; or
Amendment 209 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) the user concerned has given his or her consent to the processing of his or her electronic communications data, provided that it is technically strictly necessary for the provision of a service explicitly requested by a user for his or her purely individual usage, solely for the provision of the explicitly requested service and only for the duration necessary for that purpose and without the consent of all users, only where such processing produces effects solely in relation to the user who requested the service and does not adversely affect the fundamental rights of other users.
Amendment 213 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Before processing electronic communications data, the provider shall carry out a data protection impact assessment pursuant to Article 35 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, and if necessary a prior consultation with the supervisory authority pursuant to Article 36 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679
Amendment 218 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Providers of electronic communications services may process electronic communications metadata only if:
Amendment 222 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) it is strictly necessary to meet mandatory quality of service requirements pursuant to [Directive establishing the European Electronic Communications Code] or Regulation (EU) 2015/212028 for the duration necessary for that purpose; or __________________ 28 Regulation (EU) 2015/2120 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2015 laying down measures concerning open internet access and amending Directive 2002/22/EC on universal service and users’ rights relating to electronic communications networks and services and Regulation (EU) No 531/2012 on roaming on public mobile communications networks within the Union (OJ L 310, 26.11.2015, p. 1–18).
Amendment 227 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) it is strictly necessary for billing, calculating interconnection payments, detecting or stopping fraudulent, or abusive use of, or subscription to, electronic communications services; or
Amendment 231 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) the end-userafter receiving all relevant information about the intended processing in clear and easily understandable language, provided separately from the terms and conditions of the provider, the user or users concerned hasve given his or hertheir specific consent to the processing of his or hetheir communications metadata for one or more specified purposes, including for the provision of specific services to such end- users, provided that the purpose or purposes concerned could not be fulfilled bywithout the processing information that is made anonymousof such metadata.
Amendment 237 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. For the purposes of point (c) of paragraph 2, where a type of processing of electronic communications metadata, in particular using new technologies, and taking into account the nature, scope, context and purposes of the processing, is likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of natural persons, Articles 35 and 36 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 shall apply.
Amendment 239 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 3 – point a
Article 6 – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) for the sole purpose of the provision of a specific service to an end- user, if the end-user or end-users concerned have given their consent to the processing of his or her electronic communications content andthe user concerned has given his or her consent to the processing of his or her electronic communications content for the sole purpose of the provision of a specific service explicitly requested by the end-user, for the duration necessary for that purpose, provided that the provision of that specific service cannot be fulfilled without the processing of such content by the provider, and the consent has not been a condition to access or use a service; or
Amendment 244 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 3 – point b
Article 6 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) if all end-users concerned have given their consent to the processing of their electronic communications content for one or more specified purposes that cannot be fulfilled by processing information that is made anonymous, and the provider has consulted the supervisory authority. Points (2) and (3) of Article 36 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 shall apply to the consultation of the supervisory authority.
Amendment 255 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 1
1. Without prejudice to points (b) and (c) of Article 6(1) and points (a) and (b) of Article 6(3), the provider of the electronic communications service shall erase electronic communications content or make that data anonymous after receipt of electronic communication content by the intended recipient or recipients. Such data may be recorded or stored by the end-users or by a third partparty, which could be the provider of the electronic communication service, specifically entrusted by them end-user to record, store or otherwise process such data,. The end-user may further process the content in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2016/679, if applicable.
Amendment 264 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3
Article 7 – paragraph 3
3. Where the processing of electronic communications metadata takes place for the purpose of billing in accordance with point (b) of Article 6(2), the relevant metadatametadata which is strictly necessary may be kept until the end of the period during which a bill may lawfully be challenged or a payment may be pursued in accordance with national law.
Amendment 267 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – title
Article 8 – title
Protection of information stored in and, related to and processed by end-users’ terminal equipment
Amendment 271 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The use of processing and storage capabilities of terminal equipment and the collection of information from end-users’ terminal equipment, including aboutor making information available through the terminal equipment, including information about or generated by its software and hardware, other than by the end-user concerned shall be prohibited, except on the following grounds:
Amendment 280 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) it is strictly necessary for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of an electronic communication over an electronic communications network; or
Amendment 281 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the end-user has given his or her consentspecific consent, for a specific purpose, and the consent has not been a condition to access or use a service, for the duration necessary for that purpose; or
Amendment 288 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) it is strictly necessary for providing an information society service requested by the end-user, for the duration necessary for that provision of the service, provided that the provision of that specific service cannot be fulfilled without the processing of such content by the provider; or
Amendment 293 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point d
Amendment 299 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
Amendment 308 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Points a, c and d shall be limited to situations that involve no, or only very limited, intrusion of privacy or related to fundamental rights.
Amendment 313 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. No user shall be denied access to any information society service or functionality, regardless of whether this service is remunerated or not, on grounds that he or she has not given his or her consent under Article 8(1)(b) to the processing of personal information and/or the use of storage capabilities of his or her terminal equipment that is not necessary for the provision of that service or functionality.
Amendment 317 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) it is done exclusively in order to, for the time necessary for, and for the purpose of establishing a connection requested by the user; or
Amendment 318 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a a (new)
(aa) the end-user has given his or her consent; or
Amendment 321 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a b (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a b (new)
(ab) the data are anonymised and the risks are adequately mitigated.
Amendment 322 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Amendment 328 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 329 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
The information referred to in points aa and ab of paragraph 2 shall be conveyed in a clear and prominent notice setting out at least the details of how the information will be collected, the purpose of collection, the person responsible for it and other information required under Article 13 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, where personal data are collected. The collection of such information shall be conditional on the application of appropriate technical and organisational measures to ensure a level of security appropriate to the risks, as set out in Article 32 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
Amendment 331 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. For the purpose of point (ab) of paragraph 2, the following controls shall be implemented to mitigate the risks: (a) the purpose of the data collection from the terminal equipment shall be restricted to mere statistical counting; (b) the tracking shall be limited in time and space to the extent strictly necessary for this purpose; (c) the data shall be deleted or anonymised immediately after the purpose is fulfilled; and (d) the users shall be given effective opt out possibilities.
Amendment 334 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3
Article 8 – paragraph 3
3. The information to be provided pursuant to point (points (aa) and (ab) of paragraph 2 may be provided in combination with standardized icons in order to give a meaningful overview of the collection in an easily visible, intelligible and clearly legible manner.
Amendment 343 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2
Article 9 – paragraph 2
2. Without prejudice to paragraph 1, where technically possible and feasible, for the purposes of point (b) of Article 8(1), consent may be expressed by using the appropriate technical settings of a software application enabling access to the internetpecifications for electronic communications services or information society services which allow for specific consent for specific purposes. When such technical specifications are used by the user's terminal equipment or the software running on it, they shall be binding on, and enforceable against, any other party.
Amendment 350 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3
Article 9 – paragraph 3
3. End-users who have given their consented to the processing of electronic communications data as set out in point (c)c of Article 6(2) and points (a)a and (b)b of Article 6(3), point b of Article 8(1) and point aa of Article 8(2) shall be given the possibility to withdraw their consent at any time as set forth under Article 7(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and be reminded of this possibility at periodic intervals of 6 months, as long as the processing continues.
Amendment 354 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. A user shall not be denied access to any electronic communications service, information society service or functionality of a terminal equipment, regardless of whether this is remunerated or not, on the mere grounds that he or she has not given his or her consent to (a) the processing of electronic communications data, metadata or content pursuant to Article 6; (b) the use of input, output, processing and storage capabilities of terminal equipment and the processing of information from the users' terminal equipment, or making information available through the terminal equipment, including information about and processed by its software and hardware, pursuant to Article 8(1); (c) the processing of information emitted by terminal equipment pursuant to Article 8(2); or (d) processing that is technically not necessary for the provision of that service or functionality.
Amendment 355 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3 b (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Neither providers of electronic communications services nor any third parties shall process personal data collected on the basis of consent or any other legal ground under the e-Privacy Regulation, on any other legal basis not specifically provided for in the e-Privacy Regulation
Amendment 356 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3 c (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 3 c (new)
3c. When the processing is allowed under any exception to the prohibitions under the e-Privacy Regulation, any other processing on the basis of Article 6 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 shall be considered as prohibited, including processing for another purpose on the basis of Article 6(4) of the Regulation (EU) 2016/679. This would not prevent controllers from asking for additional consent for new processing operations
Amendment 358 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – title
Article 10 – title
Amendment 359 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Article 10 – paragraph 1
1. SHardware and software placed on the market permitting electronic communications, including the retrieval and presentation of information on the internet, shall offer the option to prevent third parties from storthat enable the access to and use of electronic communications services or the access to and use of information society services must be able to prevent other parties from the use of input, output, processing and storage capabilities of terminal equipment and the processing of information on thefrom users' terminal equipment, of an end-user or processing information already stored on that equipmentr making information available through the terminal equipment, including information about and processed by its software and hardware.
Amendment 370 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2
Article 10 – paragraph 2
2. Upon installation, the software shall inform the end-user about the privacy settings options and, to continue with the installation, requiBy default, such hardware or software shall have activated privacy settings that prevent other parties from exercising the activities referred to in paragraph 1. If the hardware or software allows for deviating settings, the end-user shall be informed about the privacy settings options during first use or installation and shall be offered the end-user to consent to a settingpossibility to change or confirm them.
Amendment 374 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 10 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. For the purposes of: (a) giving consent pursuant to Article 9(2) of this Regulation, and (b) objecting to the processing of personal data pursuant to Article 21(5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/679, the settings shall lead to a signal based on technical specifications which is sent to the other parties to inform them about the user's intentions with regard to consent or objection. This signal shall be legally valid and be binding on, and enforceable against, any other party. The European Data Protection Board shall issue guidelines to determine which technical specifications and signalling methods fulfil the conditions for consent and objection pursuant to points a and b.
Amendment 377 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3
Article 10 – paragraph 3
3. In the case of software which has already been installed on 25 May 2018, the requirements under paragraphs 1, 2 and 2a shall be complied with at the time of the first update of the software, but no later than 25 August 2018.
Amendment 379 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 1
Amendment 384 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Union or Member State law to which the provider is subject may restrict by way of a legislative measure the scope of the obligations and principles relating to processing of electronic communications data provided for in Articles 6, 7 and 8 of this Regulation in so far as its provisions correspond to the rights and obligations provided for in Articles 12 to 22 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, when such a restriction respects the essence of the fundamental rights and freedoms and is a necessary, appropriate and proportionate measure in a democratic society to safeguard one or more of the following general public interests: (a) national security; (b) defence; (c) the prevention, investigation, detection or prosecution of serious criminal offences or the execution of criminal penalties, including the safeguarding against and the prevention of threats to public security.
Amendment 387 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. In particular, any legislative measure referred to in paragraph 1 shall contain specific provisions at least, where relevant, pursuant to Article 23(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
Amendment 388 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2
Article 11 – paragraph 2
Amendment 393 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Union or Member State law to which the provider is subject may restrict, by way of a legislative measure, the scope of the rights provided for in Article 5 where such a restriction respects the essence of the fundamental rights and freedoms and is a necessary, appropriate and proportionate measure in a democratic society to safeguard one or more of the following general public interests: (a) national security; (b) defence; (c) the prevention, investigation, detection or prosecution of serious criminal offences or the execution of criminal penalties, including the safeguarding against and the prevention of threats to public security.
Amendment 394 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. In particular, any legislative measure referred to in paragraph 1 shall contain specific provisions at least, where relevant, pursuant to Article 23(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
Amendment 395 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2 c (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 2 c (new)
2c. No legislative measure referred to in paragraph 1 may allow for the weakening of the integrity and confidentiality of electronic communications by mandating a manufacturer of hardware or software, including terminal equipment or software providing for the use of electronic communications, or a provider of electronic communications services, to create and build in backdoors that weaken the cryptographic methods used or the security and integrity of the terminal equipment.
Amendment 398 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) to block incoming calls from specific numbers, or numbers having a specific code or prefix identifying the fact that the call is a marketing call referred to in Article 16(3)(b), or from anonymous sources;
Amendment 410 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 1
1. Natural or legal persons may use electronic communications services for the purposes of sending direct marketing communications to end-users who are natural persons thatand have given their explicit consent.
Amendment 411 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2
Article 16 – paragraph 2
2. Where a natural or legal person obtains electronic contact details for electronic -mail from its customer, in the context of the sale of a product or a service, in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2016/679, that natural or legal person may use these electronic contact details for direct marketing of its own similar products or services only if customers are clearly and distinctly given the opportunity to object, free of charge and in an easy manner, to such use. The customer shall be informed about the right to object and shall be given an easy way to exercise it at the time of collection and each time a message is sent.
Amendment 418 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – point a
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) present the identity of a line on which they can be contacted; orand
Amendment 419 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Unsolicited marketing communications shall be clearly recognisable as such and shall indicate the identity of the legal or natural person transmitting the communication or on behalf of whom the communication is transmitted. Such communications shall provide the necessary information for recipients to exercise their right to refuse further written or oral marketing messages.
Amendment 424 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 4
Article 16 – paragraph 4
4. Notwithstanding paragraph 1, Member States may provide by law that the placing of direct marketing voice-to-voice calls to end-users who are natural persons shall only be allowed in respect of end- users who are natural persons who have not expressed their objection to receiving those communications. Member States shall provide that end-users can object to receiving the unsolicited communications via a national Do Not Call Register, thereby also ensuring that the user is only required to opt out once.
Amendment 426 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 6
Article 16 – paragraph 6
6. Any natural or legal person using electronic communications services to transmit direct marketing communications shall inform end-users of the marketing nature of the communication and the identity of the legal or natural person on behalf of whom the communication is transmitted and shall provide the necessary information for recipients to exercise their right to withdraw their consent, in an easy manner or object, in a manner that is as easy as giving the consent and free of charge, to receiving further marketing communications.
Amendment 429 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – title
Article 17 – title
Integrity of the communications and information about detected security risks
Amendment 430 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1
Article 17 – paragraph 1
Amendment 433 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 1 a (new)
The providers of electronic communications services shall ensure that there is sufficient protection in place against unauthorised access or alterations to the electronic communications data, and that the confidentiality and integrity of the communication in transmission or stored are also guaranteed by technical measures according to the state of the art, including end-to-end encryption of the electronic communications data. When encryption of electronic communications data is used, decryption by anybody else than the user shall be prohibited. Member States shall not impose any obligations on electronic communications service providers that would result in the weakening of the confidentiality and integrity of their networks and services, including the encryption methods used.
Amendment 434 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Providers of electronic communications services and manufacturers of terminal equipment shall not use any means, no matter if technical, operational, or by terms of use or by contracts, that could prevent users and end-users from applying the best available techniques against intrusions and interceptions and to secure their networks, terminal equipment and electronic communications. Breaking, decrypting, restricting or circumventing such measure taken by users or end-users shall be prohibited.
Amendment 435 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 c (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 1 c (new)
In the case of a particular risk that may compromise the security of networks, electronic communications services, or terminal equipment, the relevant provider or manufacturer shall inform end-users of such a risk and, where the risk lies outside the scope of the measures to be taken by the service provider, inform end- users of any possible remedies. It shall also inform the relevant manufacturer and service provider.
Amendment 436 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 d (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 1 d (new)
As regards the security of networks and services and related security obligations, the obligations of Article 40 of the [European Electronic Communications Code] shall apply mutatis mutandis to all services in the scope of this Regulation
Amendment 437 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 e (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 1 e (new)
This Article shall be without prejudice to the security obligations provided for in Articles 32 to 34 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
Amendment 443 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1
Article 21 – paragraph 1
1. Without prejudice to any other administrative or judicial remedy, every end-user of electronic communications services and, where applicable, every body, organisation or association, shall have the same remedies provided for in Articles 77, 78, 79 and 7980 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
Amendment 452 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 23 – paragraph 2 – point a
Amendment 453 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 23 – paragraph 2 – point b
Amendment 454 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 2 – point d a (new)
Article 23 – paragraph 2 – point d a (new)
(da) the obligations of the providers of publicly available number-based interpersonal communication services pursuant to Article 12, 13 and 14;
Amendment 455 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 2 – point d b (new)
Article 23 – paragraph 2 – point d b (new)
(db) the obligations of the provider of an electronic communications service pursuant to Article 17.
Amendment 457 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 3
Article 23 – paragraph 3
Amendment 29 #
2017/0002(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37 – paragraph 2
Recital 37 – paragraph 2
Amendment 47 #
2017/0002(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. This Regulation shall also apply to Union agencies carrying out activities which fall within the scope of Chapters 4 and 5 of Title V of Part Three TFEU, including where the founding acts of those Union agencies lay down a standalone data protection regime for the processing of operational personal data. The provisions of this Regulation shall take precedence over the conflicting provisions in the founding acts of those Union agencies.
Amendment 1 #
2016/2273(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the EU e-Justice Portal is an essential tool for access to information and to justice, and constitutes an important step in achieving the modernisation of EU public administration;
Amendment 2 #
2016/2273(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas better access to information and the increased use of improved digital tools for company-law- related formalities throughout the lifecycle of companies would reduceincrease transparency and legal certainty, while supporting Member States in the fight against tax evasion and reducing the administrative burden for companies, particularly where the relevant electronic public services are available across borders;
Amendment 5 #
2016/2273(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas single access to these registers through the e-Justice Portal is not yet possible because of differences in the technical standards used by Member States; considers that further efforts are needed to achieve accessible, interoperable and user-friendly eGovernment tools available to the public in the EU;
Amendment 8 #
2016/2273(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
D a. whereas the use of open standards is fundamental in order to allow EU citizens to participate in governmental platforms, and in order not to force citizens to use vendor-specific programs in order to communicate with their government;
Amendment 16 #
2016/2273(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 23 #
2016/2273(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on the Commission to consider further ways to promote digital solutions for formalities throughout a company’s lifecycle, in particular for online registration processes, the electronic filing of company documents and, the provision of information for business registers and the reporting of corporate income tax; notes that in this field legislation may be the only way to create an appropriate legal framework for EU- wide digital solutions, while ensuring that the public interest principles, such as tax liability, are complied with;
Amendment 28 #
2016/2273(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Calls on the Commission to support Member States when putting in place automated centralised mechanisms which allow the identification, in a timely manner, of any natural or legal persons holding or controlling land and buildings within their territory, in order to prevent the use of the financial system for the purposes of money laundering or terrorist financing; considers that this information should be directly accessible, at national level, to Financial Intelligence Units (FIUs) and competent authorities, and should be accessible and searchable through the centralised mechanisms by the FIUs of other Member States;
Amendment 37 #
2016/2273(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Calls on the Commission and the Member states to promote open standards when developing public digital solutions.
