Activities of Virginie JORON
Plenary speeches (66)
The Turkish military operation in northeast Syria and its consequences (RC-B9-0123/2019, B9-0123/2019, B9-0125/2019, B9-0126/2019, B9-0127/2019, B9-0128/2019, B9-0129/2019, B9-0133/2019)
Violent crackdown on recent protests in Iran (debate)
An EU strategy to put an end to female genital mutilation around the world (debate)
Common charger for mobile radio equipment (debate)
Automated decision-making processes: Ensuring consumer protection, and free movement of goods and services (debate)
The EU priorities for the 64th session of the UN Commission on the Status of Women (B9-0093/2020, B9-0095/2020)
EU coordinated action to combat the COVID-19 pandemic and its consequences (continuation of debate)
70th anniversary of the Schuman Declaration (debate)
Covid-19: EU coordination of health assessments and risk classification and the consequences on Schengen and the single market (debate)
Gender Equality in EU’s foreign and security policy (debate)
Towards a more sustainable single market for business and consumers (debate)
Statements by the President
European Citizens’ Initiative – Minority SafePack (continuation of debate)
Presentation of the Court of Auditors' annual report - 2019 (debate)
Strengthening the single market: the future of free movement of services (debate)
Implementation of the Construction Products Regulation (debate)
European Cybersecurity Competence Centre (debate)
Data Protection Commissioner v Facebook Ireland Limited, Maximillian Schrems ("Schrems II") - Case C-311/18 - The adequate protection of personal data by the United Kingdom (continuation of debate)
Regulations and general conditions governing the performance of the Ombudsman’s duties (debate)
Labour rights in Bangladesh (continuation of debate)
Identifying gender-based violence as a new area of crime listed in Article 83(1) TFEU (debate)
United States sanctions and the Rule of law (continuation of debate)
EU transparency in the development, purchase and distribution of COVID-19 vaccines (debate)
The future of EU-US relations (debate)
Insurance of motor vehicles (debate)
The outcome of the EU-US Trade and Technology Council (TTC) (debate)
The EU's role in combating the COVID-19 pandemic: how to vaccinate the world (topical debate)
Digital Markets Act (debate)
Empowering European Youth: post-pandemic employment and social recovery (debate)
Activities of the European Ombudsman – annual report 2020 (debate)
Transparency and administrative standards - the treatment of public access requests based on Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 (debate)
Destruction of cultural heritage in Nagorno-Karabakh
Situation in Afghanistan, in particular the situation of women’s rights (debate)
Discharge 2020 (debate)
One-minute speeches on matters of political importance
International procurement instrument (debate)
One-minute speeches on matters of political importance
Inclusion measures within Erasmus+ 2014-2020 (A9-0158/2022 - Laurence Farreng)
Digital Services Act - Digital Markets Act (debate)
Women’s poverty in Europe (A9-0194/2022 - Lina Gálvez Muñoz)
Radio Equipment Directive: common charger for electronic devices (debate)
COVID-19 – Sustaining EU preparedness and response: looking ahead (debate)
Order of business
Revision of the Medical Devices Regulation – how to ensure the availability of medical devices (debate)
30th Anniversary of the Single Market (debate)
Surge of respiratory infections and the shortage of medication in Europe (debate)
Transparency and targeting of political advertising (debate)
Establishment of an independent EU Ethics Body (debate)
CO2 emission standards for cars and vans (A9-0150/2022 - Jan Huitema)
Activities of the European Ombudsman - annual report 2021 (debate)
Need for immediate reform of the internal rules of the Commission to ensure transparency and accountability in light of alleged conflicts of interests (debate)
Long term commitment to animal welfare (debate)
Impact on the 2024 EU budget of increasing European Union Recovery Instrument borrowing costs - Own resources: a new start for EU finances, a new start for Europe (debate)
Discharge 2021 (continuation of debate)
One-minute speeches on matters of political importance
Call for a European strategy to counter hostage diplomacy (debate)
COVID-19 pandemic: lessons learned and recommendations for the future (debate)
Public access to documents – annual report for the years 2019-2021 (debate)
Consumer credits (debate)
Single market emergency instrument (debate)
One-minute speeches on matters of political importance
One-minute speeches on matters of political importance
Presentation of the Court of Auditors' annual report 2022 (debate)
Fighting disinformation and dissemination of illegal content in the context of the Digital Services Act and in times of conflict (debate)
Common rules promoting the repair of goods
Packaging and packaging waste (debate)
Shadow reports (11)
REPORT Towards a more sustainable single market for business and consumers
REPORT on the implementation of Directive 2009/81/EC, concerning procurement in the fields of defence and security, and of Directive 2009/43/EC, concerning the transfer of defence-related products
RECOMMENDATION FOR SECOND READING on the Council position at first reading with a view to the adoption of a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a programme for the internal market, competitiveness of enterprises, including small and medium-sized enterprises, the area of plants, animals, food and feed, and European statistics (Single Market Programme) and repealing Regulations (EU) No 99/2013, (EU) No 1287/2013, (EU) No 254/2014 and (EU) No 652/2014
