35 Amendments of Marco ZULLO related to 2015/2065(INI)
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 3 a (new)
Citation 3 a (new)
- having regard to the European Parliament's Written Declaration 0088/2007 'Investigating and remedying the abuse of power by large supermarkets operating in the European Union',
Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas significant structural changes have taken place in the business-to- business (B2B) food supply chain in recent years, involving concentration and horizontal, cross border and vertical integration of entities operating in the production, processing and retail sectors;
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas UTPs occur where there is a lack of economic balance in trading relations between partners in the food supply chain, resulting fromfood supply chain actors such as farmers and suppliers on one hand, and manufacturers, processors and retailers on the other hand, lead to bargaining power disparities in business relations and constituting a serious disturbance to market balance;
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas unfair practices may have harmful consequences for the food supply chain, which in turn may havehas a detrimental impact on the entire EU economy; whereas UTPs may discourage cross-border trade in the EU and hinder the proper functioning of the internal market; whereas unfair practices can result in particular in enterprises cutting back on investment and innovation owing to a reduction in income and a lack of certainty, and may lead them to abandon production, processing or trading activities;
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas UTPs are an obstacle to the development and smooth functioning of the internal market and seriously disrupt market mechanisms;
Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)
Recital G a (new)
Ga. whereas such squeezes on suppliers have negative knock-on effects on both quality of employment and environmental protection;
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G b (new)
Recital G b (new)
Gb. whereas consumers potentially face a loss in product diversity, cultural heritage and retail outlets as a result of UTPs;
Amendment 46 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Recognises that the power gaps arising from a highly concentrated market place producers in a very weak position; believes that the stronger parties in contracts should be prevented from exploiting that position to offload corporate risk onto the weaker parties in contracts;
Amendment 61 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Doubts whether voluntary initiatives are adequate for addressing UTPs and the acknowledged ‘fear factor’ in the supply chain arising from the imbalance of power between farmers and retailers; believes, therefore, that the appropriate legal safeguards must be provided in the mainstream judicial system;
Amendment 75 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. WelcomNotes the steps taken to date by the Commission to combat UTPs with a view to securing a more balanced market;
Amendment 87 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomes the setting upReserves judgement – pending the provision of detailed statistics by the Commission – on the effectiveness of the Supply Chain Initiative, which has resulted in the adoption of a set of principles of good practice in B2B relations in the food supply chain and a voluntary framework for the implementation of those principles; believes that efforts to promote fair trading practices in the food supply chain can make a real impact;
Amendment 88 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomes the setting up of the Supply Chain Initiative, which has resulted in the adoption of a set of principles of good practice in B2B relations in the food supply chain and a voluntary framework for the implementation of those principles; believes that efforts to promote fair trading practices in the food supply chain can make a real impact; nevertheless notes that groups representing farmers have chosen not to participate because there is no enforcement mechanism nor mechanism for confidential complaints;
Amendment 94 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Welcomes the principles of good practice and the list of examples of fair and unfair practices in vertical relations in the food supply chain; shares the view that these standards now need to be enforced, however, that the voluntary nature of these practices means they do not provide a sufficiently effective solution;
Amendment 105 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Welcomes the development of alternative and informal mechanisms for dispute settlement and redress, in particular through mediation and amicable arrangements; nevertheless considers that suitable legal protection needs to be provided by the mainstream judicial system;
Amendment 117 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Notes that several Member States have initiated actions in national law to address the concerns of primary producers regarding the negative impact of UTPsthe regulatory framework is currently extremely fragmented across the EU, and that while some Member States have taken unsatisfactory action or none at all, others have initiated actions in national law to address the concerns of primary producers regarding the negative impact of UTPs; asks the Commission to assess these national efforts with a view to selecting best practices for application at EU level; asks the Commission to assess these national efforts with a view to selecting best practices for application at EU level; notes in particular the Groceries Code Adjudicator in the UK as a potential model for adaptation at EU level;
Amendment 119 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Confirms the existence of UTPs in the food supply chain and acknowledges that they are contrary to the basic principles of law and stem from imbalances of power in a highly concentrated market;
Amendment 120 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Confirms the existence of UTPs in the food supply chain and acknowledges that they are contrary to the basic principles of law; recognises that these basic principles should include prohibiting the stronger party in a contract from offloading corporate risk onto the weaker party in a contract;
Amendment 130 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Draws attention to the recent phenomenon of ‘private labels’, which allows distributors to be both the customers and the competitors of their own suppliers; stresses that there is a risk of this practice significantly limiting freedom of competition, both by compromising producers’ bargaining power and by considerably restricting the freedom of consumers by reducing their choice of products and making it difficult for them to compare prices effectively, which will prejudice the proper functioning of the market;
Amendment 139 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Points out that UTPs imposed by parties in a stronger bargaining position clearly have a negative impact; stressesPoints out that UTPs can hamper investment and product innovationimposed by parties in a stronger bargaining position clearly have a negative impact and limit consumers' actual freedom of choice;
Amendment 142 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Points out that UTPs imposed by parties in a stronger bargaining position clearly have a negative impact; stresses that UTPs can hamper investment and product innovation, and have a detrimental effect on product quality; in addition that UTPs lead to uncertainty in production which can also lead to overproduction and unnecessary food wastage;
Amendment 151 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Believes that rapidly-enacted framework legislation at EU level is essential to tackle UTPs and to address their negative consequences for farmers; urges the Commission to consider this when assessing the SCI;