Amendment 24 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas whistleblowers play an important role in reporting unlawful or improper conduct which underminesand exposing information in the public interest;
Amendment 25 #
2016/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Takes the view that, given the central role of whistle-blowers in tackling corruption and exposing wrongdoing, it is importanterative that people who disclose information (whether confidential or otherwise) concerning alleged irregularities, wrongdoing or threats to the public interest are afforded proper protection, both of their physical and moral integrity and of their livelihoods, by being granted the highest possible level of confidentiality and by being protected from retaliation as a result of their disclosure, including administrative, civil and criminal procedures;
Amendment 28 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas a number of publicised whistleblowing cases have shown that whistleblowing brings serious wrongdoinginformation of public interest such as unlawful or improper conduct to the attention of the public and of political authorities; whereas such wrongdoingsconduct haves therefore been subject to corrective measures;
Amendment 35 #
2016/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls on the Commission to look at the best practices employed in protecting whistle-blowers around the world and, on that basis, to take a holistic approach to the task of introducing a common regulatory framework in the EU which guarantees a high level of protection across the board in both the public and private sectors; reiterates its call for proposalswhilst ensuring that Member States are free to legislate on stronger protection for whistle-blowers; reiterates its call for horizontal proposals on whistleblower protection to be submitted by the end of 2017;
Amendment 37 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas, in a number of cases, whistleblowers are subject to retaliatory action, intimidation and pressure with the intention of preventing or deterring them from whistleblowing or punishing them for having done so, whereas such pressure is particularly often exercised in the workplace where whistleblowers who have discovered information in the public interest in the context their working relationship may find themselves in a weaker position vis-à-vis employers;
Amendment 41 #
2016/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Calls on the Commission to guarantee whistle-blowers the right to directly report externally in cases of serious wrongdoings, or in cases in which internal channels are either ineffective or counter-productive;
Amendment 43 #
2016/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2 b. Calls on the Commission and Member States to safeguard the anonymity of those whistle-blowers who do not want their identities to be known;
Amendment 44 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas the protection of whistleblowers is not guaranteed in a number of Member States, while many others have introduced advanced programmes tohat offer different degrees of protect themion; whereas the result of that is fragmented protection of whistleblowers in Europe, which makes it difficult for them to find out their rights and how to whistleblow, and creates legal insecurity in cross-border scenarios;
Amendment 45 #
2016/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 c (new)
Paragraph 2 c (new)
2 c. Calls on the Commission to take into account the model of whistle-blower protection whereby public authorities are not allowed to try to discover the identities of whistle-blowers.
Amendment 46 #
2016/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 d (new)
Paragraph 2 d (new)
2 d. Calls on the Commission and Member States to safeguard whistle- blowers from retaliation by their employer or other parties and to reverse the burden of proof so that it is the employer who must establish any changes or reprisals are unrelated to the protected disclosure;
Amendment 52 #
2016/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Takes the view that current EU law should be applied whenever appropriate by both the EU institutions and the Member States, and that it should be interinterpreted in such a way as to offer whistle-blowers the best possible protection; highlights that whistleblower preoted in such a way as to offer whistle-blowers the best possible protecction has already been recognised as a key mechanism for ensuring the effective application of EU legislation;
Amendment 55 #
2016/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on all the EU institutions and bodies to carry out comprehensive and effective follow-up work on the Ombudsman’s own-initiative report of 24 July 2014, in keeping withbuilding on Article 22 of the Staff Regulations, which provides for internal measures to protect whistle- blowers;
Amendment 60 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
I. whereas Parliament has repeatedly called for the horizontal protection of whistleblowers in the EU;
Amendment 61 #
2016/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls on Member States to establish transparent and clear channels for information disclosure, to set up independent national authorities to protect whistle-blowers, and to consider providing those authorities with specific support funds; calls for a centralised European authority based on the model of national privacy watchdogs to be set up.the establishment of a European find for the protection of whistle-blowers;
Amendment 63 #
2016/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Highlights than whistle-blowers' reports should be quickly and seriously investigated, and that both the whistle- blower and any person implicated by a disclosure should be able to provide additional arguments and evidence throughout the investigation, and they should be kept informed of the handling of the disclosure;
Amendment 73 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Amendment 74 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Notes the high number of whistleblowing cases in workplace context, considers that next to the protection of the public interest and the rule of law, the protection of workers is an important goal of horizontal whistleblower legislation, which could be reflected in the legal basis of the future Commission proposal; considers however that whistleblowers should also be protected in cases that fall outside employer-employee relationships, including the self-employed, entrepreneurs, freelancers, consultants, temporary workers, interns, lawyers, board members, volunteers or people involved in an ongoing recruitment process;
Amendment 80 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Takes ‘whistleblower’ to mean anybody who reports on or reveals information on an unlawful or wrongful act or an act which undermines the public interest,in the public interest, including the European public interest, such as an unlawful or wrongful act which is or may be prejudicial to the public interest or information whose publication appears necessary in order to protect the public interest, irrespective of how the person concerned obtained the information in question; emphasises that this should include, but not be confined to, reporting in the context of his or her present or past working relationship, be it in the public or private sector, of a contractual relationship, or of his or her trade union or association activities;
Amendment 89 #
2016/2224(INI)
3. Considers that a breach of the public interest includes, but is not limited to, acts of corruption, conflicts of interest, unlawful usemismanagement of public funds, threats to the environment, health, public safety, national security and privacy and personal data protection, tax avoidance, attacks on consumers' and workers’ rights and other social rights, andbuses of power, attacks on human rights and fundamental freedoms and any act intended to conceal a breach of the public interest;
Amendment 98 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Emphasises that it must be possible to disclose information concerning the acts referred to in the previous paragraph even if the confidential nature of that information is safeguarded by a legal provision;
Amendment 104 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses that the role of whistleblowers in revealing serious attacks on the public interest has proved its significance on many occasions over a number of years and that whistleblowers have proved to be a crucial resource for investigative journalism and for an independent press; points out that guaranteeing the confidentiality of sources is fundamental to freedom of the press;
Amendment 110 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Notes with concernDeplores the fact that whistleblowers continue to be subject to civil and criminal proceedings in a number of Member States, while the existing means to defend, support and protect them are absent, insufficient or ineffective; notes that, in addition, the disparities between Member States lead to legal insecurity, forum shopping by companies involved in unethical practices and the risk of unequal treatment;
Amendment 120 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Notes that one of the barriers to whistleblowers’ activities is the absence of clearly identified means of reporting; stresses that the absence of clearly identified means of reporting and the failure to follow up reports; stresses that this causes a number of whistleblowers to remain silent; expresses its concern about the retaliation and pressures which whistleblowers face when they address the guilty person or party in their organisation;
Amendment 125 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Stresses that the credibility and validity of a report must be able to be assessed in part on the way in which it was made; bBelieves that it is necessary to establish a coherent system which enables reports to be delivered both inside and outside the organisation;
Amendment 132 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Calls on the Commission to study a tiered system enabling whistleblowing inside and outside the organisation; stresses that, to do so, clear procedures should be established; bBelieves that employers should be encouraged to introduce internal reporting procedures and that one person should be responsible for collecting reports in each organisation; considers that employee representatives should be involved in the assignment of that role; takes the view that the recipients of a report should be required to follow it up and to inform whistleblowers about the action taken on their reports;
Amendment 136 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Believes that the whistleblower should give priorityTakes the view that recourse to the organisation’'s internal reporting mechanisms or toand the competent authorities; stresses, however, that in the absence of a favourable response from the organisation, or if the whistleblower is at risk or urgently needs to report information, he or she must be able to turn to non-governmental organisations or the preshould be facilitated, in particular by means of information campaigns;
Amendment 144 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Believes that reporting outside the organisation without first going through an internal step is not grounds to invalidate a report, file a lawsuit or refuse to give protectioTakes the view that whistleblowers should be free to choose the channel through which they report wrongdoing, which should include the option of informing the general public directly, and that they should be granted legal protection irrespective of the procedure chosen;
Amendment 155 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Considers that whistleblowers should have the option to file for interim relief to prevent retaliation such as dismissal, until there is an official outcome of any administrative, judicial or other proceedings
Amendment 161 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Expresses its concern about the practice of gagging orders, which involve filing or threatening to file lawsuits against the whistleblower not in an effort to have him or her convicted, but in an effort to bring about self-censorship or financial, mental or psychological exhaustion; takes the view, therefore, that the imposition of gagging orders should be punishable;
Amendment 166 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Points out the risk that whistleblowers run of having legal and civil proceedings brought against them; stresses that they are often the weaker party in trials; considers it necessary to provide for a reversal of the burden of proof in respect of retaliation against and pressure on whistleblowers; considers that the basis for whistleblower protection should be the information exposed, whether or not that information is in the public interest, whereas the intention of the whistleblower should be considered to be irrelevant, in order to remove incentives for attempts of character assassination by the parties bringing legal actions against whistleblowers, which could have a negative effect on whistleblowers even if a court decides in their favour; takes the view that confidentiality should be guaranteed throughout the proceedings;
Amendment 171 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Takes the view that whistleblowers should not be liable for prosecution, civil legal action or administrative or disciplinary penalties because they have made a report;
Amendment 174 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Believes that the option to report anonymously would encourage whistleblowers to share information which they would not share otherwise; stresses, in that regard, that clearly regulated means of reporting anonymously should be introduced and that the identity of the whistleblower, and any information enabling him or her to be identified, should not be released without his or her consent; takes the view, in that connection, that any action which undermines whistleblowers' right to anonymity should be punished;
Amendment 179 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Stresses that nobody should lose the benefit of protection on the sole grounds that he or she has misjudged the facts or that the, that he or she wrongfully believed information to be in the public interest or that a perceived threat to the public interest did not materialise, provided that, at the time of reporting, he or she had reasonable grounds to believe them to be true;
Amendment 190 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Stresses the role that trade unions and civil society play in supporting and helping whistleblowers in their dealings within their organisation;
Amendment 195 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Stresses that, in addition to the professional risks, whistleblowers also face psychological and financial risks; believes that psychological support should be provided, that legal aid should be given to whistleblowers who ask for it, that financial aid should be given to those who express a duly justified need for it and that compensation for proven professional damages should be given as a protective measure if civil proceedings are brought against a whistleblowershould be given, irrespective of the damages suffered by the whistleblower as a result of making a report;
Amendment 201 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Calls on the Member States to introduce an independent body responsible for collecting reports, verifying their credibility and, following them up at least by issuing binding recommendations, guiding whistleblowers, particularly in the absence of a positive response from their organisation, and providing them with financial assistance if necessary, in particular if they disclose facts which have cross-border implications or which directly concern the EU's institutions and bodies; suggests that this independent body should publish annual activity reports;
Amendment 211 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Calls on the Commission to propose the establishment of a similar body at EU level responsible for coordinating Member State activities, particularly in cross-border cases; believes that that European body should also be able to collect reports, verify their credibility, issue binding recommendations and guide whistleblowers when the response given by the Member State is obviously not appropriate; considers that the European Ombudsman’s mandate could be extended to serve that purpose;
Amendment 213 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21a. Takes the view that this independent body should be given the budget it needs to carry out all its tasks; calls on the Commission, in that connection, to set up a European fund for whistleblowers in order to cover the cost of protecting them, in particular when they disclose information which has cross-border implications or which concerns the EU's institutions and bodies;
Amendment 216 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21a. Considers that whistleblowers should have a meaningful opportunity to provide input to subsequent investigations or inquiries based on their disclosures;
Amendment 218 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 b (new)
Paragraph 21 b (new)
21b. Considers that whistleblowers should be allowed to clarify their complaint and provide additional information or evidence during an investigation;
Amendment 221 #
2016/2224(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 c (new)
Paragraph 21 c (new)
21c. Considers that whistleblowers should also have the right to review and comment on the outcome of the investigation related to their disclosure;
Amendment 93 #
2016/2149(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10 a. Believes that, in the long run, the period of eight weeks given to national parliaments to issue a reasoned opinion under Article 6 of the Protocol on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality should be extended significantly;
Amendment 94 #
2016/2149(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 b (new)
Paragraph 10 b (new)
10 b. Believes moreover that the thresholds defined in Article 7(2) of the Protocol to trigger a so-called "yellow card" should be lowered;
Amendment 876 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 4 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Rule 4 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Where the competent authorities of the Member States ornotify the President of the Unionend orf the Member concerned notify the President of an appointment or election to an office incompatible with the office of Member of the European Parliament within the meaning ofterm of office of a Member of the European Parliament as a result either of an additional incompatibility established by the law of that Member State in accordance with Article 7(1) or (23) of the Act of 20 September 1976, the President shall inform Parliament, which shall establish that there is a vacancy or of the withdrawal of the Member's mandate pursuant to Article 13(3) of that Act, the President shall inform Parliament that the term of office of that Member ended on the date communicated by the Member State. Where no such date is communicated, the date of the end of the term of office shall be the date of the notification by that Member State.
Amendment 880 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 5 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Rule 5 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. In the context of the exercise of their political duties, each Member shall be entitled to participate freely, actively and without any kind of discrimination in the work of the committees and delegations of Parliament, and shall therefore be elected, pursuant to Rule 196 and Rule 212, as a full member of at least one standing committee and one interparliamentary delegation.
Amendment 882 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 9 – paragraph 3
Rule 9 – paragraph 3
3. The committee shall make a proposal for a reasoned decision which recommends the adoption or rejection of the request for the waiver of immunity or for the defence of privileges and immunities. No amendments may be tabled to such a proposal. If the proposal is rejected, a contrary decision shall be deemed to have been adopted.
Amendment 886 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 9 – paragraph 8 – subparagraph 1
Rule 9 – paragraph 8 – subparagraph 1
The committee's reportproposal for a decision shall be placed at the head ofon the agenda of the first sitting following the day on which it was tabled. No amendments may be tabled to thesuch a proposal(s) for a decision.
Amendment 894 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 11 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Rule 11 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Badges shall not be issued to individuals within a Member’s entourage who fall within the scope of the agreement on the establishment of the transparency register.
Amendment 897 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 11 – paragraph 8 – indent 2 a (new)
Rule 11 – paragraph 8 – indent 2 a (new)
– the holder has refused to cooperate with inquiries, hearings or invitations to committee meetings without sufficient justification.
Amendment 911 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 21 – paragraph 2
Rule 21 – paragraph 2
Where a rapporteur or a shadow rapporteur breaches the provisions of the Code of Conduct for Members of the European Parliament with respect to financial interests and conflicts of interest, the committee which appointed him or her may, on the initiative of the President and on a proposal by the Conference of Presidents, terminate the holding of that office. The majorities laid down in the first paragraph shall apply mutatis mutandis to each stage of this procedure.
Amendment 922 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 25 – paragraph 12 a (new)
Rule 25 – paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. The Bureau shall create a public register of all calls and demands by Parliament on the Commission, on the Council and on Member States. That register shall include regularly updated documentation of the consequences of any such calls and demands.
Amendment 946 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 34 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Rule 34 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Such groupings shall be required to declare, annually, any support, whether in cash or in kind (e.g. secretarial assistance), which if offered to Members as individuals would have to be declared under Annex I.
Amendment 948 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 34 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
Rule 34 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
The Quaestors shall keep a register of the declarations referred to in the second subparagraph. That register shall be published on the Parliament’s website. The Quaestors shall adopt detailed rules on those declarations and shall ensure the comprehensive enforcement of this Rule.
Amendment 960 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 39 – paragraph 4
Rule 39 – paragraph 4
4. IWhere appropriate, after exchanging views with the Council and the Commission in accordance with the arrangements agreed at interinstitutional level1a, if the committee responsible for legal affairs decides to dispute the validity or the appropriateness of the legal basis, it shall report its conclusions to Parliament. Without prejudice to Rule 63, Parliament shall vote on this before voting on the substance of the proposal. __________________ 1aInterinstitutional Agreement of 13 April 2016 on Better-Law Making, paragraph 25 (OJ L 123, 12.5.2016, p. 1)
Amendment 961 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 42 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Rule 42 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Where the committee responsible for the subject-matter is of the opinion that a proposal for a legislative act, or parts of it, does not comply with the principle of subsidiarity, it shall request the opinion of the committee responsible for respect of the principle of subsidiarity. Such request shall be made no later than four weeks of the announcement in Parliament of referral to the committee responsible for the subject-matter.
Amendment 970 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 53 a (new)
Rule 53 a (new)
Rule 53a Gender mainstreaming amendments The committee responsible for gender mainstreaming shall always be entitled to submit an opinion with regard to gender mainstreaming. Such opinion shall consist of amendments to the motion for resolution of the committee for the subject matter or, in the case of documents of a legislative nature, of amendments to the text referred to that committee. Those amendments may be accompanied where appropriate by short justifications. Such justifications shall be the responsibility of the rapporteur for the opinion and shall not be put to the vote. The committee responsible shall put these amendments to the vote. Rule 53(3), (5) and (6), and Rule 205 (2) and (4) shall apply.
Amendment 974 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 59 a (new)
Rule 59 a (new)
Amendment 982 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 63 – paragraph 1 – indent 1
Rule 63 – paragraph 1 – indent 1
– where the Commission withdrawsreplaces, substantially amends or intends substantially to amend its initial proposal after Parliament has adopted its position, in order to replace it with another text, except where this is done in order to take account of Parliament's position; orif the Commission intends to modify the legal basis provided for in its initial proposal, with the result that the ordinary legislative procedure would no longer apply, the President may also act at the request of the committee responsible for legal affairs;
Amendment 983 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 63 – paragraph 1 – indent 2
Rule 63 – paragraph 1 – indent 2
Amendment 984 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 63 – paragraph 1 – indent 3
Rule 63 – paragraph 1 – indent 3
– where, through the passage of time or changes in circumstances, the nature of the problem with which the proposal is concerned substantially changes; or
Amendment 985 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 63 – paragraph 2
Rule 63 – paragraph 2
2. ParliamThe President shall, at the request of the committee responsible, ask the Council to refer again to Parliament a proposal submitted by the Commission pursuant to Article 294 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Unio for the subject-matter or the committee responsible for legal affairs, ask the Council to refer a draft legislative act to Parliament again, where the Council intends to modify the legal basis of the proposalprovided for in Parliament's position at first reading with the result that the ordinary legislative procedure willould no longer apply.
Amendment 987 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 67 a (new)
Rule 67 a (new)
Rule 67a Vote in Parliament-Second reading 1. Parliament shall vote first on any proposal for immediate rejection of Council's position tabled in writing by the committee responsible, a political group or at least 40 Members. For it to be adopted, such a proposal shall require the votes of a majority of the component Members of Parliament. If the Council's position is rejected, the President shall announce in Parliament that the legislative procedure is closed. If that proposal for rejection is not adopted, Parliament shall then proceed in accordance with paragraphs 2 to 4. 2. Save where a proposal for rejection has been adopted in accordance with paragraph 1, the amendments to the Council's position, including those contained in the provisional agreement tabled by the committee responsible under Rule 73d(4), shall be put to the vote. Any amendment to the Council's position shall be adopted only if it secures the votes of a majority of the component Members of Parliament. Before voting on the amendments, the President may ask the Commission to state its position and the Council to comment. 3. Notwithstanding a vote by Parliament against the initial proposal to reject the Council's position under paragraph 1, Parliament may, on the proposal of the Chair or rapporteur of the committee responsible or of a political group or at least 40 Members, consider a further proposal for rejection after voting on the amendments under paragraph 3. For it to be adopted, such a proposal shall require the votes of a majority of the component Members of Parliament. If the Council's position is rejected, the President shall announce in Parliament that the legislative procedure is closed. 4. After the votes taken under paragraphs 1 to 3 and any votes then taken on amendments to the draft legislative resolution relating to procedural requests, the President shall announce that the second reading of Parliament has been concluded and the legislative resolution shall be deemed to have been adopted. If need be, it shall be modified, pursuant to Rule 193(2), to reflect the outcome of the votes taken under paragraphs 1 to 3 or to the application of Rule 76. The text of the legislative resolution and of Parliament's position, if any, shall be forwarded by the President to the Council and to the Commission. Where no proposal to reject or amend the Council's position has been tabled, it shall be deemed to have been approved.
Amendment 995 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 73 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Rule 73 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
After each trilogue the negotiating team shall report back to the following meeting of the committee responsible. Documents reflecting the outcome of the last trilogue shall be made available to the committee and shall be published, proactively, by the Committee Chair.
Amendment 1004 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 88 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Rule 88 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Draft amendments which have been rejected in the committee responsible shall not be put to the vote in Parliament unless this has been requested in writing, before a deadline to be set by the President, by a committee, a political group or at least 40 Members; that deadline may on no account be less than 24 hours before the start of the vote.