REPORT on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on contestable and fair markets in the digital sector (Digital Markets Act)
REPORT on women’s poverty in Europe
RECOMMENDATION FOR SECOND READING on the Council position at first reading with a view to the adoption of a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on improving the gender balance among directors of listed companies and related measures
REPORT on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the transparency and targeting of political advertising
REPORT on eGovernment accelerating digital public services that support the functioning of the single market
REPORT on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of the environment through criminal law and replacing Directive 2008/99/EC
REPORT on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on amending Directives 2005/29/EC and 2011/83/EU as regards empowering consumers for the green transition through better protection against unfair practices and better information
REPORT on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on common rules promoting the repair of goods and amending Regulation (EU) 2017/2394, Directives (EU) 2019/771 and (EU) 2020/1828
Opinions (2)
OPINION on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) 2017/1129 as regards the EU Recovery prospectus and targeted adjustments for financial intermediaries to help the recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic
OPINION on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on packaging and packaging waste, amending Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 and Directive (EU) 2019/904, and repealing Directive 94/62/EC
Shadow opinions (15)
OPINION on the draft general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2020
OPINION on artificial intelligence: questions of interpretation and application of international law in so far as the EU is affected in the areas of civil and military uses and of state authority outside the scope of criminal justice
OPINION with recommendations to the Commission on the framework of ethical aspects of artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies
OPINION on Digital Services Act and fundamental rights issues posed
OPINION on a European strategy for data
Opinion on Guidelines for the 2022 Budget - Section III
OPINION on a Farm to Fork Strategy for a fair, healthy and environmentally friendly food system
OPINION on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on European data governance (Data Governance Act)
OPINION on Protecting workers from asbestos
OPINION on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the access of third-country goods and services to the Union’s internal market in public procurement and procedures supporting negotiations on access of Union goods and services to the public procurement markets of third countries
OPINION on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning batteries and waste batteries, repealing Directive 2006/66/EC and amending Regulation (EU) No 2019/1020
OPINION on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) No 910/2014 as regards establishing a framework for a European Digital Identity
OPINION on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on harmonised rules on fair access to and use of data (Data Act)
OPINION on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on harmonised rules on fair access to and use of data (Data Act)
OPINION on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the European Health Data Space
Institutional motions (1)
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on an EU strategy to put an end to female genital mutilation around the world
Oral questions (7)
Animal welfare and the new Green Deal
An EU ban on the use of wild animals in circuses
Alleged conflicts of interest and influence-trafficking by judges of the Court of Justice of the European Union and the Commission
An EU Commissioner for Animal Welfare
Right of access to documents under Article 42 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and redacted contracts with vaccine manufacturers
An EU Commissioner for Animal Welfare
Commission measures to ease energy poverty and provide relief to consumers
Written explanations (590)
Draft amending budget No 1/2019: surplus from 2018 (A9-0005/2019 - John Howarth)
J’ai voté contre ce rapport. Ce rapport préconise de transférer dans la réserve budgétaire de l’Union européenne, les recettes provenant des amendes infligées aux États membres et appelle à ne surtout pas réduire les contributions des États membres sauf pour les excédents issus de la sous-exécution.Nous considérons que l’UE n’a aucune légitimité pour sanctionner financièrement les États membres qui tardent par exemple à transposer les directives dans leur législation nationale. Historiquement, la Commission européenne a fait preuve de partialité dans les procédures qu’elle lance à l’encontre des États. L’exemple le plus frappant porte sur le rejet du budget italien qui prévoyait un déficit public équivalant à 2,6% du PIB en 2019, bien en-dessous de la limite des 3% de déficit. Tandis que la France bénéficie étrangement d’une certaine indulgence sous la présidence d’Emmanuel Macron.Par conséquent, chaque excédent budgétaire doit être reversé dans son intégralité aux États membres dont les contributions financent le budget européen.