Amendment 152 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Believes that the Supply Chain Initiative and other national and EU voluntary systems (codes of good practice, voluntary dispute settlement mechanisms) should be further developed and impromoted; encouragesved so as to overcome the current reticence on the part of producers and traders to become involved in such initiatives; takes the view that they should play a leading role in efforts to combat UTPs;
Amendment 165 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Acknowledges, nonetheless, that voluntary and self-regulatory schemes are not enough to put an end to UTPs once and for all, owing to the lack of effective enforcement mechanisms, scant producer participation, conflicts of interest between the parties concerned and the absence of any concrete penalties for non- compliance;
Amendment 175 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Stresses that action to combat UTPs will help to ensure the proper functioning of the internal market and to develop cross- border trading in the EU; points out that a fragmented market leads to regulatory uncertainty for those involved and thus creates an imbalance in surplus distribution along the value chain in the various countries concerned;
Amendment 178 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Stresses that action to combat UTPs will help to ensure the proper functioning of the internal market and to develop cross- border trading within the EU and with third countries;
Amendment 198 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Reaffirms that free and fair competition, freedom to contract and properstrong and effective enforcement of the relevant legislation to protect all entities in the food supply chain, irrespective of geographical location are of key importance in ensuring the proper functioning of the food supply chain;
Amendment 207 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. Welcomes the Commission's acknowledgement in its Green paper of 31 January 2013 that there is no true contractual freedom where there is marked inequality between parties;
Amendment 208 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. Points out that the regulatory framework is extremely fragmented across the EU, and that while some Member States have adopted specific measures, others have taken unsatisfactory action or none at all;
Amendment 213 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Urges the Commission to submit specific proposals for EUbasic EU-level framework legislation bannprohibiting UTPs in the food supply chain that will enable markets to operate as they should and fair and transparent relations to be maintained between food producers, suppliers and distributors;
Amendment 236 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Suggests that work should begin on EU rules on the establishment or recognition of national public agencies with responsibility for enforcing laws to combat unfair practices in the food supply chain; takes the view that public agencies of this kind should be empowered to conduct investigations on their own initiative andor on the basis of informal information andor complaints dealt with on a confidential basis (thus overcoming the fear factor), as well as to impose penalties;
Amendment 237 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Suggests that work should begin on EU rules on the establishment or recognition of national public agencies with responsibility for enforcing laws to combat unfair practices in the food supply chain; takes the view that public agencies of this kind should be empowered to conduct investigations on their own initiative and on the basis of informal information and complaints dealt with on a confidential basis (thus overcoming the fear factor), as well as to impose penalties; The issue of unfair trading practices in the supply chain has the been the subject of 5 European Parliament resolutions including 3 specifically on imbalances and abuses in the food supply chain, since 2009; further notes that the European Commission has produced 3 Communications, one Green paper and commissioned two Final Reports on similar subjects in the same timeframe; on this basis declares that yet more analysis on the state of UTPs in the food supply chain will merely delay the pressing need for action to help all food supply chain actors address UTPs. Therefore recommends that work should begin swiftly on a Directive based on Article 114 TFEU providing for the establishment or recognition of national public agencies with responsibility for enforcing laws to combat unfair practices in the food supply chain; takes the view that the EU should establish minimum standards for principles, including an open list of outlawed UTPs, and operational procedures regarding investigations undertaken by such agencies on their own initiative and on the basis of informal information and complaints dealt with on a confidential basis (thus overcoming the fear factor), as well as to impose dissuasive penalties of amounts sufficient to ensure that no enterprise can profit from imposing UTPs; Such a Directive should also provide for a single European market coordination forum to enable national enforcement bodies to provide advice, facilitate exchange of good practice and information, cooperate on cross border cases, analyse new forms of UTPs and where appropriate, cooperate in setting and imposing penalties in cases involving operators from more than one Member State. Such public agencies should be sufficiently staffed and funded, and also coordinate with relevant enforcement bodies in Member States and in third countries;
Amendment 255 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Calls for due account to be taken, when drafting rules in this area, of the specific features of each market and the legal requirements obtaining on it, the different situations and approaches in individual Member States, the degree of consolidation or fragmentation of individual markets, and other significant factors, while also capitalising upon the measures already taken in some Member States that are proving to be effective; takes the view that such regulatory efforts should ensure that there is relatively broad discretion to tailor the measures to be taken to the specific features of each market and should be based on the general principle of improving enforcement by involving the relevant public agencies;
Amendment 261 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Recognises that self regulation, EU and Member State legislation as well as independent adjudicators and dispute resolution entities can all co-exist and work together to end UTPs in the food supply chain;
Amendment 311 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomes the setting upExpresses doubts as to the Commission's assessment of the effectiveness of the Supply Chain Initiative, which has resulted in the adoption of a set of principles of good practice in B2B relations in the food supply chain and a voluntary framework for the implementation of those principles; believes that efforts to promote fair trading practices in the food supply chain can make a real impact; regrets, in particular, as regards the collection of data relating to complaints received and resolved, that a more detailed analysis has not been carried out, in terms of both quantity and quality, to understand what types of operators have resorted to this option and whether large distributors or SMEs have benefited more greatly; believes that the failure to carry out such an in-depth assessment could undermine the overall judgment of the initiative;
Amendment 330 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the setting up of national platforms of organisations and businesses in the food supply chain to promote fair trading practices and seek to put an end to UTPs; regrets, however, that in assessing the effectiveness of the Supply Chain Initiative, cross-border trading practices between stakeholders in different countries, which remain outside the area of responsibility of the national platforms, have not been sufficiently taken into consideration; stresses that in order to build an efficient European single market it is vital not to neglect this aspect, on which there is a lack of data, also concerning the negative impact on producers' income;