Amendment 1031 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 116 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Rule 116 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
For the purposes of access to documents, the term 'Parliament documents' means any content within the meaning of Article 3(a) of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 which has been drawn up or received by officers of Parliament within the meaning of Title I, Chapter 2, of these Rules, by Parliament's governing bodies, committees or interparliamentary delegations, or by Parliament's Secretariat, including during the trilogue meetings.
Amendment 1033 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 116 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Rule 116 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Parliament shall establish a register of Parliament documents. Legislative documents, including those from trilogue meetings, and certain other categories of documents shall, in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, be made directly accessible through the register. References to other Parliament documents shall as far as possible be included in the register.
Amendment 1035 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 116 – paragraph 7 a (new)
Rule 116 – paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Members are invited to publish details of their meetings with individuals and organisations falling within the remit of the Transparency Register. The Bureau shall take the necessary measures to enable this information to be published on Parliament's website.
Amendment 1041 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 118 – paragraph 7 a (new)
Rule 118 – paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. In the event of a change in the financial interests of a Commissioner during her/his term of office, this situation shall be subject to scrutiny by Parliament in accordance with Article 1(3) to (6) of Annex XVI. If a conflict of interests is identified during a Commissioner's term of office and the Commission fails to implement Parliament's recommendations for resolving that conflict of interests, Parliament may ask the President of the Commission to withdraw confidence in the Commissioner in question, pursuant to paragraph 5 of the Framework agreement on relations between the European Parliament and the European Commission.
Amendment 1077 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 141 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Rule 141 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. In urgent cases, the President, where possible after consulting the Chair and rapporteur of the committee responsible for legal affairs, may take precautionary action in order to comply with the relevant time-limits. In such cases, the procedure provided for in paragraphs 3 or 4 shall, as applicable, be implemented at the earliest opportunity.
Amendment 1078 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 141 – paragraph 4 b (new)
Rule 141 – paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. The committee responsible for legal affairs shall lay down principles for the application of this Rule.
Amendment 1084 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 153 a (new)
Rule 153 a (new)
Rule 153 a Topical debate requested by a political group 1. At each part-session, one or two periods of not less than 60 minutes each shall be set aside in the draft agenda for debates on a topical matter of major interest to European Union policy. 2. Each political group shall have the right to propose the topical matter of its choice for at least one such a debate every year. The Conference of Presidents shall ensure, over a rolling period of one year, a fair distribution among the political groups of that right. 3. The political groups shall transmit the topical matter of their choice to the President in writing before the drawing up of the final draft agenda by the Conference of Presidents. Rule 38(1) concerning the rights, freedoms and principles recognised by Article 6 of the Treaty on European Union and the values enshrined in its Article 2 shall be fully respected. 4. The Conference of Presidents shall determine the time at which such a debate is to be held. 5. The debate shall be introduced by a representative of the political group having proposed the topical matter. Following this introduction, speaking time shall be allocated in accordance with Rule 162 (4) and (5).
Amendment 1101 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 168 a (new)
Rule 168 a (new)
Amendment 1104 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 169 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Rule 169 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Amendments for consideration in Parliament may be tabled by the committee responsible, a political group or at least 40 Members. The names of all co-signatories shall be published.
Amendment 1106 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 169 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
Rule 169 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
Amendments to documents of a legislative nature within the meaning of Rule 47(1) may be accompanied by a short justification. Such justifications shall be the responsibility of the author and shall not be put to the vote.
Amendment 1114 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 174 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Rule 174 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
The President may put the original text to the vote first, or put an amendment that is closer to the original text to the vote before the amendment that departs furthest from the original text. The President shall seek the agreement of Parliament before doing so.
Amendment 1116 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 174 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 1
Rule 174 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 1
The President may decide, following the adoption or rejection of a particular amendment, that several other amendments of similar content or with similar objectives shall be put to the vote collectively. The President mayshall seek the agreement of Parliament before doing so.
Amendment 1117 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 175 – paragraph 1
Rule 175 – paragraph 1
When more than 50 amendments andor requests for a split or separate vote have been tabled to a reportconcerning a text tabled by a committee for consideration in Parliament, the President may, after consulting its Chair, ask theat committee responsible to meet to considerto meet to vote on each of those amendments or requests. Any amendment or request for a split or separate vote not receiving favourable votes at this stage from at least one-tenth of the members of the committee shall not be put to the vote in Parliament.
Amendment 1132 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 183 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Rule 183 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Once the general debatevoting session has been concluded, any Member may give an oral explanation on the single and/or final vote for not longer than one minute orconcerning an item submitted to Parliament. Each Member may give one oral explanation of his or her vote per part-session. Any Member may give a written explanation of vote which shall consist of no more than 200 words, and which shall be included ion the verbatim report of proceedingsMembers' page on Parliament's website, in a special section which is clearly distinct from the oral explanations of vote.
Amendment 1141 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 198 – paragraph 3
Rule 198 – paragraph 3
3. The request to set up a committee of inquiry must specify precisely the subject of the inquiry and include a detailed statement of the grounds for it. Parliament, on a proposal from the Conference of Presidents, shall decide whether to set up a committee and, if it decides to do so, on its composition, in accordance with Rule 199.
Amendment 1154 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 205 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Rule 205 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The minutes of the committee coordinators' meetings shall be translated into the official languages and distributed to all Members of the committee. Those minutes shall be made accessible to the public, with the exception of certain items of the minutes in respect of which the committee coordinators have exceptionally, for reasons of confidentiality, as laid down in Article 4(1) to (4) of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 30 May 2001, regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents, decided otherwise.
Amendment 1157 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 205 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Rule 205 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Rapporteurs, shadow rapporteurs and committee chairs shall only meet interest representatives that have registered in the Transparency Register and publish online all scheduled meetings that have the purpose of influencing Union legislation.
Amendment 1159 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 205 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 b (new)
Rule 205 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 b (new)
All input, pertaining to the subject matter of the report, received by rapporteurs and committee chairs from individuals and organisations falling within the remit of the Transparency Register shall be collected and disclosed by Parliament. The Bureau shall take the necessary measures to enable this information to be disclosed.
Amendment 1172 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 216 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Rule 216 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
The committee may, with regard to an admissible petition, decide to draw up an own-initiative report in accordance with Rule 52(1) or to submit a short motion for a resolution to Parliament, provided that the Conference of Committee Chairs is informed in advance and there is no objection by the Conference of Presidents. Such motions for resolutions shall be placed on the draft agenda for the part-session held no later than eight weeks after their adoption in committee. They shall be put to a single vote and shall also be without debate. Rule 151 shall apply, unless the Conference of Presidents exceptionally decides to apply Rule 151decides otherwise.
Amendment 1174 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 216 a (new)
Rule 216 a (new)
Rule 216 a Fact-finding visits 1. When investigating petitions, establishing facts or seeking solutions the committee may organise fact-finding visits to the Member State or region concerned by admissible petitions that have been already debated in the committee. Fact- finding visits shall cover issues raised in several petitions whenever it is possible. The Bureau Rules governing committee delegations within the European Union shall apply. 2. Members elected in the Member State of destination shall not be part of the delegation. They may be allowed to accompany the fact-finding visit delegation in an ex officio capacity. 3. After each visit, a mission report shall be drafted by the official members of the delegation. Such reports are drafted under the exclusive responsibility of the participants in the visit, on an equal footing, who shall seek to reach a consensus. Failing such a consensus, the mission report shall set out the divergent assessments. Members taking part in the delegation ex officio shall not participate in the drafting of the report. 4. The mission report, including possible recommendations, shall be submitted to the committee. Members may table amendments to the recommendations, but not to the parts of the report concerning the facts established by the delegation. The committee shall first vote on the amendments to the recommendations, if any, then on the mission report as a whole. The mission report, if approved, shall be forwarded for information to the President.
Amendment 1190 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Annex I – Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Annex I – Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) not receive any kind of remuneration for any activity which purpose is to influence or enable others to influence Union policy or decision- making.
Amendment 1195 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Annex I – Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b b (new)
Annex I – Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b b (new)
(bb) not receive any payment or anything of value for an appearance, speech, or article, excluding any actual and necessary travel and accommodations expenses, and gifts as defined in Article 5(1);
Amendment 1199 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Annex I – Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b c (new)
Annex I – Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b c (new)
(bc) not receive support in the form of staff or other resources from outside interests, except from political parties;
Amendment 1201 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Annex I – Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b d (new)
Annex I – Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b d (new)
(bd) not be remunerated for serving on a board of an association, corporation or any other entity;
Amendment 1208 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Annex I – Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point h a (new)
Annex I – Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point h a (new)
(ha) property owned by the Member;
Amendment 1209 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Annex I – Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point h b (new)
Annex I – Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point h b (new)
(hb) the Member’s debts or liabilities
Amendment 1211 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Annex I – Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – introductory part
Annex I – Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – introductory part
Any regular income Members receive in respect of each item declared in accordance with the first subparagraph shall be placed in one of the following categories:reported in the form of precise amounts.
Amendment 1214 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Annex I – Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – indent 1
Annex I – Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – indent 1
Amendment 1216 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Annex I – Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – indent 2
Annex I – Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – indent 2
Amendment 1218 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Annex I – Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – indent 3
Annex I – Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – indent 3
Amendment 1219 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Annex I – Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – indent 4
Annex I – Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – indent 4
Amendment 1221 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Annex I – Article 4 – paragraph 3
Annex I – Article 4 – paragraph 3
3. The information provided to the President in line with this Article shall be published on Parliament’s website in an easily accessible manner, with sufficiently comprehensive information to allow citizens to understand the effective meaning of side jobs and to what extent they might, or might not, constitute a conflict of interest.
Amendment 1224 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Annex I – Article 4 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Annex I – Article 4 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Declarations of financial interest shall be translated at least into English, French and German and be made available in an open and machine readable format.
Amendment 1229 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Annex I – Article 4 a (new)
Annex I – Article 4 a (new)
Amendment 1230 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Annex I – Article 6 – paragraph 1
Annex I – Article 6 – paragraph 1
1. Former Members of the European Parliament who engage in professional lobbying or representational activities directly linked to the European Union decision-making process may not, throughout the period in which they engage in those activities, benefit from the facilities granted to former Members under the rules laid down by the Bureau to that effect25 . __________________ 252. During a period of equivalent length to that during which former Members are eligible for a transitional allowance as defined in Article 13(2) of the Statute for Members of the European Parliament, they shall receive no remuneration of any kind for any activity of which purpose is to influence or enable others to influence Union policy or decision-making. 3. Without prejudice to paragraph 1, former Members shall notify the Parliament of any post-term-of-office occupation that they intend to take up. The Advisory Committee shall look into these notifications to determine whether their purpose is to influence or enable others to influence Union policy or decision-making. In such cases, the names of the former Members concerned shall be published. __________________ 25 Bureau Decision of 12 April 1999. Bureau Decision of 12 April 1999.
Amendment 1234 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Annex I – Article 7 – title
Annex I – Article 7 – title
Amendment 1235 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Annex I – Article 7 – paragraph 1
Annex I – Article 7 – paragraph 1
1. An Advisory Committee on the Conduct of Members (‘the AdvisoryEthics Committee’) is hereby established.
Amendment 1237 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Annex I – Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Annex I – Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
The AdvisoryEthics Committee shall be composed of five members, appointed by the President at the beginning of his or her term of office from amongstBureau after consulting the members of the bureaux and the coordinators of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs and the Committee on Legal Affairs, taking due account of the Members’ experience and of political balance.. The members of the Ethics Committee shall be chosen from among persons who are Union citizens, have full civil and political rights, and offer every guarantee of independence. They shall not be sitting MEPs. They shall comprise: – at least one member who has held high judicial office – at least one member who is a qualified auditor – at least one member who is a former Member of the European Parliament – at least one member with outside experience of preventing corruption in companies or from a civil society organisation working on parliamentary ethics
Amendment 1240 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Annex I – Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Annex I – Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Each member of the AdvisoryEthics Committee shall serve as chair for six months on a rotating basis.
Amendment 1241 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Annex I – Article 7 – paragraph 3
Annex I – Article 7 – paragraph 3
Amendment 1245 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Annex I – Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Annex I – Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Upon request by a Member, the AdvisoryEthics Committee shall give him or her, in confidence and within 30 calendar days, guidance on the interpretation and implementation of the provisions of this Code of Conduct. The Member in question shall be entitled to rely on such guidance.
Amendment 1248 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Annex I – Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Annex I – Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
At the request of the President, or on its own initiative, the Advisory Committee shall also assess alleged breaches of this Code of Conduct and advise the President on possible action to be taken.
Amendment 1253 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Annex I – Article 7 – paragraph 5
Annex I – Article 7 – paragraph 5
5. The AdvisoryEthics Committee may, after consulting the President, seek advice from outside experts.
Amendment 1254 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Annex I – Article 7 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Annex I – Article 7 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Amendment 1255 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Annex I – Article 7 – paragraph 5 b (new)
Annex I – Article 7 – paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Every year, the Ethics Committee shall verify the accuracy of at least 25 % of the declarations submitted by Members pursuant to Article 4.
Amendment 1256 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Annex I – Article 7 – paragraph 6
Annex I – Article 7 – paragraph 6
6. The AdvisoryEthics Committee shall publish an annual report of its work, which shall also include recommendations for improving the compliance of Members with this Code of Conduct, notably by clarifying its content when necessary.
Amendment 1260 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Annex I – Article 8 – paragraph 1
Annex I – Article 8 – paragraph 1
1. Where there is reason to think that a Member of the European Parliament may have breached this Code of Conduct, the President may refer the matter to the Advisory CommitteeEthics Committee, on its own initiative or at the request of the President, may investigate the matter.
Amendment 1263 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Annex I – Article 8 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Annex I – Article 8 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Anyone may lodge a complaint to the Ethics Committee, substantiated by material facts, about a suspected breach of this Code of Conduct.
Amendment 1266 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Annex I – Article 8 – paragraph 2
Annex I – Article 8 – paragraph 2
2. The AdvisoryEthics Committee shall examine the circumstances of the alleged breach, and may hear the Member concerned. On the basis of the conclusions of its findings, it shall make a recommendation to the President on a possible decision.
Amendment 1269 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Annex I – Article 8 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Annex I – Article 8 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
If, taking into account that recommendation, the President concludes that the Member concerned has breached the Code of Conduct, he shall, after hearing the Member, adopt a reasoned decision laying down a penalty, which he shall notify to the Member. If the President decides not to follow the recommendation of the Ethics Committee to impose a penalty, the advice of the Ethics Committee and the reasoning of the President shall be made public.
Amendment 1277 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Annex XVI – paragraph 1 – point a – interpretation
Annex XVI – paragraph 1 – point a – interpretation
Amendment 1278 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Annex XVI – paragraph 1 – point a – interpretation –subparagraph 1 a (new)
Annex XVI – paragraph 1 – point a – interpretation –subparagraph 1 a (new)
The confirmation by the Committee responsible for Legal Affairs of the absence of any conflict of interests is an essential precondition for the holding of the hearing by the committee responsible. In the absence of such confirmation or if the Committee responsible for Legal Affairs identifies a conflict of interests, the procedure for appointing the Commissioner-designate shall be suspended.
Amendment 1279 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Annex XVI – paragraph 6 b (new)
Annex XVI – paragraph 6 b (new)
The following guidelines shall be applied when the declarations of financial interests are scrutinised by the Committee responsible for Legal Affairs: (a) if, when scrutinising a declaration of financial interests, the Committee responsible for Legal Affairs deems, on the basis of the documents presented, the declaration to be accurate, complete and to contain nothing indicating an actual or potential conflict of interests in connection with the portfolio of the Commissioner-designate, its Chair shall send a letter confirming this fact to the committees responsible for the hearing or to the committees involved in the event of a procedure taking place during a Commissioner's term of office; (b) if the Committee responsible for Legal Affairs deems the declaration of interests of a Commissioner-designate to contain information which is incomplete or contradictory, or if there is a need for further information, it shall request this information from the Commissioner- designate and shall consider this before making its decision; (c) if the Committee responsible for Legal Affairs identifies a conflict of interests based on the declaration of financial interests or the supplementary information supplied by the Commissioner-designate, it shall draw up recommendations aimed at resolving the conflict of interests; the recommendations may include renouncing the financial interests in question and/or changes being made to the portfolio of the Commissioner-designate by the President of the Commission;
Amendment 5 #
2016/2076(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas the April 2013 UN Commission on Crime, Prevention and Criminal Justice resolution, endorsed by the UN Economic and Social Council in July 2013, encourages its "Member States to make illicit trafficking in wild fauna and flora a serious crime when organized criminal groups are involved", thereby placing it on the same level as human trafficking and drug trafficking;
Amendment 22 #
2016/2076(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital E
Recital E
Amendment 26 #
2016/2076(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas, in view of the uniquely cross-border nature of wildlife trafficking offences, the EU should work towards establishing minimum rules concerning the definition and sanctioning of such offences, pursuant to Article 83(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), while respecting the principle of subsidiarity;
Amendment 37 #
2016/2076(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Considers that the EU needs to step up its common efforts to tackle environmental crime and wildlife trafficking in particular, now that it is a party to the CITES convention;
Amendment 41 #
2016/2076(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls on the Commission and the Member State authorities to step up their cooperation in the fight against wildlife trafficking, particularly between enforcement agencies, including police, customs, judicial, and sanitary and trade inspection authorities; in particular, calls for the setting up of joint enforcement priorities with Europol and Eurojust providing dedicated support for cross- border cases;
Amendment 49 #
2016/2076(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Agrees with the Commission that training activities, notably targeting the judicial staff, are an essential part of the fight against organised crime, including wildlife trafficking; believes that this should be considered as allowing concrete enforcement of the United Nations Convention on transnational organised crime;
Amendment 55 #
2016/2076(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to put all the necessary means in place to deter wildlife trafficking in countries of origin and of destination, notably through awareness campaigns targeting the consumers of the EU countries of destination of wildlife trafficking products;
Amendment 59 #
2016/2076(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Considers that the fight against wildlife trafficking can be advanced by instruments of soft law; notes, however,legislative action in order to ensure legal certainty and to create binding rules; notes that EU legislative action may be necessary in some cases in order to ensure legal certainly and to create binding rules;on laying down obligations for operators who place illegal products on the market and enabling to counter efficiently wildlife trafficking, already exists in the specific sector of timber 1b; __________________ 1bRegulation (EU) No 995/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 October 2010 laying down the obligations of operators who place timber and timber products on the market – also known as the (Illegal) Timber Regulation.
Amendment 65 #
2016/2076(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls on the Commission to take steps towards establishing common minimum rules concerning the definition of criminal offences and sanctions relating to wildlife trafficking, pursuant to Article 83(1) TFEU; to this effect, stresses that scaling up sanctions under the Directive on environment protection through criminal law 1a can help further approximate criminal sanctions in the field of wildlife trafficking throughout the EU. __________________ 1aDirective 2008/99/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on the protection of the environment through criminal law.