Draft amending budget No 2/2019: reinforcement of key programmes for EU competitiveness: Horizon 2020 and Erasmus+ (A9-0004/2019 - John Howarth)
J’ai voté contre ce texte. Le projet de budget rectificatif (PBR) nº 2/2019 vise à allouer 100 millions d’euros supplémentaires à certains programmes. Bien que nous soyons sensibles au questions environnementales et que nous soutenions le programme Erasmus (et non Erasmus+), cette inflation budgétaire n’est pas envisageable à l’heure où les États membres sont contraints par la Commission européenne de réduire leur déficit public. De plus, une partie de ces fonds sera alloué à des migrants et non aux contribuables européens.
Mobilisation of the European Union Solidarity Fund to provide assistance to Romania, Italy and Austria (A9-0002/2019 - Siegfried Mureşan)
Le Fonds de solidarité de l’Union européenne (FSUE) vise à soutenir financièrement les États membres touchés par des catastrophes naturelles. J’ai voté pour mobiliser le Fonds pour un montant de 293 millions d’euros en faveur de la Roumanie, de l’Italie et de l’Autriche, victimes d’inondations en 2018.
Draft amending budget No 3/2019: proposal to mobilise the European Union Solidarity Fund to provide assistance to Romania, Italy and Austria (A9-0006/2019 - John Howarth)
Le Fonds de solidarité de l’Union européenne (FSUE) vise à soutenir financièrement les États membres touchés par des catastrophes naturelles. J’ai voté pour mobiliser le Fonds pour un montant de 293 millions d’euros en faveur de la Roumanie, de l’Italie et de l’Autriche, victimes d’inondations en 2018.
Mobilisation of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund - EGF/2019/000 TA 2019 - Technical assistance at the initiative of the Commission (A9-0001/2019 - Bogdan Rzońca)
Le Fonds européen d’ajustement à la mondialisation (FEM) vise à soutenir les salariés et travailleurs indépendants devenus inactifs en raison de modifications majeures de la structure du commerce international résultant de la mondialisation, de la persistance de la crise financière et économique mondiale, ainsi qu’à faciliter leur réinsertion professionnelle. La dotation annuelle du FEM n’excède pas 150 millions d’euros. Le 2 juillet 2019, la Commission a adopté une nouvelle proposition de décision sur la mobilisation de 610 000 euros. D’habitude, notre délégation vote en faveur de la mobilisation du FEM, mais dans ce cas je me suis abstenue car certaines dépenses présentées ne paraissent pas nécessaires.
The UK’s withdrawal from the EU (B9-0038/2019, B9-0039/2019)
En substance, la résolution ne reconnaît pas la liberté et la légitimité du Royaume-Uni à quitter l’Union européenne malgré la volonté du peuple britannique exprimée à deux reprises, au travers du résultat du référendum de 2016 en faveur d’un retrait et du résultat des élections européennes de 2019 qui a démontré un vote massif pour le Brexit Party. Bruxelles n’a pas à dicter sa volonté politique à une nation souveraine, comme au point 20 de la résolution où l’UE fait clairement de l’ingérence dans le choix de politique intérieure du Royaume-Uni.Dès lors, j’ai voté contre cette résolution.