Amendment 4 #
2016/2055(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Maintains that whistle-blowers play an essential role in helping Member State and EU institutions and bodies to deter any breaches of the principle of integrity and misuse of power that might violate the rule of law at European and national levels, harm the economy or environment and undermine the trust of citizens in democratic institutions and processes;
Amendment 10 #
2016/2055(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Regrets that not all EU institutions and bodieto date, only the Commission, the European Parliament, the Ombudsman and the Court of Auditors have adopted thesuch rules;
Amendment 13 #
2016/2055(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Points out the need for the Parliament to carry out a study in order to come forward with a concrete proposal for a mechanism to protect Accredited Parliamentary Assistants in case they become whistle-blowers, when there is enough and solid evidence of corruption or serious misconduct on the part of his or her MEP, as well as creating a safe method of communication with the relevant posts of the European Parliament, while bearing in mind the special nature of the work of an Assistant;
Amendment 19 #
2016/2055(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Takes note that the Commission, in its EU Anti-Corruption report, stated that EU Member States have in place most of the necessary anti-corruption legal instruments and institutions, however the capacity and efficiency of whichthese instruments should be improved;
Amendment 21 #
2016/2055(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Regrets that many Member States have still failed to put in place dedicated whistle-blower protection rules, particularly given the essential nature of whistle-blower protection in the prevention of and fight against corruption and the fact that whistle-blower protection is recommended under the UN Convention on Anti-Corruption in Article 33;
Amendment 24 #
2016/2055(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Recalls that Commission Directive 2015/2392 sets out the procedures for reporting, record-keeping requirements, and protection measures for whistle- blowers, but regrets that this is one of the few pieces of sectorial legislation that includes provisions for whistle-blowers;
Amendment 27 #
2016/2055(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Reiterates its Calls on the Commission to set uppropose an EU legalislative framework onfor the effective protection of whistle-blowers without undermining Member State competencesand the like taking into account the assessment of the rules at national level in order to provide for minimum rules for whistle-blower protection;
Amendment 16 #
2016/2008(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas following the recent crises in the economic, political and social fields that have severely affected individual Member States and the Union as a whole, citizens’ relationship with politics has become increasingly strained, as the public feels that it is not represented adequately; whereas the engagement and involvement of citizens and civil society in democratic life are essential for the good functioning of democracy and for the legitimacy and accountability of both national and EU representational systemseach level of the multi- level governance structure of the EU;
Amendment 55 #
2016/2008(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas e-democracy could represent an alternative form of engagement capable of providing a solution tomitigating public disaffection with traditional politics, and could help promote grassroots support for EU policies;
Amendment 71 #
2016/2008(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses that the purpose of e- democracy is to facilitate democratic practice, not to establish an alternative democratic system or to promo by providing additional means to increase transparency and citizens' participation, including possibilities for cross-border participation, and an opportunity to foster a certain type of democracysense of ownership which contributes to improve trust and, consequently, the legitimacy of our political system;
Amendment 86 #
2016/2008(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Stresses the need to engage young people in the political debate and notes that the use of ICT in democratic procedures can be an effective tool for that purpose;
Amendment 87 #
2016/2008(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Points to the importance ofNotes that e- voting ais a system offering manythat might offer some potential advantages, in particular for young people, people with reduced mobility and people living or working in a Member State of which they are not a citizen or in a third country; stresses nonetheless that there are significant problems with using e-voting in elections and that, if e-voting is going to be used, the secrecy of the vote must be ensured as well as a way to independently verify that the result has not been tampered with; points at the same time the difficulties in ensuring that voters make their own free choice without intimidation and the difficulties in getting the public to trust the result;
Amendment 95 #
2016/2008(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 112 #
2016/2008(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Stresses that democratic processes require extensive debate, scrutiny and reflection which are conducive to fair and rational deliberation, but and that this could be overshadowed by specific sectorial interests which abuse the influence of ICTe use of ICT in democratic processes must also comply with all transparency standards so to ensure transparency in the participation process itself at all political levels and at all stages of deliberation and the decision-making process;
Amendment 118 #
2016/2008(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Notes that for a functioning democracy, citizens' trust on institutions and democratic processes are a fundamental dimension; stresses therefore that the introduction of e- democracy tools needs to be accompanied by proper communication and education strategies;
Amendment 120 #
2016/2008(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7b. Stresses the importance of embedding e-participation in the political system in order to incorporate citizens' contributions in the decision-making process and ensure a follow-up; notes that a lack of responsiveness from decision- makers leads to disappointment and distrust;
Amendment 121 #
2016/2008(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 c (new)
Paragraph 7 c (new)
7c. Points out that in a functional democracy, net neutrality is important for the free access to online information and technological neutrality is one of the cornerstone of legislation meant to design and implement e-democracy;
Amendment 122 #
2016/2008(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 d (new)
Paragraph 7 d (new)
7d. Emphasises that the use of ICT tools should be complementary to other channels of communication with public institutions with the aim to avoid any kind of discrimination on the grounds of digital skills or lack of resources and infrastructures;
Amendment 150 #
2016/2008(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Calls on the Member States and EU institutions to promote the use of open source and open standards to ensure interoperability and transparency, and further collaborative development and, considers that in a functioning e- democracy citizens should not have to buy software from specific vendors in order to be able to communicate with public institutions;
Amendment 156 #
2016/2008(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Encourages the Member States and the EU to promote and support mechanisms that enable the participation of the public and their interaction with governments and EU institutions; highlights that ICT should facilitate access to information, transparency, active listening and debate for betternd participation in the decision- making;
Amendment 183 #
2016/2008(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Calls on the Commission to expand and develop e-participation in the mid-term review of the Digital Single Market Strategy to be launched in 2017;
Amendment 199 #
2016/2008(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Calls for more cooperation at EU level and recommends the sharing of best practices for e-democracy projects as a way to move towards a form of democracy that is more participatory and deliberative and that responds to the requests and interests of the public; calls on the Commission to provide an assessment of possible models of online voting for consideration by the Member States by the end of 2017, in time for the next European elections in 2019with an analysis of their strengths and weaknesses for consideration by the Member States;
Amendment 205 #
2016/2008(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Stresses the need to protect privacy and personal data when using e-democracy tools and to foster a more secure internet environment, particularly with regard to information and data security, the setting- up of secure digital public registers and the validation of electronic signatures in order to prevent fraudulent multiple interactions; underlines that security issues must not become a deterrent to the inclusion of individuals and groups in democratic processesthe principle of proportionality should be applied when designing the security dimension of e- democracy tools in order to ensure the appropriate level of security for each tool;
Amendment 217 #
2016/2008(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Calls on its Members to enhance transparency in their work, especially in the current challenging political context, and asks its administration to look into the possibility of setting up digital platforms, including the latest IT tools, in order to allow Members to communicate with the constituents and stakeholders efficiently, with a view to informing them on EU and parliamentary activities, to opening up policy-making processes and increasing awaren and increase transparency by allowing its Members to publish their meetings with lobbyists and the documents provided by theses of European democracystakeholders;
Amendment 218 #
2016/2008(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Welcomes its initiatives in the field of e-participation and its frontrunner positioncommits to take the frontrunner position in this field; proposes in this regard to develop a digital platform as a follow up of the on-going pilot project 'Promoting linked open data, free software and civil society participation in law-making throughout the EU' to support, inter alia, a process of public consultation for its reports; supports continuous efforts to strengthen its representative character by including citizens' participation in the decision- making process and encourages its Members to make wider use of new technologies in order to develop them to their full potential;
Amendment 224 #
2016/2008(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Encourages political parties at EU and national level to make the most out of digital tools in order to develop new ways to promote internal democracy, in order to allowcluding transparency in their management, financing, decision-making processes and better communication with and participation of their members and supporters and with civil society;
Amendment 229 #
2016/2008(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Calls on the EU and its institutions to be open to more experimentation with new e-participation methods such as crowdsourcing at EU level and at national, regional and local level; reiterates at the same time the need to complement these measures with awareness raising campaigns in order to explain the possibilities of these tools;
Amendment 59 #
2016/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) Council Directive 93/83/EEC17 facilitates cross-border satellite broadcasting and retransmission by cable of television and radio programmes from other Member States of the Union. However, the provisions of that Directive on transmissions of broadcasting organisations are limited to satellite transmissions and therefore do not apply to online services ancillary to broadcast while the provisions concerning retransmissions of television and radio programmes from other Member States are limited to simultaneous, unaltered and unabridged retransmission by cable or microwave systems and do not extend to such retransmissions by means of other technologies. _________________ 17 Council Directive 93/83/EEC of 27 September 1993 on the coordination of certain rules concerning copyright and rights related to copyright applicable to satellite broadcasting and cable retransmission OJ L 248, 6.10.1993, p. 15– 21.
Amendment 81 #
2016/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) The ancillary online services covered by this Regulation are those services offered by broadcasting organisations which have a clear and subordinate relationship to the broadcast. They include services giving access to television and radio programmes in a linear manner simultaneously to the broadcast and services giving access, within a defined time period after the broadcast,services giving access to television and radio content including services giving access to television and radio programmes which have been previously broadcasted by the broadcasting organisation (so-called catch- up services). In addition, ancillary online servicesThey include services which give access to material which enriches or otherwise expands television and radio programmes broadcast by the broadcasting organisation, including by way of previewing, extending, supplementing or reviewing the relevant programme's content. The provision of access to individual works , as well as content genuinely produced or licensed for other protected subject matter that have been incorporated in a television or radio programme should not be regarded as an ancillary online service. Similarly online environment. Public broadcasters in particular need to be able to use different dissemination channels to reach different audiences in order to fulfil their public service mandate. In order to reach younger audiences, the possibility to disseminate services designed for the online environment is crucial. Therefore, the provision of access to works or other protected subject matter independently of broadcast, such as services giving access to individual musical or audiovisual works, music albums or videos, do not fall under licensed for the broadcaster, and webcasting are included in the scope of the definition of ancillary online services.
Amendment 96 #
2016/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) Since the provision of, the access to or the use of an ancillary online service is deemed to occur solely in the Member State in which the broadcasting organisation has its principal establishment, while de facto the ancillary online service can be provided across borders to other Member States, it is necessary to ensure that in arriving at the amount of the payment to be made for the rights in question, the parties should take into account all aspects of the ancillary online service such as the features of the service, the audience, including the audience in the Member State in which the broadcasting organisation has its principal establishment and in other Member States in which the ancilonline service is accessed and used, and all available language versions. The consideration of language versions is particularly online service is accessed and used, and the language version. important as they often limit the audience in Member States other than the Member States in which the broadcasting organisation has its principal establishment considerably. The use of freely licensed content by broadcasters, such as public sector information which is regularly published under a free license in line with Directive 2003/98/EC, is an important public policy goal. This goal would be undermined by the imposition of any unwaivable remuneration, as unwaivable remuneration is fundamentally incompatible with free licenses, which by definition allow a non-exclusive re-use free of charge. In order to ensure that broadcasters can continue to use freely licensed content under the country of origin principle set out in this Regulation, it is necessary to exclude any imposition of unwaivable remuneration by Member States.
Amendment 115 #
2016/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) Operators of retransmission services offered on satellite, digital terrestrial, closed circuit IP-based, mobile and similar networks, provide services which are equivalent to those provided by operators of cable retransmission services when they retransmit simultaneously, in an unaltered and unabridged manner, for reception by the public, an initial transmission from another Member State of television or radio programmes, where this initial . They should therefore be within the scope of this Regulation and benefit from the mechanism introducing mandatory collective management of rights. In order to adapt to the development of digital technologies and to the changing user behaviour, this mechanism should include the retransmission, is by wire or over the air, including by satellite but excluding online transmissions, and intended for reception by the public. They should therefore be within the scope of this Regulation and benefit from thn an unaltered manner, via the Internet (so called over- the-top (OTT) service providers). The retransmission does not have to be simultaneous, as this would run counter to the principle of technological neutrality, whereas some mtechanism introducing mandatory collective management of rights. Retransmission services which are offered on the open internet should be excluded from the scope of this Regulation as those services have different characteristics. They are not linked to any particular infrastructure and their ability to ensure a controlled envirnologies may require a certain delay in retransmission, and because catch-up TV services by cable retransmission providers should also be facilitated, in order to achieve a level playing-field. The inclusion of OTT is crucial for allowing, in line with consumer expectations, portability of such services within the Member State of residence, as well as beyond, through the mechanism established by Regulation 2017/... of the European Parliament and of the Council1a. _________________ 1aProposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council onm ent is limited wsuring then compared for example to cable or closed circuit IP-based networks. ross-border portability of online content services in the internal market, COM(2015)0627.
Amendment 148 #
2016/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14a (new)
Recital 14a (new)
(14 a) Distributors, such as cable or platform operators, that receive programme carrying signals through a direct injection process for reception by the public should be covered by the mandatory collective management provisions outlined in this Regulation, even if a communication to the public has not taken place prior to the transmission of the signal by the distributor. Distributors should therefore obtain an authorisation from the relevant rightholders as concerns their respective participation in such acts, subject to mandatory collective management. The notion of "direct injection" is a technical term for the specific situation in which cable or other platform operators receive the broadcast signal directly from the broadcaster's premises or via a privately- closed network, so that such broadcast signal is not transmitted for reception by the public before it is transmitted by the operator receiving the signal. In this situation, which typically occurs within a Member State, there is only one, single communication to the public of such a programme-carrying signal. This clarification is important in order to avoid further complexity in the interpretation of the notion of communication to the public, which would have consequences beyond the issue of retransmission.
Amendment 149 #
2016/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14 b (new)
Recital 14 b (new)
Amendment 150 #
2016/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14 c (new)
Recital 14 c (new)
(14 c) In a number of Member States, rights clearance for the communication to the public or making available of television and radio programmes or related services, in a linear or non-linear form, is facilitated through extended collective licencing agreements. In order to take account of this situation and to improve legal certainty for all concerned parties in light of the judgment of the Court of Justice in Case C-301/15, this Regulation clarifies that such agreements are in line with Union law. The definition of information society services already exists in Directive 98/34/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council1a and in Directive 98/84/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council1b ; this definition covers any service normally provided for remuneration, at a distance, by means of electronic equipment for the processing (including digital compression) and storage of data, and at the individual request of a recipient of a service. The definition of linear and non-linear audiovisual media service should be in line with Directive 2010/13/EU. _________________ 1aDirective 98/34/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 June 1998 laying down a procedure for the provision of information in the field of technical standards and regulations and of rules on information society services (OJ L 204, 21.7.1998, p. 37). 1b Directive 98/84/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 November 1998 on the legal protection of services based on, or consisting of, conditional access (OJ L 320, 28.11.1998, p. 54).
Amendment 151 #
2016/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14d (new)
Recital 14d (new)
(14 d) In light of the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, it is also necessary to provide an additional exception to the rights of reproduction and communication to the public laid down in Article 2(a) and Article 3(1) of Directive 2001/29/EC, as established in Article 5(2) of that Directive, in order to provide legal certainty, and to allow service providers to make such programmes and services available on the basis of extended collective licencing.
Amendment 152 #
2016/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14e (new)
Recital 14e (new)
(14 e) The application of copyright and related rights is in some cases divided into numerous territorially defined national rights, with different rightholders and exercised in some cases by a different entity. A database maintained by collective management organisations is therefore needed to facilitate the identification of rightholders and the ability of broadcasting organisations and retransmission operators to conclude licensing agreements.
Amendment 176 #
2016/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) In order to achieve the objective of promoting the cross-border provision of ancillary online services and of facilitating retransmissions of television and radio programmescontent originating in other Member States, it is appropriate to adopt a Regulation, which directly applies in Member States. A Regulation is necessary in order to guarantee a uniform application of the rules across Member States and their entering into force at the same time with regard to all the concerned transmissions and retransmissions. The direct applicability of a Regulation reduces legal fragmentation and provides greater uniformity by introducing a harmonised set of rules which promote the free circulation of television and radio programmes originating in other Member Statescontent originating in other Member States. At the same time, the Regulation should not in any way limit or prohibit already existing mandatory collective management systems in Member States that go beyond what is required by this Regulation, particularly in domestic situations, because this would run counter to the Regulation's objective of facilitating retransmissions. Therefore, this regulation should be without prejudice to any existing mandatory or extended collective management solutions for retransmission existing in a Member State that go beyond what is required in this Regulation.
Amendment 191 #
2016/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article –1 (new)
Article –1 (new)
Article -1 Subject Matter 1.This Regulation establishes legal mechanisms to facilitate the clearance of copyright and related rights relevant for the cross-border provision of online services and to facilitate digital retransmissions of television and radio content as well as broadcasting organisations' on-demand services originating in other Member States. 2.Those legal mechanisms include the establishment of the country of origin principle as regards the exercise of those rights. The legal mechanisms also include provisions on mandatory collective management of copyright and related rights relevant for retransmission, on legal presumptions of representation by collective management organisations, on the exercise of retransmission rights by broadcasting organisations and on the application of the mandatory collective management rules set out in this Regulation to direct injection.
Amendment 198 #
2016/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) "ancillary online service" means an online service consisting in the provision to the public, by or under the control and responsibility of a broadcasting organisation, of radio or television programmes simultaneously with or for a defined period of time, before, during or after their broadcast by the broadcasting organisation as well as of any material produced, co-produced or commissioned by or for the broadcasting organisation whichor licenced to ist ancillary to such broadcastd any service by the broadcasting organisation providing access to works under the editorial responsibility of the broadcasting organisation;
Amendment 218 #
2016/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(b a) "direct injection" means a two- or more step process by which broadcasting organisations transmit their programme- carrying signals point to point via a private line, in such a way that the programme-carrying signals cannot be received by the general public during the transmission, to a distributor who then offers these programmes to the public in an unaltered and unabridged manner, for viewing or listening on cable, microwave systems, satellite, digital terrestrial, IP- based or similar networks.
Amendment 233 #
2016/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – title
Article 2 – title
Application of the principle of ‘country of origin’ to ancillary online services by broadcasters
Amendment 240 #
2016/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1
(1) The acts of communication to the public and of making available occurring when providing an ancillary online service by or under the control and responsibility of a broadcasting organisation as well as the acts of reproduction which are necessary for the provision of, the access to or the use of the ancillary online service shall, for the purposes of exercising copyright and related rights relevant for these acts, be deemed to occur solely in the Member State in which the broadcasting organisation has its principal establishment. Any disputes over the exercise of these rights shall fall under the jurisdiction of that Member State.
Amendment 256 #
2016/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2
Article 2 – paragraph 2
(2) When fixing the amount of the payment to be made for the rights subject to the country of origin principle as set out in paragraph 1, the parties shall take into account all aspects of the ancillary online service such as the features of the ancillary online service, the audience, and thall available language versions. Member States shall not impose any unwaivable remuneration for the rights subject to the country of origin principle set out in paragraph 1.
Amendment 263 #
2016/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 2 a (new)
(2 a) Member States may decide to exclude an online service from the application of paragraph 1 only in the case that the broadcasting organisation responsible for the online service establishes itself in one Member State while targeting exclusively an audience in another Member State market for the sole purpose of circumventing national copyright rules.
Amendment 301 #
2016/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 5 a (new)
(5 a) Paragraphs 1 to 5 shall also apply to the integral re-use of the broadcasting organisation's on-demand services by a party other than the broadcasting organisation under whose control and responsibility such services were primarily made available.
Amendment 302 #
2016/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 5 b (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 5 b (new)
(5 b) Collective management organisations shall maintain a database providing information related to the application of copyright and related rights including the owner of a right, the type of use, the territory and period of time.
Amendment 317 #
2016/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 a (new)
Article 4 a (new)
Article 4 a Direct Injection Article 3 shall also apply to cases of direct injection, as defined in point (b a) of Article 1.
Amendment 318 #
2016/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 b (new)
Article 4 b (new)
Article 4 b Agreements on passive sales Agreements imposing on broadcasters or retransmission services obligations, in respect of passive sales, to act in violation of Article 101(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and Regulation (EU) No 330/2010, shall be automatically void.
Amendment 319 #
2016/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 c (new)
Article 4 c (new)
Article 4 c Extended collective licencing 1.Member States may extend the application of a non-exclusive licence concluded by a collective management organisation, on behalf of its members, with an information society service or a linear audiovisual media or radio service provider for the communication to the public or making available of, as well as the acts of reproduction which are necessary for the provision of, broadcasters' radio or television programmes and audiovisual works provided by the broadcasting organisation to the public, to rightholders of the same category as those covered by the licence who are not represented by the collective management organisation, provided that: (a) the collective management organisation is, on the basis of mandates from rightholders, broadly representative of rightholders in the category of works or other subject-matter and of the rights which are the subject of the licence; (b) equal treatment is guaranteed to all rightholders in relation to the terms of the licence; (c) the collective management organisation makes available to all rightholders information about the exploitation of the works subject to this paragraph; (d) all rightholders may at any time exclude the application of the licence to their works or other subject-matter. 2.Exceptions or limitations introduced by Member States to the rights provided for in Articles 2 and 3 of Directive 2001/29/EC apply in cases related to the provision to the public by an information society service provider of works covered by paragraph 1, insofar as the relevant rightholder does not exclude the application of the non-exclusive license.