Patentability of plants and essential biological processes (B9-0040/2019, B9-0040/2019, B9-0041/2019, B9-0042/2019, B9-0043/2019, B9-0044/2019, B9-0047/2019)
En 2015, la grande chambre de recours de l’Office européen des brevets (OEB) a jugé possible le brevetage des produits obtenus à partir de procédés essentiellement biologiques, tels que les végétaux, les semences... Une variété de brocoli et une variété de tomate ont ainsi été brevetées.Il existe en Europe un système de protection beaucoup plus adapté à la spécificité des plantes : le certificat d’obtention végétale (COV). Celui-ci garantit des droits au sélectionneur d’une variété végétale, tout en protégeant ceux des agriculteurs et des chercheurs. Les premiers pourront ainsi réutiliser les semences obtenues pour une récolte future, les seconds pourront utiliser librement les produits à des fins scientifiques. Je suis contre la brevetabilité d’organismes naturels. Outre le problème éthique, les agriculteurs seraient contraints de payer chaque année des sommes importantes pour l’achat de nouvelles semences. J’ai donc voté pour ce rapport qui s’oppose à la brevetabilité du vivant.
Importance of European remembrance for the future of Europe (RC-B9-0097/2019, B9-0097/2019, B9-0098/2019, B9-0099/2019, B9-0100/2019)
Cette résolution intervient à l’occasion du 80ème anniversaire du déclenchement de la Seconde Guerre Mondiale.Il s’agit ici de rappeler les causes de la Seconde guerre mondiale (en l’occurrence le pacte germano-soviétique), de condamner les totalitarismes, d’honorer ses nombreuses victimes et de pratiquer un devoir de mémoire. J'ai voté pour cette résolution.
State of implementation of anti-money laundering legislation (B9-0045/2019, B9-0046/2019)
J’ai voté pour ce texte qui regrette que l’autorité bancaire européenne (EBA) ait voté contre la prise de sanctions dans le scandale du blanchiment lié à la banque danoise Danske bank. Le texte recommande aussi la création d’une liste grise d’États tiers ne présentant pas les garanties nécessaires dans le cadre de la lutte contre le blanchiment et le terrorisme.Plus largement, la législation européenne dans le cadre de la lutte contre le blanchiment de capitaux et le financement du terrorisme s’est articulé ces dernières années autour de 5 différentes directives sur l’échange d’information entre pays, le contrôle de certains montages ou la création de listes noires des paradis fiscaux. La 5ème directive, applicable au 1er janvier 2020, a mis l’accent sur la notion de bénéficiaire effectif, obligeant les autorités nationales à révéler aux administrations des autres États membres l’identité de ces derniers, ceci afin de neutraliser les montages du type trusts et autres fiducies. Rappelons que la 5e directive n’est toujours pas transposée par la France.
Eurojust and Serbia Cooperation Agreement (A9-0009/2019 - Juan Fernando López Aguilar)
J’ai voté pour ce texte. L’échange de données entre les autorités compétentes de différents pays, dans le cadre de la lutte contre les crimes graves et le terrorisme, est une pratique courante. Eurojust est une agence de l’Union européenne qui a pour tâche d’assister les pays membres par un soutien logistique et structurel aidant à la coopération interétatique. Par ailleurs, la Serbie est un pays ami faisant partie d’un espace géopolitique sensible, proche d’États fragiles voire de proto-États carrément mafieux, comme le Kosovo. Il est important d’avoir une coopération aussi resserrée que possible avec les pays fiables de cette zone.