Amendment 325 #
2016/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Agreements on the exercise of copyright and related rights relevant for the acts of communication to the public and the making available occurring in the course of provision of an ancillary online service as well as for the acts of reproduction which are necessary for the provision of, the access to or the use of an ancillary online service which are in force on [the date mentioned in Article 7(2), to be inserted by OPOCE ] shall be subject to Article 2 as from [the date mentioned in Article 7(2) + 21 years, to be inserted by OPOCE] if they expire after that date.
Amendment 330 #
2016/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 2 a (new)
(2 a) The extension of this Regulation to include video-on-demand platforms in its scope shall be considered together with the review of Article 10 of Directive 2017/....1a _________________ 1aProposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on copyright in the Digital Single Market, COM(2016)0593.
Amendment 77 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) This Directive is based upon, and complements, the rules laid down in the Directives currently in force in this area, in particular Directive 96/9/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council27 , Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council27a , Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council28 , Directive 2006/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council29 , Directive 2009/24/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council30 , Directive 2012/28/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council31 and Directive 2014/26/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council32 . _________________ 27 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. 20–28). 27a Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market (Directive on electronic commerce) (OJ L 178, 17.7.2000, p. 1). 28 Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society (OJ L 167, 22.6.2001, p. 10–19). 29 Directive 2006/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on rental right and lending right and on certain rights related to copyright in the field of intellectual property (OJ L 376, 27.12.2006, p. 28–35). 30 Directive 2009/24/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the legal protection of computer programs (OJ L 111, 5.5.2009, p. 16–22). 31 Directive 2012/28/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on certain permitted uses of orphan works (OJ L 299, 27.10.2012, p. 5– 12). 32 Directive 2014/26/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on collective management of copyright and related rights and multi- territorial licensing of rights in musical works for online use in the internal market (OJ L 84, 20.3.2014, p. 72–98).
Amendment 83 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) Rapid technological developments continue to transform the way works and other subject-matter are created, produced, distributed and exploited. New business models and new actors continue to emerge. The objectives and the principles laid down by the Union copyright framework remain sound. However, legal uncertainty remains, for both rightholders and users, as regards certain uses, including cross-border uses, of works and other subject-matter in the digital environment. As set out in the Communication of the Commission entitled ‘Towards a modern, more European copyright framework’26 , in some areas it is necessary to adapt and supplement the current Union copyright framework. This Directive provides for rules to adapt certain exceptions and limitations to digital and cross-border environments, as well as measures to facilitate certain licensing practices as regards the dissemination of out-of- commerce works and the online availability of audiovisual works on video- on-demand platforms with a view to ensuring wider access to content. In order to achieve a well-functioning marketplace for copyright, there should also be rules on rights in publications, on the use of works and other subject-matter by online service providers storing and giving access to user uploaded content and on the transparency of authors' and performers' contracts. _________________ 26 COM(2015) 626 final. COM(2015) 626 final.
Amendment 86 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) This Directive is based upon, and complements, the rules laid down in the Directives currently in force in this area, in particular Directive 96/9/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council27 , Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council 27a, Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council28 , Directive 2006/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council29 , Directive 2009/24/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council30 , Directive 2012/28/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council31 and Directive 2014/26/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council32 . _________________ 27 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. 20–28). 27a Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market (Directive on electronic commerce) (OJ L 178, 17.7.2000, p. 1). 28 Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society (OJ L 167, 22.6.2001, p. 10–19). 29 Directive 2006/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on rental right and lending right and on certain rights related to copyright in the field of intellectual property (OJ L 376, 27.12.2006, p. 28–35). 30 Directive 2009/24/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the legal protection of computer programs (OJ L 111, 5.5.2009, p. 16–22). 31 Directive 2012/28/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on certain permitted uses of orphan works (OJ L 299, 27.10.2012, p. 5– 12). 32 Directive 2014/26/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on collective management of copyright and related rights and multi- territorial licensing of rights in musical works for online use in the internal market (OJ L 84, 20.3.2014, p. 72–98).
Amendment 89 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) New technologies enable the automated computational analysis of information in digital form, such as text, sounds, images or data, generally known as text and data mining. Those technologies allow researchers tothe processing of large amounts of information to gain new knowledge and discover new trends. Whilst text and data mining technologies are prevalent across the digital economy, there is widespread acknowledgment that text and data mining can in particular benefit the research community and in so doing encourage innovation. However, in the Union,here is a need to clarify the legality of copies made for purposes of text and data mining in order to encourage innovation and discovery in all fields. Without a mandatory exception applying throughoutthe Union, all entities engaging in text and data mining, including research organisations such as universities and research institutes, are confronted with legal uncertainty as to the extent to which they can perform text and data mining of content. In certain instances, text and data mining may involve acts protected by copyright and/or by the sui generis database right, notably the reproduction of works or other subject-matter and/or the extraction of contents from a database. Where there is no exception or limitation which applies, an authorisation to undertake such acts would be required from rightholdersFor text and data mining to occur one first needs to access information and then to reproduce that information. It is generally only after that information is normalised that its processing through text and data mining can occur. Once there is lawful access to information, it is when that information is being normalised that a copyright protected use takes place since this leads to a reproduction by changing the format of the information itself or an extraction from a database into one that can be subjected to text and data mining. The copyright relevant processes in the use of text and data mining technology is consequently not the text and data mining process itself which consists of a reading and analysis of digitally stored normalised information, but the process of access and the process by which information is normalised to enable its automated computational analysis. The process of access to information be it works or other subject matter protected by copyright is already regulated in the copyright related acquis. In certain instances, text and data mining may involve works protected by copyright and/or by the sui generis database right. Text and data mining may also be carried out in relation to mere facts or data which are not protected by copyright and in such instances no authorisation would be required.
Amendment 94 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) Union law already provides certain exceptions and limitations covering uses for scientific research purposes which may apply to acts of text and data mining. However, those exceptions and limitations are optional and not fully adapted to the use of technologies inxt and data mining technologies which are relevant far beyond the area of scientific research. Moreover, where researchers havethere is lawful access to content, for example through subscriptions to publications or open access licences, the terms of the licences may exclude text and data mining. As research is increasingly carried out with the assistance of digital technology, there is a risk that the Union's competitive position as a research area and action lines envisaged in the European Open Science Agenda will suffer unless steps are taken to address the legal uncertainty for text and data miningregarding text and data mining for all potential users. Union law must acknowledge that text and data mining is increasingly used beyond formal research organisations and for purposes other than scientific research which nevertheless contribute to innovation, technology transfer and the public interest.
Amendment 97 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) In the fields of research, education and preserv and innovation, transformative use, education ofand cultural heritage, digital technologies permit new types of uses that are not clearly covered by the current Union rules on exceptions and limitations. In addition, the optional nature of exceptions and limitations provided for in Directives 2001/29/EC, 96/9/EC and 2009/24/EC in these fields may negatively impacts the functioning of the internal market. This is particularly relevant as regards cross-border uses, which are becoming increasingly important in the digital environment. Therefore, the existing exceptions and limitations in Union law that are relevant for scientific research, teaching and preservation of cultural heritage should be reassessed and complemented in the light of those new uses. Mandatory exceptions or limitations for uses of text and data mining technologies in the field of scientific research, illustration for teaching in the digital environment and for preserv, illustration for teaching , user-generated content, freedom of panorama and for preservation and dissemination of cultural heritage should be introduced. For uses not covered by the exceptions or the limitations provided for in this Directive, the exceptions and limitations existing in Union law should continue to apply. Directives 96/9/EC and 2001/29/EC should be adapted.
Amendment 98 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9 a (new)
Recital 9 a (new)
(9 a) Furthermore, there is widespread acknowledgment that access to normalised information in a format which enables it to be subjected to text and data mining can in particular benefit the research community in its entirety including to smaller research organisations especially when there is no lawful access to content, for example through subscriptions to publications or open access licences. In the Union, research organisations such as universities and research institutes are confronted with challenges to gain lawful access to the volume of digitally stored information required for new knowledge to be sought through the use of text and data mining.
Amendment 100 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) This legal uncertainty should be addressed by providing for a mandatory exception to the right of reproduction and also to the right to prevent extraction from a database for the purposes of text and data mining, which should not be subject to compensation given that in view of the nature and scope of the exception the harm should be minimal. An additional mandatory exception should allow research organisations to have access to normalised information in a format that enables it to be text and data mined provided that that process is carried out by the research organisation. Rightholders should not be able to seek compensation for this exception that goes beyond what is necessary and proportionate to the cost of the normalisation process. Research organisations should also benefit from this exception when they engage in public-private partnerships. These new exceptions should be without prejudice to the existing mandatory exception on temporary acts of reproduction laid down in Article 5(1) of Directive 2001/29, which should continue to apply to text and data mining techniques which do not involve the making of copies going beyond the scope of that exception. Research organisations should also benefit from the exception when they engage into public-private partnerships.
Amendment 107 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) Research organisations across the Union encompass a wide variety and size of entities the primary goal of which is to conduct scientific research or to do so together with the provision of educational services. Due toTaking into account the diversity of such entities, it is important to have a common understanding of the beneficiaries of the exceptionfor instance small research organisations with only limited access to content, it is important that rightholders provide access to normalised datasets for the purpose of text and data mining.. Despite different legal forms and structures, research organisations across Member States generally have in common that they act either on a not for profit basis or in the context of a public- interest mission recognised by the State. Such a public-interest mission may, for example, be reflected through public funding or through provisions in national laws or public contracts. At the same time, organisations upon which commercial undertakings have a decisive influence allowing them to exercise control because of structural situations such as their quality of shareholders or members, which may result in preferential access to the results of the research, should not be considered research organisations for the purposes of this Directive.
Amendment 112 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) In view of a potentially high number of access requests to and downloads of their works or other subject- matter, rightholders should be allowed to apply measures where there is risk that the security and integrity of the system or databases where the works or other subject-matter are hosted would be jeopardised. Those measures should not exceed what is necessarand in order to ensure reproducibility of research results, Member States shall designate a facility to safely sto pursue the objective of ensuring the security and integrity of the system and should not undermine the effective application of the exceptionre datasets used for text and data mining.
Amendment 113 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) New technologies enable the automated computational analysis of information in digital form, such as text, sounds, images or data, generally known as text and data mining. Those technologies allow researchers tothe processing of large amounts of information to gain new knowledge and discover new trends. Whilst text and data mining technologies are prevalent across the digital economy, there is widespread acknowledgment that text and data mining can in particular benefit the research community and in so doinghere is a need to clarify the legality of copies made for purposes of text and data mining in order to encourage innovation. Howe and discover,y in the Union,all fields. Without a mandatory exception applying throughout the Union, all entities engaging in text and data mining, including research organisations such as universities and research institutes are confronted with legal uncertainty as to the extent to which they can perform text and data mining of content. In certain instances, text and data mining may involve acts protected by copyright and/or by the sui generis database right, notably the reproduction of works or other subject-matter and/or the extraction of contents from a database. Where there is no exception or limitation which applies, an authorisation to undertake such acts would be required from rightholdersFor text and data mining to occur, one first needs to access information and then to reproduce that information. It is generally only after that information is normalised that its processing through text and data mining can occur. Once there is lawful access to information, it is when that information is being normalised that a copyright protected use takes place since this leads to a reproduction by changing the format of the information itself or an extraction from a database into one that can be subjected to text and data mining. The copyright relevant processes in the use of text and data mining technology is consequently not the text and data mining process itself which consists of a reading and analysis of digitally stored normalised information, but the process of access and the process by which information is normalised to enable its automated computational analysis. The process of access to information be it works or other subject matter protected by copyright is already regulated in the copyright related acquis. In certain instances, text and data mining could involve works protected by copyright and/or by the sui generis database right. Text and data mining may also be carried out in relation to mere facts or data which are not protected by copyright and in such instances no authorisation would be required.
Amendment 125 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) Union law already provides certain exceptions and limitations covering uses for scientific research purposes which may apply to acts of text and data mining. However, those exceptions and limitations are optional and not fully adapted to the use of technologies inxt and data mining technologies which are relevant far beyond the area of scientific research. Moreover, where researchers havethere is lawful access to content, for example through subscriptions to publications or open access licences, the terms of the licences may exclude text and data mining. As research is increasingly carried out with the assistance of digital technology, there is a risk that the Union's competitive position as a research area and action lines envisaged in the European Open Science Agenda will suffer unless steps are taken to address the legal uncertainty for text and data miningregarding text and data mining for all potential users. Union law should acknowledge that text and data mining is increasingly used beyond formal research organisations and for purposes other than scientific research which nevertheless contribute to innovation, technology transfer and the public interest.
Amendment 131 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9 b (new)
Recital 9 b (new)
(9 b) Furthermore, there is widespread acknowledgment that access to normalised information in a format which enables it to be subjected to text and data mining can in particular benefit the research community in its entirety including to smaller research organisations especially when there is no lawful access to content, for example through subscriptions to publications or open access licences. In the Union, research organisations such as universities and research institutes are confronted with challenges to gain lawful access to the volume of digitally stored information required for new knowledge to be sought through the use of text and data mining.
Amendment 134 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9 a (new)
Recital 9 a (new)
(9 a) Scientific data produced with public funding should be made available in an open format, so that researchers, citizens and companies can access the data and re-use them, including to perform text and data mining. This obligation should create an Open Data mandate for the benefit of researchers and of European SMEs and start-ups. For the advancement of European innovation, guiding principles on text and data mining enablement should be further scrutinised along the lines of the Horizon 2020 Open Research Data Pilot. The exception for text and data mining should cover all data sources, including data hosted by information society service providers, so that concentrated and anti-competitive research models can be avoided.
Amendment 136 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) This legal uncertainty should be addressed by providing for a mandatory exception to the right of reproduction and also to the right to prevent extraction from a database for the purposes of text and data mining, which should not be subject to compensation given that in view of the nature and scope of the exception the harm should be minimal. An additional mandatory exception should allow research organisations to have access to normalised information in a format that enables it to be text and data mined provided that that process is carried out by the research organisation. Rightholders should not be able to seek compensation for this exception that goes beyond what is necessary and proportionate to the cost of the normalisation process. Research organisations should also benefit from this exception when they engage in public-private partnerships. These new exceptions should be without prejudice to the existing mandatory exception on temporary acts of reproduction laid down in Article 5(1) of Directive 2001/29, which should continue to apply to text and data mining techniques which do not involve the making of copies going beyond the scope of that exception. Research organisations should also benefit from the exception when they engage into public-private partnerships.
Amendment 151 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 21 a (new)
Recital 21 a (new)
(21 a) Cultural heritage institutions, and educational establishments have long been involved in making reproductions for individual researchers in their collections, upon their request and on an ad hoc basis. This serves to support and enrich an individual's scientific research, as a researcher who cannot travel to where a work or related subject matter is held is able to request that a reproduction be made for them in compliance with current Union rules on exceptions and limitations. Research, education and learning is increasingly taking place in a cross border environment. There is however a lack of clarity as to whether the existing exceptions or limitations in Member States provide for a cross-border effect. This situation hampers scientific research and the development of the European Research Area. This legal uncertainty should be addressed, and researchers provided with a clear framework that allows them to request a cultural heritage institution, or educational establishment to make and supply them with a reproduction of a work or other subject matter for the purposes of their research, including in a cross border context.
Amendment 152 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 21 b (new)
Recital 21 b (new)
(21 b) Different arrangements, based on the implementation of the exception provided for in Directive 2001/29/EC, are in place in a number of Member States in order to facilitate cultural heritage institutions, and educational establishments to give on site access to works and other subject-matter on the premises. Such arrangements exist as educational establishments and cultural heritage institutions are involved in preserving and giving access to their digital collections on the premises. Digital technologies provide new ways of giving access to those collections on the premises, for example the use of WIFI networks to give users access to collections on their own portable devices, such as mobile phones and laptops. The requirement to use dedicated terminals for giving access to content on the premises has proven impractical and outdated. At the same time, the maturity of digital preservation requires cultural heritage institutions to preserve and give access not just to digitised analogue works and other subject matter, but also to born- digital materials. Member States should therefore be required to provide for an exception to permit cultural heritage institutions, and educational establishments to give access to all digitised and born-digital collections on the premises or online. Such an exception should allow copies to be delivered on any technology to members of the public.
Amendment 156 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) Research organisations across the Union encompass a wide variety and size of entities the primary goal of which is to conduct scientific research or to do so together with the provision of educational services. Due toTaking into account the diversity of such entities, it is impfor instance small research ortgant to have a common understanding of the beneficiaries of the exceptionisations with only limited access to content, it is important that rightholders provide access to normalised datasets for the purpose of text and data mining. Despite different legal forms and structures, research organisations across Member States generally have in common that they act either on a not for profit basis or in the context of a public- interest mission recognised by the State. Such a public-interest mission may, for example, be reflected through public funding or through provisions in national laws or public contracts. At the same time, organisations upon which commercial undertakings have a decisive influence allowing them to exercise control because of structural situations such as their quality of shareholders or members, which may result in preferential access to the results of the research, should not be considered research organisations for the purposes of this Directive.
Amendment 159 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) In view of a potentially high number of access requests to and downloads of their works or other subject- matter, rightholders should be allowed to apply measures where there is risk that the security and integrity of the system or databases where the works or other subject-matter are hosted would be jeopardised. Those measures should not exceed what is necessarand in order to ensure reproducibility of research results, Member States shall designate a facility to safely sto pursue the objective of ensuring the security and integrity of the system and should not undermine the effective application of the exceptionre datasets used for text and data mining.
Amendment 171 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 31
Recital 31
Amendment 178 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 32
Recital 32
Amendment 188 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 33
Recital 33
(33) For the purposes of this Directive, it is necessary to defineclarify the sconceptpe of press publication in a way that embraces only journalistic publications, published by a service provider, periodically or regularly updated in any media, for the purpose of informing or entertaining. Such publications would include, for instance, daily newspapers, weeklotection provided by article 2 and 3 of Directive 2001/29/EC. In order to improve legal certainty for all concerned parties, and to ensure the freedom to carry out certain acts necessary for monthly magazines of general or special ithe normal functioning of the Internest and news websites. Periodical publications which are published for scientific or academic purposes, such as scientific journals, should not be covered by the protection granted to press publications under this Directive. This protection doess well as to take account of certain fundamental rights, these articles do not extend to acts of hyperlinking, which do not constitute communication to the public.
Amendment 197 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 34
Recital 34
Amendment 206 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 35
Recital 35
Amendment 211 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 36
Recital 36
Amendment 216 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 37
Recital 37
(37) Over the last years, the functioning of the online content marketplace has gained in complexity. Online services providing access to copyright protected content uploaded by their users without the involvement of right holders have flourished and have become mainimportant sources of access to content online. This affects rightholders' possibilities to determine whether, and under which conditions, their work and other subject-matter are used as well as their possibilities to get an appropriate remuneration for it allowing for diversity and ease of access to content but also generating challenges when copyright protected content is uploaded without prior authorisation from rightsholders.