Draft amending budget No 4/2019: reduction of commitment and payment appropriations in line with updated needs of expenditure and update of revenue (own resources) (A9-0012/2019 - John Howarth)
J’ai voté contre ce texte. Concernant le projet de budget rectificatif de la Commission européenne, nous approuvons la baisse des dépenses, mais nous déplorons la hausse de la contribution française au budget de l’Union européenne, qui passe de 22,4 milliards d’euros à 22,6 milliards d’euros. Certes, il s’agit d’un ajustement technique généré par l’actualisation des ressources propres de l’Union européenne. Néanmoins, il est difficilement concevable que la France supporte, à elle seule, un quart de la correction britannique de 2018.
Adjustments to the amounts mobilised from the Flexibility Instrument for 2019 to be used for migration, refugee inflows and security threats (A9-0013/2019 - John Howarth)
Objection pursuant to Rule 112: Active substances, including flumioxazine (B9-0103/2019)
J’ai voté pour ce texte. Cette résolution exhorte la Commission à retirer les approbations concernant des substances actives soupçonnées de présenter un danger pour la santé humaine et environnementale.En particulier, la substance flumioxazine a été reconnue toxique pour la reproduction ainsi que pour les organismes aquatiques et perturbateur endocrinien probable.L’Autorité européenne de sûreté des aliments a elle-même fait état de préoccupations concernant cette substance. Néanmoins, la Commission ne remet pas en cause son analyse et prévoit même l’extension de son autorisation.Conformément au principe de précaution, nous ne devons tolérer aucun risque lié à des substances potentiellement dangereuses pour la santé humaine et l’environnement.
Objection pursuant to Rule 112: Active substances, including chlorotoluron (B9-0104/2019)
J’ai voté pour ce texte. Cette résolution exhorte la Commission à retirer les approbations concernant des substances actives soupçonnées de présenter un danger pour la santé humaine et pour l’environnement.En particulier, la substance chlorotoluron a été reconnue perturbateur endocrinien probable, très toxique pour les organismes aquatiques et susceptible de provoquer le cancer et de nuire au fœtus.En dépit de ces risques, la Commission a l’intention de prolonger son autorisation.Conformément au principe de précaution, nous ne devons tolérer aucun risque lié à des substances potentiellement dangereuses pour la santé humaine et l'environnement.
Objection pursuant to Rule 112: Genetically modified maize MZHG0JG (SYN-ØØØJG-2) (B9-0107/2019)
J’ai voté pour ce texte. Cette résolution conteste le projet de décision d’exécution de la Commission autorisant Syngenta Crop Protection de mettre sur le marché des denrées alimentaires et des aliments pour animaux contenant du maïs génétiquement modifié MZHG0JG.Il s’agit d’un maïs OGM résistant et traité aux herbicides à base de glyphosate et de glufosinate. l’OMS a classifié le glyphosate comme probablement cancérigène. Quant au glufosinate, il est lui classé comme substance toxique pour la reproduction.Conformément au principe de précaution, nous ne devons tolérer aucun risque lié à des substances potentiellement dangereuses pour la santé humaine et l'environnement.
Objection pursuant to Rule 112: Genetically modified soybean A2704-12 (ACS-GMØØ5-3) (B9-0105/2019)
J’ai voté pour ce texte. Cette résolution conteste le projet de décision d’exécution de la Commission autorisant Bayer à mettre sur le marché des denrées alimentaires et des aliments pour animaux contenant du soja génétiquement modifié A2704-12.Ce soja OGM a été traité aux herbicides à base de glufosinate. Or, cette substance est classée comme toxique pour la reproduction et satisfait donc normalement aux critères d’exclusion énoncés dans les différents règlements européens en la matière.Une étude indépendante a conclu que l’évaluation des risques menée par l’EFSA n’était pas acceptable car elle ne contrôlait pas correctement le niveau global de sécurité et la toxicité potentielle du soja A2704-12. Les États membres ne sont pas tenus d’analyser les résidus de glufosinate dans le soja importé.Enfin, l’UE, deuxième importatrice mondiale de soja, contribue à la déforestation dans les pays producteurs, notamment en Amérique du Sud.Conformément au principe de précaution, nous ne devons tolérer aucun risque lié à des substances potentiellement dangereuses pour la santé humaine et l’environnement.