Amendment 230 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 1
Recital 38 – paragraph 1
Where information society service providers which store and provide access to the public to copyright protected works or other subject-matter uploaded by their users, thereby going beyond the mere provision of physical facilities and performing an act of communication to the public, they are obliged to conclude conduct licencing agreements with rightsholders on a voluntary basis, the users' fundamental rights to privacy, freedom of expression and freedom of information are often not sufficiently taken into account and their ability to assert their right of use under an exception or limitation is often unjustly curtailed by the measures put in place as part of those licenscing agreements with rightholders, unless they are eligible for the liability. In order to correct this situation and provide legal certainty to users who are exercising their right of use under an excemption provided in Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council34 . _________________ 34 Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market (OJ L 178, 17.7.2000, p. 1–16)or limitation that exists under national law in the country in which the use is made, a legal framework governing those licencing agreements is necessary. In order to protect fundamental rights and improve legal certainty for all concerned parties in light of the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, it is necessary that any agreements on measures between rightsholders and information society service providers do not impose a general obligation on information society service providers to monitor the information which they transmit or store, nor a general obligation actively to seek facts or circumstances indicating illegal activity.
Amendment 243 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 21 e (new)
Recital 21 e (new)
(21 e) Following technological developments and evolving user behaviour, a significant phenomenon of cultural creation has emerged, which relies on users uploading or displaying content, in various forms, to online services. Such user-generated content may comprise extracts or quotations of protected works or other subject-matter, which may be altered, combined or transformed for different purposes by users. Such uses of extracts or quotations within user-generated content, for various purposes such as the illustration of an idea, review or entertainment, are now widespread online and, provided that the use of such extracts or quotations of protected works or other subject-matter is proportionate, do not cause significant economic harm to the rightholders concerned and may even advertise the work used within the user-generated content.
Amendment 244 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 21 f (new)
Recital 21 f (new)
(21 f) Despite some overlap with existing voluntary exceptions or limitations, such as the ones for quotation and parody, the use of protected works or other subject- matter within user-generated content is nonetheless not properly covered by the existing list of exceptions or limitations, creating legal uncertainty for users. Particularly the voluntary nature of existing exceptions and limitations is significantly curtailing the development of user-generated content, which is typically disseminated in a borderless online environment. It is therefore necessary to provide a new mandatory specific exception to authorise the legitimate uses of extracts or quotations of protected works or other subject-matter within user- generated content.
Amendment 249 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 2
Recital 38 – paragraph 2
Amendment 256 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 3
Recital 38 – paragraph 3
Amendment 270 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 39
Recital 39
Amendment 281 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 31
Recital 31
Amendment 295 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 32
Recital 32
Amendment 305 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 2
Article 1 – paragraph 2
2. Except in the cases referred to in Article 6, this Directive shall leave intact and shall in no way affect existing rules laid down in the Directives currently in force in this area, in particular Directives 96/9/EC, 2000/31/EC, 2001/29/EC, 2006/115/EC, 2009/24/EC, 2012/28/EU and 2014/26/EU.
Amendment 312 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 33
Recital 33
(33) For the purposes of this Directive, it is necessary to defineclarify the sconceptpe of press publication in a way that embraces only journalistic publications, published by a service provider, periodically or regularly updated in any media, for the purpose of informing or entertaining. Such publications would include, for instance, daily newspapers, weeklotection set out in Article s2 and 3 of Directive 2001/29/EC. In order to improve legal certainty for all concerned parties, and to ensure the freedom to carry out certain acts necessary for monthly magazines of general or special ithe normal functioning of the Internest and news websites. Periodical publications which are published for scientific or academic purposes, such as scientific journals, should not be covered by the protection granted to press publications under this Directive. This protection doess well as to take account of certain fundamental rights, these Articles should not extend to acts of hyperlinking, which do not constitute communication to the public.
Amendment 314 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 3 a (new)
(3a) 'user generated content' means an image, a set of moving images with or without sound, a phonogram, text, software, data, or a combination of the above, which is uploaded to an online service by one or more users;
Amendment 315 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 4
Article 2 – paragraph 4
Amendment 320 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall provide for an exception to the rights provided for in Article 2 of Directive 2001/29/EC, Articles 5(a) and 7(1) of Directive 96/9/EC and Article 11(1) of this Directive for reproductions and extractions made by research organisations in order to carry out text and data mining of works or other subject-matter to which they have lawful acc. This includess, for the sole purposes of scientific researchtext and data mining, the permission to extract contents of databases and to make reproductions.
Amendment 326 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 34
Recital 34
Amendment 329 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Member States shall provide for rightholders who market works or other subject-matter primarily for research purposes, to have an obligation to allow research organisations not having lawful access to those works or other subject- matter access to datasets that are optimised for enabling them to carry out text and data mining on all aspects of the works. Member States may also provide for rightholders to have a right to request compensation for meeting this obligation as long as that compensation is related to the cost of formatting these datasets and does not exceed what is necessary and appropriate to cover those costs.
Amendment 330 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 2
Article 3 – paragraph 2
2. Any contractual provision or legal protection of technological measures contrary to the exception provided for in paragraph 1 shall be unenforceable.
Amendment 332 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 3
Article 3 – paragraph 3
3. Rightholders shall not be allowed to apply measures to ensure the security and integrity of the networks and databases where the works or other subject-matter are hosted. Such measures shall notechnologically limit the right to exercise the exception adopted pursuant gto beyond what is necessary to achieve that objectiveparagraph 1.
Amendment 337 #
2016/0280(COD)
4. Member States shall encourage rightholders and research organisations to define commonly-agreed best practices concerning the application of the measures referred to in paragraph 3designate a facility to safely store datasets used for text and data mining and to make them accessible for verification purposes.
Amendment 340 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 35
Recital 35
Amendment 369 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 37
Recital 37
(37) Over the last years, the functioning of the online content marketplace has gained in complexity. Online services providing access tohosting copyright protected content uploaded by their users without the involvement of right holders have flourished and have become mainimportant sources of access to content online. This affects rightholders' possibilities to determine whether, and under which conditions, their work and other subject-matter are used as well as their possibilities to get an appropriate remuneration for it allowing for diversity and ease of access to content but also generating challenges when copyright protected content is uploaded without prior authorisation from rightholders.
Amendment 386 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 1
Recital 38 – paragraph 1
Where information society service providers that store and provide access to the public to copyright protected works or other subject-matter uploaded by their users, thereby going beyondinformation provided by a recepient of the service conduct licencing agreements with rightsholders on a voluntary basis, the users' fundamental rights to privacy, freedom of expression and freedom of information are often not sufficiently taken into account and their ability to assert their right of use under an exception or limitation is often unjustly curtailed by the measures provision of physical facilities and performing an act of communication to the publut in place as part of those licencing agreements. In order to correct this situation and provide legal certainty to users who are exercising their right of use under an exception or limitation that exists under national law in the country in whic,h they are obliged to conclud use is made, a legal framework governing those licenscing agreements with rightholders, unless they are eligible for the liability exemption provided in Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Councilis necessary. In order to protect fundamental rights and improve legal certainty for all concerned parties in light of the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, it is necessary that any agreements on measures between rightsholders and information society service providers do not impose a general obligation on information society service providers to monitor the information which they transmit or store, nor a general obligation actively to seek facts or circumstances indicating illegal activity. 34 . _________________ 34 Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market (OJ L 178, 17.7.2000, p. 1–16).
Amendment 390 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 e (new)
Article 5 e (new)
Article 5e User-generated content exception 1. Member States shall provide for an exception or limitation to the rights provided for in Articles 2, 3 and 4 of Directive 2001/29/EC, point (a) of Article 5 and Article 7(1) of Directive 96/9/EC, point (a) of Article 4(1) of Directive 2009/24/EC and Article 13 of this Directive in order to allow for the digital use of quotations or extracts of works and other subject-matter comprised within user-generated content for purposes such as criticism, review, entertainment, illustration, caricature, parody or pastiche provided that the quotations or extracts: (a) relate to works or other subject- matter that have already been lawfully made available to the public; (b) are accompanied by the indication of the source, including the author's name, unless this turns out to be impossible; and (c) are used in accordance with fair practice and in a manner that does not extend beyond the specific purpose for which they are being used. 2. Any contractual provision contrary to the exception provided for in this paragraph 1 shall be unenforceable.
Amendment 405 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 2
Recital 38 – paragraph 2
Amendment 415 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 3
Recital 38 – paragraph 3
Amendment 423 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11
Article 11
Amendment 431 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 a (new)
Recital 38 a (new)
(38 a) Any agreements on measures between rightsholders and information society service providers that might be concluded should provide for an obligation for rightholders to provide the necessary data to allow the services to identify their content in a publicly accessible database. Such obligation should help clarify the responsibility of rightholders for claims made by third parties over the use of works which they would have identified as being their own in the implementation of any agreement reached with the service provider.
Amendment 437 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 39
Recital 39
Amendment 449 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Chapter 4 – title
Chapter 4 – title
Certain uses of protected content by users of online services
Amendment 459 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – title
Article 13 – title
Use of protected content by users of information society service providers storing and giving access to large amounts of works and other subject-matter uploaded by their users
Amendment 465 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. IWhere information society service providers that store and provide to the public access to large amounts of works or other subject- matter uploaded by their users shall, in cooperationconclude agreements with rightsholders, take measures to ensure the funche implementationing of such agreements concluded with rightholders for the use of their works or other subject-matter or to prevent the availability on their services of works or other subject-matter identified by rightholders through the cooperation with the service providers. Those measures, such as the use of effective content recognition technologies, shall be appropriate and proportionate. The service providers shall provideshall respect the users' fundamental rights and shall in particular not convey an obligation upon the information society service provider to monitor the information which they transmit or store, nor a general obligation actively to seek facts or circumstances indicating illegal activity. The service providers shall cooperate and work together with rightsholders with adequate information on the functioning and the deployment of the measures, as well as, when relevant, adequate reporting on the recognition and use of the works and other subject-matterto ensure that the functioning and implementation of such agreements are full and transparent towards the users.
Amendment 488 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2
Article 13 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall ensure that the servicenational law providers referred to in paragraph 1 put in place complaints and redress mechanisms that are available to users in case of disputes over the application of the measures referred to in paragraph 1users access to a court or other relevant authority for the purpose of asserting their right of use under an exception or limitation.
Amendment 495 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The agreements referred to in paragraph 1 shall be implemented without prejudice to the use of works made within an exception or limitation to copyright. To this end, Member States shall ensure that users are allowed to communicate rapidly and in an effective manner with the rightholders who have requested any measures within the scope of agreements referred to in paragraph 1 in order to challenge the application of those measures.
Amendment 498 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 3
Article 13 – paragraph 3
Amendment 519 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 4
Article 2 – paragraph 4
Amendment 538 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall provide for an exception to the rights provided for in Article 2 of Directive 2001/29/EC, Articles 5(a) and 7(1) of Directive 96/9/EC and Article 11(1) of this Directive for reproductions and extractions made by research organisations in order to carry out text and data mining of works or other subject-matter to which they have lawful acc. This includess, for the sole purposes of scientific researchtext and data mining, the permission to extract contents of databases and to make reproductions.
Amendment 547 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Member States shall provide for rightholders who market works or other subject-matter primarily for research purposes, to have an obligation to allow research organisations not having lawful access to those works or other subject- matter access to datasets that are optimised for enabling them to carry out text and data mining on all aspects of the works. Member States may also provide for rightholders to have a right to request compensation for meeting this obligation as long as that compensation is related to the cost of formatting these datasets and does not exceed what is necessary and appropriate to cover those costs.
Amendment 548 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 2
Article 3 – paragraph 2
2. Any contractual provision or legal protection of technological measures contrary to the exception provided for in paragraph 1 shall be unenforceable.
Amendment 554 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 3
Article 3 – paragraph 3
3. Rightholders shall not be allowed to apply measures to ensure the security and integrity of the networks and databases where the works or other subject-matter are hosted. Such measures shall notechnologically limit the right to exercise the exception adopted pursuant gto beyond what is necessary to achieve that objectiveparagraph 1.
Amendment 559 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 4
Article 3 – paragraph 4
4. Member States shall encourage rightholders and research organisations to define commonly-agreed best practices concerning the application of the measures referred to in paragraph 3designate a facility to safely store datasets used for text and data mining and to make them accessible for verification purposes.
Amendment 564 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Amendment 572 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 2
Article 18 – paragraph 2
Amendment 731 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11
Article 11
Amendment 797 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Chapter 4 – title
Chapter 4 – title
Certain uses of protected content by users of online services
Amendment 804 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – title
Article 13 – title
Use of protected content by information society service providers storing and giving access to large amounts of works and other subject-matter uploainformation provided by their users
Amendment 820 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. IWhere information society service providers that store and provide to the public access to large amounts of works or oinformation provided by recipients of ther subject-matter uploaded by their users shall, in cooperation with rightholders, take measures to ensure the functioning of agreements concluded with rightholders for the use of their works or other subject-matter or to prevent the availability on their services of works oervice, conclude agreements with rightholders, the implementation of such agreements shall respect the users' fundamental rights and shall in particular nother subject-matter identified by rightholders through the cooperation with the service providers. Those measures, such as the use of effective content recognition technologies, shall be appropriate and proportionate. The service providers shall provide rightholders with adequate information on the functioning and the deployment of the measures, as well as, when relevant, adequate reporting on the recognition and use of the works and other subject-matter convey an obligation upon the information society service provider to monitor the information which they transmit or store, nor a general obligation actively to seek facts or circumstances indicating illegal activity. The service providers shall cooperate and work together with rightholders to ensure that the functioning and implementation of such agreements are full and transparent towards the users.
Amendment 833 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. In order to ensure the transparency of the agreements mentioned in paragraph 1, rightholders shall provide, in a publicly accessible database, all the necessary data related to the holder of the right, the protected subject matter and relevant territories, in order to allow the service providers to identify accurately their content.
Amendment 835 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 1 b (new)
1 b. In order to ensure a proportionate implementation of the voluntary agreements mentioned in paragraph 1, Member States shall take appropriate measures to ensure that rightholders and information society service providers make available to the beneficiary of an exception or limitation provided for in national law in accordance with Article 5 of Directive 2001/29 and with [Articles XXX of this Directive] the means of benefiting from that exception or limitation, to the extent necessary to benefit from that exception or limitation.
Amendment 845 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2
Article 13 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall ensure that the servicenational law providers referred to in paragraph 1 put in place complaints and redress mechanisms that are available to users in case of disputes over the application of the measures referred to in paragraph 1users with access to a court or other relevant authority for the purpose of asserting their right of use under an exception or limitation.
Amendment 848 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. The agreements referred to in paragraph 1 shall be implemented without prejudice to the use of works made within an exception or limitation to copyright. To this end, Member States shall ensure that users are allowed to communicate rapidly and in an effective manner with the rightholders who have requested any measures within the scope of agreements referred to in paragraph 1 in order to challenge the application of those measures.
Amendment 855 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 3
Article 13 – paragraph 3
Amendment 995 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 2
Article 18 – paragraph 2
Amendment 15 #
2016/0130(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) The limit values should be revised when necessary, in accordance with the precautionary principle and the principle of the protection of workers, in the light of all relevant scientific data and of all relevant factors allowing to measure the risks on the ground.
Amendment 26 #
2016/0130(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) For some carcinogens and mutagens it is necessary to consider other absorption pathways, including the possibility of penetration through the skin, in order to ensure the bhighest possible level of protection of workers' health and safety.
Amendment 29 #
2016/0130(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3 a (new)
Recital 3 a (new)
(3a) The scope of Directive 2004/37/EC should include carcinogenic, mutagenic and reprotoxic substances (CMRs), as well as diesel engine exhaust.
Amendment 34 #
2016/0130(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) Guides and good practice developed through initiatives such as the Social Dialogue "Agreement on Workers' Health Protection Through the Good Handling and Use of Crystalline Silica and Products Containing it" (NEPSi) are valuable instruments to complement regulatory measures and in particular to support the effective implementation of limit values, and update the latter in the light of current practice.
Amendment 36 #
2016/0130(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) The limit values set out in Annex III to Directive 2004/37/EC for vinyl chloride monomer and, hardwood dusts and dusts and chromium (VI) should be revised in the light of more recent scientific data.
Amendment 37 #
2016/0130(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) Certain chromium (VI) compounds meet the criteria for classification as carcinogenic category 1A or 1B in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 and therefore are carcinogens within the meaning of Directive 2004/37/EC. It is possibletherefore necessary, on the basis of the available information, including scientific and technical data, to set out a limit value for these chromium VI compounds. It is therefore appropriate to establish a limit value for chromium (VI) compounds that are carcinogens within the meaning of Directive 2004/37/EC.
Amendment 40 #
2016/0130(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) The aim of this amendment is to strengthens the protection of workers' health at their workplace. In order to fully achieve that purpose, adequate means of control should be put in place and duly reinforced.
Amendment 47 #
2016/0130(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) Given that the present act concerns the workers' health at their workplace, the deadline for transposition should be two yearsno later than two years after the date of publication of this Directive.
Amendment 15 #
2016/0070(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Citation 1
Citation 1
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Articles 53(1) and 62 46, Article 53(1), Article 62 and points (a) and (b) of Article 153(1) thereof,
Amendment 32 #
2016/0070(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) The Rome I Regulation provides that the country where the work is habitually carried out shall not be deemed to have changed if he is temporarily employed in another country. The Rome I Regulation does not specify or define the term "temporarily employed". It is therefore essential that for posted workers who are, by definition, carrying out work in another Member State for a limited period of time, a specific provision is introduced in this Directive in order to provide for a period after which the country of service provision is deemed to become the habitual place of employment.
Amendment 37 #
2016/0070(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) In view of the long duration of certain posting assignments, it is necessary to provide that, in case of posting lasting for periods higher than 124 months, the host Member State is deemed to be the country in which the work is carried outof habitual employment, without prejudice to any terms and conditions of employment which are more favourable to the worker. In accordance with the principle of Rome I Regulation, the law of the host Member Sates therefore applies to the employment contract of such posted workers if no other choice of law was made by the parties. In case a different choice was made, it cannot, however, have the result of depriving the employee of the protection afforded to him by provisions that cannot be derogated from by agreement under the law of the host Member State. This should apply from the start of the posting assignment whenever it is envisaged for more than 24 months and from the first day subsequent to the 24 months when it effectively exceeds this duration. This rule does not affect the right of undertakings posting workers to the territory of another Member State to invoke the freedom to provide services in circumstances also where the posting exceeds 24 months. The purpose is merely to create legal certainty in the application of the Rome I Regulation to a specific situation, without amending that Regulation in any way. The employee will in particular enjoy the protection and benefits pursuant to the Rome I Regulation.
Amendment 38 #
2016/0070(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8 a (new)
Recital 8 a (new)
(8a) In the event that the posting is found not to be genuine, the applicable terms and conditions of employment should, in order to protect the worker, be those established by the Member State to whose territory the worker is posted, without prejudice to any terms and conditions of employment that are more favourable to the worker.
Amendment 52 #
2016/0070(COD)
(12) It is within Member States' competence to set rules on remuneration in accordance with their law and practice. However, national rules on remuneration applied to posted workers must be justified by the need to protect posted workers and must not disproportionately restrict the cross-border provision of servnational law and/or practices.
Amendment 77 #
2016/0070(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Directive 96/71/EC
Article 2 a - paragraph 1
Article 2 a - paragraph 1
1. When the anticipated or the effective duration of posting exceeds twenty-four12 months, the Member State to whose territory a worker is posted or where the service is provided shall be deemed to be the country in which his or her work is habitually carried outwhere the posting undertaking is established, without prejudice to any terms and conditions of employment that are more favourable to the worker.
Amendment 80 #
2016/0070(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Directive 96/71/EC
Article 2 a - paragraph 2
Article 2 a - paragraph 2
Amendment 82 #
2016/0070(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Directive 96/71/EC
Article 2 a - paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 2 a - paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. An undertaking shall also be deemed to be established in the state of the posting if the company posts workers or anticipate posting workers on two or more assignments in the same Member State, if the cumulative duration of the posting periods of the workers exceeds or is anticipated to exceed 12 months during a period of 36 months.
Amendment 83 #
2016/0070(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Directive 96/71/EC
Article 2 a – paragraph 2 b (new)
Article 2 a – paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. If an undertaking that posts workers for more than 12 months to a Member State does not want to be deemed to be established in that state, it will have to show that is not established in that Member State.
Amendment 84 #
2016/0070(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new)
Directive 96/71/EC
Article 2 b (new)
Article 2 b (new)
Amendment 85 #
2016/0070(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 b (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 b (new)
Directive 96/71/EC
Article 2 c (new)
Article 2 c (new)
(1b). The following Article is inserted: Rule against derogation 'Article 2c Rule against derogation The application of this Directive shall not result in depriving workers of the terms and conditions of employment under provisions that cannot be derogated from by agreement under the law that applies in the country of service provision.'
Amendment 29 #
2015/2352(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Encourages Member States to start a progressive phase out of offshore hydrocarbon exploration and extraction operations in order to meet the long term objective of climate-neutrality before the end of the century, pursuant to the commitments taken in the Paris Agreement on climate change of December 2015 (COP21);
Amendment 70 #
2015/2352(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. To avoid insolvency risks, with potential financial consequences on taxpayers, and increase financial security, the establishment of a special EU fund based on fees paid by the offshore industry should be considered;
Amendment 79 #
2015/2352(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Calls on the Commission to add major oil accidents into Directive 2008/99/EC on the protection of the environment through criminal law, recognising that criminal sanctions are a dissuasive and effective way to encourage safety management;
Amendment 10 #
2015/2283(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the package of better regulation measures adopted on 19 May 2015; believes howeverBelieves that material criteria for establishing the existence of a violation of the subsidiarity and proportionality principles should be proposed within the package of better regulation measures;
Amendment 14 #
2015/2283(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Regrets the decrease in the number of reasoned opinions received from national parliaments in 2014; tTakes note of the Commission’s view that, far from reflecting a decrease in interest on their part, thise decrease in the number of reasoned opinions received from national parliaments in 2014 might be the result of the declining number of legislative proposals from the Commission;
Amendment 21 #
2015/2283(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the continued consideration of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality, which are among the guiding principles for the European Union when it chooses to act; stresses that subsidiarity and democratic legitimacy are closely intertwined concepts; highlights that subsidiarity checks can be considered an important tool for reducing the so-called ‘democratic deficit’; points out that national parliaments have a vital role to play in ensuring that decisions are taken as closely as possible to the citizen;
Amendment 34 #
2015/2283(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Believes, nevertheless, that it is important to raise the awareness of national and regional parliaments on subsidiarity issues and to support them with tools permitting information exchange; stresses that, especially since the volume of reasoned opinions received from national parliaments in 2014 remained unchanged in proportion to the number of Commission proposals, a mechanism should be developed for the participation of national parliamentsa better involvement of national parliaments and, where appropriate, regional parliaments with legislative powers, in the EU legislative process;
Amendment 46 #
2015/2283(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Believes that the period of eight weeks given to national parliaments to issue a reasoned opinion under Article 6 of the Protocol on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality should be extended significantly and that the thresholds defined in Article 7(2) of the Protocol to trigger a so-called "yellow card" should be lowered;
Amendment 58 #
2015/2283(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Considers that the Commission should provide an adequate response to the request by a number of national chambers for a stronger subsidiarity control procedure; supports the request made by some national chambers to play a more crucial role, by proposing that the Commission should be bound to withdraw or amend its proposal when a yellow card is triggered; believes, at the same time, that the idea of a ‘'green card’' should be considered as one means of raising the participation and activity of national parliamentand, where appropriate, regional parliaments with legislative powers in the EU legislative process.
Amendment 64 #
2015/2283(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Underlines the huge potential impact of EU-level decisions that the conclusion of international trade agreements such as the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) and the Trade in Services Agreement (TiSA) may have on the capacity of regional and local self-government, including on decisions on services of general economic interest; calls on the Commission and on the Council to take full account of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality when negotiating international trade agreements and to report to Parliament their potential effects on subsidiarity;
Amendment 104 #
2015/2283(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
Amendment 83 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 j (new)
Paragraph 2 j (new)
2j. Stresses that the digital single market should give the opportunity to ensure accessibility for all, and especially for people with disabilities, to products and services protected by copyright and related rights; urges the EU to ratify the Marrakesh Treaty to Facilitate Access to Published Works by Visually Impaired Persons and Persons with Print Disabilities, which requires a harmonised mandatory exception to the benefit of persons with print disabilities and allows for the cross-border exchange of accessible format copies;
Amendment 84 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 k (new)
Paragraph 2 k (new)
2k. Notes the obstacles created by patent protection and licensing terms on interoperability, in particular for software; considers that the promotion of ICT-standards must not discriminate against open source software in order to support the digital single market and associated development of innovative SMEs in Europe, especially when based on open source business models;
Amendment 53 #
2015/2103(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas the full range of 'soft impacts' on human dignity may be difficult to estimate, but will still need to be considerdevelopments in robotics and artificial intelligence can and should be designed ifn and when robots replace human care and companionship, and whereas questions of human dignity also can arise in the context of way that they preserve the dignity, autonomy and self-determination of the individual, especially in the fields of human care and companionship, and in the context of medical appliances, 'repairing' or enhancing human beings;
Amendment 65 #
2015/2103(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I a (new)
Recital I a (new)
Ia. whereas further development and increased use of automated and algorithmic decision-making undoubtedly has an impact on the choices that a private person (such as a business or an internet user) and an administrative, judicial or other public authority take in rendering their final decision of a consumer, business or authoritative nature; whereas safeguards and the possibility of human control and verification need to be built into the process of automated and algorithmic decision-making;
Amendment 93 #
2015/2103(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital Q
Recital Q
Q. whereas, thanks to the impressive technological advances of the last decade, not only are today's robots able to perform activities which used to be typically and exclusively human, but the development of certain autonomous and cognitive features – e.g. the ability to learn from experience and take quasi-independent decisions – has made them more and more similar to agents that interact with their environment and are able to alter it significantly; whereas, in such a context, the legal responsibility arising fromthrough a robot’s harmful action becomes a crucial issue;
Amendment 97 #
2015/2103(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital R
Recital R
R. whereas a robot's autonomy can beis defined as the ability to take decisions and implement them in the outside world, independently of external control or influence; whereas thise autonomy of a robot or of artificial intelligence is of a purely technological nature and its degree depends on how sophisticated a robot's interaction with its environment has been designed to be;
Amendment 102 #
2015/2103(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital S
Recital S
S. whereas the more autonomous robots are, the less they can be considered simple tools in the hands of other actors (such as the manufacturer, the owner, the user, etc.); whereas this, in turn, maksignificantly challenges the ordinary rules on liability insufficient and callsand calls for considering the need for new rules which focus on how a machine can be held – partly or entirely – responsible for its acts or omissions; whereas, as a consequence, it becomes more and more urgent to address the fundamental question of whether robots should possess a legal statuutonomous systems and self-learning machines can be subject to adapted civil liability rules;
Amendment 109 #
2015/2103(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital T
Recital T
T. whereas, automation blurs the lines between legal subjects and objects, and ultimately, robots' autonomy raises the question of their nature in the light of the existing legal categories – of whether they should be regarded as natural persons, legal persons, animals or objects – or whether a new categorylegal status should be created, with its own specific features and implications as regards the attribution of rights and duties, including liability for damage;
Amendment 113 #
2015/2103(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital T a (new)
Recital T a (new)
Ta. whereas it is unclear by which responsibility scheme distributed autonomous organisations (DAOs), organisations run by rules encoded in computer programmes, would abide under the law, while such legal uncertainty can significantly impact research, innovation, industrial development and consumer protection;
Amendment 125 #
2015/2103(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital X
Recital X
X. whereas the shortcomings of the current legal framework are apparent in the area of contractual liability insofar as machines designed to choose their counterparts, negotiate contractual terms, conclude contracts and decide whether and how to implement them make the traditional rules inapplicable, which highlights the need for new, more up-to- date ones, applicable to robots acting as contracting parties;
Amendment 134 #
2015/2103(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Calls on the Commission to propose a common European definition of smart autonomous robots and their subcategories by taking into consideration the following characteristics of a smart robot and an autonomous system: o acquires autonomy through sensors and/or by exchanging data with its environment (inter-connectivity) and trades and analyses data o is self-learning (optional criterion) o has a physical support or is connected to a software programme without being embedded in a physical support o adapts its behaviours and actions to its environment;
Amendment 148 #
2015/2103(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Underlines that many robotic applications are still in an experimental phase; welcomes the fact that more and more research projects are being funded with national and European money; calls on the Commission and the Member States to strengthen financial instruments for research projects in robotics and ICT, including public-private partnerships; emphasises that sufficient resources need to be devoted to the search for solutions to the social and ethical challenges that the technological development and its applications raise, the sole focus on technology being insufficient without the simultaneous development of a completed neuroscience taking into account human abilities and safety;
Amendment 153 #
2015/2103(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Asks the Commission to foster research programmes that include a mechanism for short-term verification of the outcomes in order to understand what real risks and opportunities are associated with the dissemination of these technologies; calls on the Commission to combine all its effort in order to guarantee a smoother transition for these technologies from research to commercialisation on the market, after proper risk and safety evaluation, registration and other necessary technical checks; calls for the creation of a European-wide research and development project on robotics and neuroscience;
Amendment 160 #
2015/2103(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Notes that the development of artificial intelligence and robotics should be done in such a manner that the environmental impact is limited through effective energy consumption, the use of renewable energy and of scarce materials, and minimal waste and reparability.
Amendment 164 #
2015/2103(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4 b. Calls on the Commission and Member states to stimulate research on the possible long-term risks of artificial intelligence and robotics technologies, and on how they might be mitigated or avoided;
Amendment 171 #
2015/2103(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Notes that the potential for empowerment through the use of robotics is nuanced by a set of tensions or risks relating to human safety, privacy, integrity, dignity, autonomy, self-determination and data ownership;
Amendment 212 #
2015/2103(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Notes that there are no legal provisions that specifically apply to robotics, but that existing legal regimes and doctrines can be readily applied to robotics while some aspects appear to need specific consideration; calls on the Commission to come forward with a balanced approach to intellectual property rights when applied to hardware and software standards, and codes that protect innovation and at the same time foster innovation; calls on the Commission to elaborate criteria for an ‘own intellectual creation’ for copyrightable works produced by computers or robots, in a context where intellectual property rights can present a risk of preventing access to hardware and software data when such access, especially to source-code, may enable solutions to potentially high and still unknown risks; calls therefore for reinforced exceptions, such as reverse engineering, on computer programmes, not to be overridden by contract;
Amendment 215 #
2015/2103(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10 a. recalls that in the Continental European understanding of authorship, the concept of 'intellectual creation' is tied to the author's personality, meant to apply to natural persons, and therefore artificial agents such as robots and artificial intelligence shall not be considered as authors, and information produced by them shall not be eligible to copyright protection;
Amendment 222 #
2015/2103(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11 a. Notes that the collection, processing, storing and analysing of big data – such as through autonomous vehicles – might require a change and further development of the current personal data protection regime;
Amendment 224 #
2015/2103(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Points out that the useprovision of psersonal data as a 'currency' with which services can be 'bought'vices without payment of money but in exchange of personal data raises new issues in need of clarification; stresses that the use of personal data as a 'currency' must not lead to a circumvention of the basic principles governing the right to privacy and data protection; principles governing the right to privacy and data protection enshrined in Directives of the European Parliament and of the Council 95/46/EC1a and 2002/58/EC1b and with Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council1c , and shall abide by the consumer protection principles laid down in Directive on contracts for the supply of digital content (2015/0287); __________________ 1aDirective 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data (OJ L 281, 23.11.1995, p. 31). 1bDirective 2002/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 July 2002 concerning the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the electronic communications sector (Directive on privacy and electronic communications) (OJ L 201, 31.07.2002, p 37), called, as amended by Directives 2006/24/EC and 2009/136/EC, the "e- Privacy Directive". 1cRegulation (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).
Amendment 231 #
2015/2103(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12 a. Considers that algorithms not protected by copyright but protected otherwise, e.g. by trade-secrets, should be subject to the same possibility of reverse- engineering as copyright protected computer programmes; underlines the need for SMEs and non-digital industries to get access to technology in good competition conditions, in view of a swift and balanced development of robotic and artificial intelligence markets;
Amendment 232 #
2015/2103(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. CHighlights that the issue of setting standards and granting interoperability is key for future competition in the field of artificial intelligence and robotics technologies; calls on the Commission to continue to work on the international harmonisation of technical standards, in particular together with the European Standardisation Organisations and the International Standardisation Organisation, in order to avoid fragmentation of the internal market and to meet consumers’ concerns; asks the Commission to analyse existing European legislation with a view to checking the need for adaption in light of the development of robotics and artificial intelligence, in particular in light of a future dedicated registration system;
Amendment 260 #
2015/2103(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Notes the great advances delivered by and further potential of robotics in the field of repairing and compensating for damaged organs and human functions, but also the complex questions raised in particular by the possibilities of human enhancement; asks for the establishment of committees on robot ethics in hospitals and other health care institutions tasked with considering and assisting in resolving unusual, complicated ethical problems involving issues that affect the care and treatment of patients; recommends the creation of independent trusted entities to retain the means necessary to provide persons carrying vital and advanced medical appliances with care, such as maintenance, repairs and enhancements, including software updates fixing malfunctions and vulnerabilities, especially in the case where such maintenance is no longer carried out by the original supplier; suggests creating an obligation for manufacturers to supply these independent trusted entities with comprehensive design instructions including source code, similar to the legal deposit of publications to a national library; calls on the Commission and the Member States to develop guidelines to aid in the establishment and functioning of such committees and entities;
Amendment 298 #
2015/2103(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Considers that robots' and artificial intelligence's civil liability is a crucial issue which needs to be addressed at EU level so as to ensure the same degree of transparency, consistency and legal certainty throughout the European Union for the benefit of consumers and businesses alike;
Amendment 322 #
2015/2103(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28 a (new)
Paragraph 28 a (new)
28 a. Proposes to make the documentation of AI's and robots' actions mandatory, in order to help attribute fault when accidents occur; encourages design methods making AI's and robots' behaviours ethically and/or legally verifiable, allowing to provide for certain elements of proof about the causal link between the actions and the principles being obeyed through the software programme, such design element being subject to monitoring and inquiry in a human-accessible way;
Amendment 327 #
2015/2103(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Points out that a possible solution to the complexity of allocating responsibility for damage caused by increasingly autonomous robots could be an obligatory insurance scheme, as is already the case, for instance, with cars; notes, nevertheless, that unlike the insurance system for road traffic, where the insurance covers human acts and failures, an insurance system for robotics could be based on the obligation of the producer and owner to take out an insurance for the autonomous robots it produces;
Amendment 354 #
2015/2103(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31 – point f a (new)
Paragraph 31 – point f a (new)
f a) creating rules as to certain robots and artificial intelligence appliances to cease to function at any time a producer or owner so decides in a safe manner, thereby enabling human control, while taking into account the ethical aspects involved; to consider how a smart robot could, should this be necessary, cease to interact with other appliances or robots, in particular in the framework of Internet of Things;
Amendment 369 #
2015/2103(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – paragraph 1 (after subheading ‘Civil law liability’)
Annex – paragraph 1 (after subheading ‘Civil law liability’)
Any chosen legal solution applied to robots' liabilitythe liability of robots and of artificial intelligence in cases other than those of damage to property should in no way restrict the type or the extent of the damages which may be recovered, nor should it limit the forms of compensation which may be offered to the aggrieved party on the sole grounds that damage is caused by a non-human agent.
Amendment 371 #
2015/2103(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – paragraph 1 a (new) (after subheading ‘Civil law liability’)
Annex – paragraph 1 a (new) (after subheading ‘Civil law liability’)
Any policy decision on the civil liability rules applicable to robots and artificial intelligence should be taken with due consultation of a European-wide research and development project dedicated to robotics and neuroscience, with scientists and experts able to assess all related risks and consequences;
Amendment 372 #
2015/2103(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – paragraph 1 (after subheading ‘Interoperability, access to code and intellectual property rights’)
Annex – paragraph 1 (after subheading ‘Interoperability, access to code and intellectual property rights’)
The interoperability of network-connected autonomous robots that interact with each other should be ensured. Access to the source code, input data, and construction details should be available when needed in order, to investigate accidents and damage caused by 'smart robots', as well as in order to ensure their continued operation, availability, reliability, safety and security.
Amendment 374 #
2015/2103(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – paragraph 2 (after subheading ‘Interoperability, access to code and intellectual property rights’)
Annex – paragraph 2 (after subheading ‘Interoperability, access to code and intellectual property rights’)
Amendment 378 #
2015/2103(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – paragraph 2 (after heading ‘CHARTER ON ROBOTICS’)
Annex – paragraph 2 (after heading ‘CHARTER ON ROBOTICS’)
The framework, made in consultation with a European-wide research and development project dedicated to robotics and neuroscience, must be designed in a reflective manner that allows individual adjustments to be made on a case-by-case basis in order to assess whether a given behaviour is right or wrong in a given situation and to take decisions in accordance with a pre-set hierarchy of values.
Amendment 380 #
2015/2103(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – paragraph 1 (after subheading ‘Fundamental Rights’)
Annex – paragraph 1 (after subheading ‘Fundamental Rights’)
Robotics research activities should respect fundamental rights and be conducted in the interests of the well-being ofand self- determination of the individuals and society at large in their design, implementation, dissemination and use. Human dignity and autonomy – both physical and psychological – is always to be respected.
Amendment 386 #
2015/2103(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – bullepoint 1 (after subheading ‘LICENCE FOR DESIGNERS’)
Annex – bullepoint 1 (after subheading ‘LICENCE FOR DESIGNERS’)
• You should take into account the European values of dignity, autonomy and self-determination, freedom and justice before, during and after the process of design, development and delivery of such technologies including the need not to harm, injure, deceive or exploit (vulnerable) users.
Amendment 37 #
2015/2053(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Taking into consideration the significant differences between agricultural and non-agricultural products, such as number of producers, underlines the relevance of quality controls.
Amendment 48 #
2015/2053(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Notes that producers could be asked to pay a contribution in order to obtain a GI, provided that such contributions were one- off payments, were fair in relation to the costs incurred, and were enforced uniformly throughout the EU;
Amendment 60 #
2015/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital M
Recital M
M. whereas the existing European electoral rules allow for a non-obligatory threshold of up to 5 % of votes cast to be set for European elections, and 15 Member States have availed themselves of this opportunity and have introduced a threshold of between 3 % and 5 %; whereas in smaller Member States, and in Member States that have subdivided their electoral area into constituencies, the de facto threshold nevertheless lies above 3 %, and sometimes far above 5 %, even though no legal thresholds exist;
Amendment 61 #
2015/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital M a (new)
Recital M a (new)
Ma. whereas elections in constituencies which comprise one seat imply a de facto majoritarian system, and whereas the establishment of constituencies which comprise a very limited number of seats is affecting the proportional nature of the voting system;
Amendment 90 #
2015/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital Q a (new)
Recital Q a (new)
Qa. whereas Members of the European Parliament do not have the possibility of being replaced by a temporary substitute when they take parental leave or if they need to take long-term leave of absence for reasons of sickness, which means that there is a risk that some constituents may receive a lower quality of representation, and whereas the possibility of being replaced by a temporary substitute is open only to Members of the European Parliament from some Member States who are appointed to serve as ministers in their national governments;
Amendment 94 #
2015/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital R
Recital R
R. whereas postal, electronic and internet voting could make the conduct of European elections more efficient and more appealing for voters, provided that the highest possible standards of data protection are ensureda wider use of postal voting could increase the rate of participation in elections to the European Parliament;
Amendment 96 #
2015/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital R a (new)
Recital R a (new)
Ra. whereas internet voting has certain drawbacks, such as the difficulty of ensuring that the voter is making his or her own free choice, unconstrained by bystanders, the difficulty of ensuring data protection and the secrecy of the vote, the difficulty of ensuring that votes are counted correctly without being tampered with, and difficulties of getting the public to trust the result;
Amendment 123 #
2015/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 144 #
2015/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Amendment 149 #
2015/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Suggests that constituencies established by Member States should comprise not less than 10 % of the total number of seats allocated to the Member State concerned and that, for constituencies comprising fewer than 26 seats, a mechanism for the adjustment of seats be set up at national level in order to guarantee the proportional nature of the voting system;
Amendment 188 #
2015/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Encourages Member States to use postal electronic and internet voting in order to make voting easier for people with reduced mobility and for those living abroad;
Amendment 194 #
2015/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Recommends to Member States that they be very careful about using internet voting, and proposes that, should a Member State wish to conduct a European election using an internet voting system, that system must be organised in such a way as to ensures not only that the secrecy of the vote is maintained but also that the accuracy of the result can be independently verified;
Amendment 202 #
2015/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Submits that Members of the European Parliament should have the possibility of securing the appointment of a temporary substitute to take over their rights and duties in the event that they are appointed to a position in a national government, take parental leave or take long-term leave of absence for reasons of health;
Amendment 223 #
2015/2035(INL)
Article 2
1. In accordance with its specific national situation, each Member State may establish constituencies for elections to the European Parliament or subdivide its electoral area in a different manner, without generally affecting the proportional nature of the voting system. 2. Constituencies shall not comprise fewer than 10 % of the total number of seats allocated to the Member State in which they are situated. 3. For constituencies in which the list system is used and which comprise fewer than 26 seats, a mechanism for the adjustment of seats shall be put in place at national level, to be governed in each Member State concerned by its national provisions.
Amendment 282 #
2015/2035(INL)
Article 4a (new)
4a. If a Member State introduces electronic and internet voting for European Parliament elections, they shall adopt adequate measures to ensure the secrecy of the vote, data protection, and that the voting system and the accuracy of the result can be independently verified
Amendment 284 #
2015/2035(INL)
Article 13 – paragraph 4a (new)
4a. Member States should establish a system for appointing a temporary substitute for a Member of European Parliament, who is temporarily unable to act as a Member of the European Parliament due to reasons of health, parental leave, or due to appointment as a minister in a national government
Amendment 14 #
2015/0136(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point viii
Paragraph 1 – point viii
(viii) Ensure in that regard that a clear obligation is imposed on Member States to take all necessary steps to achieve a concrete result, namely to ratify or accede to the 2010 HNS Convention within a reasonable timeframe, which should be no longer than fourtwo years from the date of entry into force of the Council decision;
Amendment 16 #
2015/0135(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point viii
Paragraph 1 – point viii
(viii) Ensure in that regard that a clear obligation is imposed on Member States to take all necessary steps to achieve a concrete result, namely to ratify or accede to the 2010 HNS Convention within a reasonable timeframe, which should be no longer than fourtwo years from the date of entry into force of the Council decision;
Amendment 22 #
2014/2252(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Believes that the eight-week period given to national parliaments to issue a reasoned opinion under Article 6 of the Protocol on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality should be extended significantly to allow national parliaments and, where appropriate, regional parliaments, to participate to a greater extent; encourages national and regional parliaments to become more involved in the European debate;
Amendment 26 #
2014/2252(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Underlines the huge potential impact of EU level decisions that the conclusion of international trade agreements such as TTIP and CETA may have on the capacity of regional and local self- government including decisions on services of general economic interest; calls on Commission and Council to fully take the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality into account when negotiating international trade agreements and to report about their potential effects on subsidiarity to the European Parliament;
Amendment 30 #
2014/2252(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Considers that the "yellow card"- procedure ought to be made easier for parliaments to use; points out that it is worth considering whether the threshold should to be decreased and the time- period in which parliaments can use the procedure should be lengthened;
Amendment 36 #
2014/2252(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Notes that legislative proposals may change dramatically in the lead-up to adoption by the institutions; recallsand that a check on compliance with the principle of subsidiarity is onlymight be undertaken at the outset and not at the conclus; recalls nevertheless there should be no obligation ofn the legislative process; further recalls that impact assessments more generally are only prepared for the initial rather than the final stages of the legislative processor to perform an impact assessment on compliance with the principle of subsidiarity of an agreement reached on a legislative act prior to the final adoption of an agreement;
Amendment 37 #
2014/2252(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
Amendment 670 #
2014/2249(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 70 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Paragraph 70 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Safeguarding the interests of non- Eurozone countries
Amendment 671 #
2014/2249(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 70 a (new)
Paragraph 70 a (new)
70a. Underlies the importance of an EU functioning of both Eurozone and non- Eurozone countries.
Amendment 674 #
2014/2249(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 70 b (new)
Paragraph 70 b (new)
70b. Recognizes the fact that some member states have derogations from the EMU and that others have chosen to remain outside the Eurozone for the foreseeable future and that this situation should be regularized.
Amendment 675 #
2014/2249(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 70 c (new)
Paragraph 70 c (new)
70c. Calls for strengthening the safeguards for non-Eurozone countries so as to ensure that the deepening of the EMU does not lead to creation of divisions within the EU. The EU must ensure that it is functioning for all the member states.
Amendment 676 #
2014/2249(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 70 d (new)
Paragraph 70 d (new)
70d. Underlines that non-Eurozone countries must be able to observe the meetings of the Eurogroup and be able to participate in discussions that concerns the whole of the union.
Amendment 677 #
2014/2249(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 70 e (new)
Paragraph 70 e (new)
70e. Considers that there is a need for balance between Eurozone and non- Eurozone countries. If there is an institutional strengthening of the Eurozone such as the creation of a joint position combining the roles of president of the Eurogroup and vice president of the Commission, the non-Eurozone countries also need to be strengthened by the creation of a post in the Commission with the mission to ensure that the rights of the non-Eurozone countries are properly considered.
Amendment 697 #
2014/2249(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 72
Paragraph 72
72. Points out the importance of promoting the idea of a minimal wage determined by each Member State, and suggests that, under current Treaty provisions, an ‘Employees Mobility Directive’ could be adopted to reduce still-existing barriers for employees; These proposals need to be flexible enough to respect the national systems and role of the social partners in countries with collective agreements.
Amendment 54 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas this problem, coupled with a lack of a common vision on the part of oure EU needs to reflect on the fact that a Member States has regards the future of our continent, has given rise to unprecedented levels of ‘euroscepticism’ that risk a return to nationalism and the disintegration of the Unionvoted to leave the EU, and the fact that the euro crisis is still ongoing after more than seven years and there is a growing discontent among the citizens; this is partially due to the over-centralisation of the EU and the tendency of the political system to take the side of big business instead of citizens and the environment;
Amendment 70 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. wThereas, instead of fostering the Union, the system whereby Member State scepticism against the EU which exists among the citizens has many causes. One is that the EU has mtake progrn up too many issuess at different speeds in accordance with their different capacities and circumstances, further reinforced in the Lisbon Treaty, which introduced new formal methods of enhanced cooperation, has increased the complexity of the Unnd has not been able to focus on the issues which must be coordinated at European level, for example, migration and climate challenges. It is also true that certain problems are aggravated by current decision-making arrangements. For example, the economic crisis has been aggravated by EMU, and there is every reason to give nations and accentuated its ‘variable geom free choice as to whether to join the monetary’; whereas more and more Member States are declining to agree on the goals and prefer ‘à la carte’ solutions, some of them even unilaterally; union. The EU has to an excessive extent become an instrument of a short-sighted right- wing policy which has contributed to growing gulfs between people and regions in Europe and the world.
Amendment 143 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J
Recital J
J. whereas this new system of governance implies a genuine governmentshould be equipped to formulate and implement the common monetary, fiscal and macro- economic policies that the euro area desperately needs and must be endowed with a treasury and budget commensurate with the scale of the tasks at hand; whereas this requires, in addition to measures within the existing primary law, a reform of the Lisbon Treaty;
Amendment 185 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital N
Recital N
N. whereas over the past decade the security situation in Europe has deteriorated markedly, especially in our neighbourhood: no longer can a single Member State guarantee its internal and external security alone; The Union’s policies shall not prejudice the specific character of the security and defence policy of certain Member Countries;
Amendment 192 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital O
Recital O
Amendment 240 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital S
Recital S
Amendment 270 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Section 1
Section 1
1. Considers that theit is time of crisis management by means of ad hoc and incremfor the EU to change track. The focus on centralising decisions has passed, as it only leads to measures that are too little,-making to Brussels has functioned poorly. It is now time too late; is convinced that it is now time to address the shortcomings of the governance of the Eurcarefully consider which decisions should be taken at which level and be opean Union by undertaking a comprehensive, in-depth reform of the Lisbon Treatyto decentralization and to decisions which strengthen the influence of citizens;
Amendment 322 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Section 5
Section 5
5. Stresses that a comprehensive democratic reflection on the reform of the Treaties can and must only be achievneeds to be implemented in accordance with the principle of international law. This can be implemented through a Convention, which guarantees inclusiveness through its composition of representatives of national parliaments, governments of all the Member States, the Commission and the European Parliament, and also provides the proper platform for such reflection and engagement with European citizens;
Amendment 327 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Considers that welfare and sustainability must be made principal goals of the economic policy. The EU needs a new strategy for sustainability and social development which can contribute to developed welfare policies in the countries and prevent a ‘race to the bottom’ in terms of social and environmental conditions;
Amendment 329 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Proposes that the formulations in the Treaty on the free market being superior in other respects (for example, equality, environment or social protection) should be changed in the Treaty so that it becomes politically neutral;
Amendment 330 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 c (new)
Paragraph 5 c (new)
5c. Considers that the rules on environmental and consumer protection should be minimum rules, so that countries are entitled to conduct more progressive policies, but not with lower aims; that the EU shall strengthen this opportunity which exists in TFEU 95:4 to a functioning environment and consumer guarantee;
Amendment 331 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 d (new)
Paragraph 5 d (new)
5d. Considers that the Parliament and the national parliaments must receive stronger democratic control over how the EU acts in trade policy while the power of large enterprises and lobbyists must be restricted;
Amendment 332 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 e (new)
Paragraph 5 e (new)
5e. Considers that global justice and development in the poorest countries must become explicit goals of the EU’s trade policies;
Amendment 333 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 f (new)
Paragraph 5 f (new)
5f. Believes that the goals of the EU’s agricultural and fisheries policies must be rewritten so that the environment, sustainable development as well as fair global trade are prioritised;
Amendment 337 #
Amendment 339 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Notes that the fracturing process of ‘variable geometry’ has found its way into the European decision-making process every time the European Council decides to apply intergovernmental methods and to bypass the ‘Union method’ as defined in the Treaties; this not only leads to less effective policy- making but also contributes to a growing lack of transparency, democratic accountability and control;Proposes a fundamental review of the Treaty so that decisions and accountability take place as close to the citizens as possible in harmony with the principle of subsidiarity.
Amendment 346 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Believes that the Treaty amendment shall strengthen the yellow card so that it can function in practice; the limit for how many parliaments need to protest needs to be lowered; believes that the influence of national parliaments in the EU’s legislation process must increase; the national parliaments should receive more influence over how the member countries act in the Council and have the same rights as the European Parliament to add proposals; believes that it should be easier to review bad decisions by extended use of ‘sunset paragraphs’ which entail that EU legislation must be reaffirmed or renegotiated after a number of years;
Amendment 370 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Considers it essential in these circumstances to reaffirm the missionto reaffirm that the peoples of Europe have a right to steer their own future and that the wording of an ‘ever- closer union among the peoples of Europe’ (Article 1 TEU) in order to mitigate any tendency towards disintegration and to clarify once more the moral, political and historical purpose, as well as the constitutional nature, of the European Union’ (Article 1 TEU) does not intend to limit the freedom of choice and political rights of the citizens;
Amendment 382 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Proposes that the next revision of the Treaties should rationalisestrengthen the current disorderly ‘variable geometry’, i.e. ‘l’Europe à la carte’, by ending the disruptive practice of opt-outs, opt-ins and except with the aim of improving the Unions;
Amendment 412 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. NotBelieves that this new type of ‘associate status’ could also be one of the possible outcomes to respect the will of the majority of the citizens of the United Kingdom to leave the EU; stresses that this wish must be respected, given that the withdrawal of the United Kingdom, as one of the larger Member States, and as the largest non-euro-area member, affects the strength and the institutional balance of the Union – a new situation that adds to the need for revision of the Treae European Parliament should respect the will of the majority of the citizens of Great Britain to leave the EU and that they should be given a fair agreement which benefits both parties;
Amendment 511 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
Amendment 526 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
Amendment 550 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
Amendment 578 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
Amendment 598 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
Amendment 630 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
Amendment 647 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
Amendment 665 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
Amendment 682 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
Amendment 712 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 a (new)
Paragraph 27 a (new)
27a. Underlines the importance of an EU functioning of both Eurozone and non-Eurozone countries;
Amendment 715 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 b (new)
Paragraph 27 b (new)
27b. Recognizes the fact that some Member States have derogations from the EMU and that others have chosen to remain outside the Eurozone for the foreseeable future and that this situation should be regularized;
Amendment 716 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 c (new)
Paragraph 27 c (new)
27c. Calls for strengthening the safeguards for non-Eurozone countries so as to ensure that the deepening of the EMU does not lead to creation of divisions within the EU; considers that the EU must ensure that it is functioning for all the Member States;
Amendment 717 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 d (new)
Paragraph 27 d (new)
27d. Underlines that non-Eurozone countries must be able to observe the meetings of the Eurogroup and be able to participate in discussions that concern the whole of the union;
Amendment 718 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 e (new)
Paragraph 27 e (new)
27e. Considers that there is a need for balance between Eurozone and non- Eurozone countries; notes that if there is an institutional strengthening of the Eurozone such as the creation of a joint position combining the roles of president of the Eurogroup and vice president of the Commission, the non-Eurozone countries also need to be strengthened by the creation of a post in the Commission with the mission to ensure that the rights of the non-Eurozone countries are properly considered;
Amendment 751 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
Amendment 794 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
33. Stresses that for the Union to strengthen the defence of the EU territory, as a pillar within NATO, which remains the cornerstone of the European security architecture, and to enable the Union to act autonomously in operations abroad, mainly with a view to stabilising its neighbourhood, thConsiders that the militarisation of the EU must be terminated; notes that the plans for a joint army, defence alliance and equipment must be Treaties should provide for the possibility of establishing a European defence unionmoved from the Treaty;
Amendment 823 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 a (new)
Paragraph 34 a (new)
34a. Considers that the EU needs to improve its transparency and introduce freedom to communicate information and a genuine principle of public access to official records;
Amendment 867 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Rule 36
Rule 36
36(a) notes that, parallel to the procedures of national laws, the use of a motion of censure should be made possible in accordance with the process provided for in Article 234 TFEU as well as against individual Commissioners, providing however in this case that there is a majority threshold equal to three fifths of the votes cast in the Parliament;
Amendment 872 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37
Paragraph 37
Amendment 945 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44
Paragraph 44
Amendment 962 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45
Paragraph 45
45. Believes that, in strengthening the governance of the euro area, due respect should be paid to the interests of Member States that are not yet part of the euro (the ‘pre-ins’);
Amendment 1001 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 50
Paragraph 50
50. Proposes in this regard that the decision-making procedures for both own resources and the MFF should be shifted from unanimity to qualified majority voting, thereby inducing real co-decision between the Council and Parliament on all budgetary matters; repeats its call, furthermore, to make the MFF coterminous with the mandates of Parliament and the European executive, and insists that the finances of all Union agencies should become an integral part of the EU budget;
Amendment 1 #
2014/2151(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 a (new)
Citation 1 a (new)
- having regard to Article 17 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,
Amendment 8 #
2014/2151(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas intellectual property rights are one of the driving forces of innovation and creativity and a key contributor to competitiveness and employment; whereas product authenticity must not be conflated with product safety and product quality issues, the enforcement of intellectual property rights plays a significantcould also play a role in ensuring consumers’ health and safety; whereas counterfeiting is generally linked with a black economy;
Amendment 27 #
2014/2151(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas there is a certain level of tolerance among Europeans for the idea that IPR infringements could be considered legitimate, especially among the young generation8 and entrepreneurial start-up companies; __________________ 8 See OHIM Report ‘European Citizens and intellectual property: perception, awareness and behaviour’, November 2013.
Amendment 36 #
2014/2151(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas law enforcement is essential with regard to the foreseeability of the law, and whereas it is of the utmost importance to find effective, proportionate and dissuasive means of enforcing IPR;
Amendment 51 #
2014/2151(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Believes that all actors in the supply chain have a role to play in the fight against IPR infringement and should be involved in this process; stresses that an approach involving all actors should be developed both in the online and in the offline context; believes that fundamental rights need to be balanced for this to be successful as measures that impact fundamental rights cannot be undertaken voluntarily by commercial operators, but need a legal basis and judicial oversight;
Amendment 61 #
2014/2151(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Welcomes the approach of depriving IPR infringers of their revenues by means of agreements between right-holders and their partners; supports the elaboration of memoranda of understanding as soft-law measures to fight against counterfeiting and piracy, and supports the idea of developing such measures further among stakeholders; reminds the Commission that it is precluded by the 2003 Inter-Institutional Agreement8afrom supporting self- and co- regulatory mechanisms where fundamental rights, such as the right to freedom of expression, are at stake; __________________ 8aThe Inter-Institutional Agreement on Better Law-Making between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission (2003/C 321/01)
Amendment 64 #
2014/2151(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the approach taken by the Commission to develop targeted awareness campaigns; believes that it is essential that the concrete consequences of IPR infringements for society as a whole, and for consumers and citizens individually, should be understood by all; believes that consumers should be better informed of what IPR consist of, and what can be done or not done with protected goods and content as foreseeability of the law is a precondition for its respect; calls on the Commission and the Member States to further develop awareness actions aimed at specific audiences and relevant markets;
Amendment 89 #
2014/2151(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Asks the Commission to increase its efforts to put an end to extortion practices profiting from over-broad protection of vaguely defined intellectual property assets;
Amendment 91 #
2014/2151(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 b (new)
Paragraph 9 b (new)
9b. Takes the view that extensive intermediary liability regimes threatens the development of new business models and a free and open internet;
Amendment 97 #
2014/2151(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Insists on the need to take into account SMEs when drafting legislation, and reiterates that the ‘think small first’ principle should be applied at all times, in particular with regards to clarifying which achievements constitute patentable subject matter;
Amendment 119 #
2014/2151(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Insists onthat the important role played by customs and international cooperation in the fight against IPR infringement in cross- border trade must not undermine global public health targets and trade in generic medicines;
Amendment 326 #
2014/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that the competent judicial authorities, on the application of the injured party, order the infringerperson who has unlawfully acquired, disclosed or use a trade secret, who knew or ought to have known that he or she was engaging in unlawful acquisition, disclosure or use of a trade secret, to pay the trade secret holder damages commensurate to the actual prejudice suffered as a result of the unlawful acquisition, disclosure or use of the trade secret.
Amendment 328 #
2014/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. In accordance with their national law and practice, Member States may restrict the liability for damages of employees towards their employers for the unlawful acquisition, disclosure or use of a trade secret of the employer. This option also applies when unlawful acquisition, disclosure and use of trade secrets occurs after the employment of an employee has terminated.