Objection pursuant to Rule 112: Genetically modified maize MON 89034 × 1507 × MON 88017 × 59122 × DAS-40278-9 and genetically modified maize combining two, three or four of the single events MON 89034, 1507, MON 88017, 59122 and DAS-40278-9 (B9-0106/2019)
J’ai voté pour ce texte. Cette résolution conteste le projet de décision d’exécution de la Commission autorisant Dow AgroSciences Europe à mettre sur le marché des denrées alimentaires et des aliments pour animaux contenant du maïs génétiquement modifié.Il s’agit d’un maïs OGM résistant aux herbicides contenant du glufosinate, du glyphosate et du 2,4-D ainsi qu’à des protéines insecticides toxiques.En 2015, le Centre international de recherche sur le cancer de l’OMS a classifié le glyphosate comme probablement cancérigène, tandis que le glufosinate est quant à lui classé comme substance toxique pour la reproduction et probable perturbateur endocrinien.Conformément au principe de précaution, nous ne devons tolérer aucun risque lié à des substances potentiellement dangereuses pour la santé humaine et l’environnement.
Foreign electoral interference and disinformation in national and European democratic processes (B9-0108/2019, B9-0111/2019)
J’ai voté contre cette résolution. Cette résolution commune est une attaque politique très claire envers les mouvements patriotes européens et la Russie, accusés d’être des acteurs majeurs de l’ingérence électorale étrangère et de la désinformation dans les processus démocratiques nationaux et européens.Incapable de comprendre ce qui amène les peuples européens à se tourner de plus en plus vers les partis patriotes lors des élections, l’Union européenne tente de rejeter la faute sur eux et invoque une prétendue désinformation venant de leur part, aidés par la Russie.Par les mesures qu’elle propose, elle démontre un comportement complotiste et un caractère profondément liberticide.
Multiannual Financial Framework 2021-2027 and own resources: time to meet citizens' expectations (B9-0110/2019, B9-0112/2019, B9-0113/2019)
J’ai voté contre ces propositions du PPE, S&D, Renew et Verts, ainsi que la proposition de GUE, qui visent à augmenter le budget multiannuel de l’Union européenne à 1324 milliards d’euros, et à introduire de nouveaux impôts « européens ». Pour protéger nos entreprises et nos citoyens, j’ai voté pour notre proposition alternative visant à réduire les dépenses administratives, évaluer et rationnaliser certaines dépenses, et finalement réduire le budget global 2021-2027.
Employment and social policies of the euro area (A9-0016/2019 - Yana Toom)
J’ai voté contre ce rapport qui n’apporte aucune solution convenable en matière d’emploi et de politique sociale et prétend attribuer à l’Union européenne des mérites qui ne sont pas les siens. Le rapport inclut aussi des références aux migrants alors qu’il y a encore près de 16 millions de chômeurs en Europe.J’ai voté pour notre résolution alternative affirmant que les politiques sociales et d’emploi doivent rester du ressort exclusif des États. Oui, les États ont le droit de mettre en place une priorité à l’emploi, à tout le moins pour les ressortissants de l’UE par rapport aux migrants.
European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (2014-2020) (A9-0015/2019 - Vilija Blinkevičiūtė)
J’ai voté pour ce texte. Ce fonds est prévu afin d’aider les entreprises à absorber l’impact potentiel en cas d’un Brexit sans accord. Ce fonds peut être utilisé pour indemniser les salariés ou les employeurs indépendants qui auraient à subir le préjudice d’une délocalisation ou d’une cessation d’activité due à une modification de la structure commerciale de l’Union Européenne.
Fishing authorisations for Union fishing vessels in United Kingdom waters and fishing operations of United Kingdom fishing vessels in Union waters (A9-0014/2019 - Chris Davies)
Implementation and financing of the EU general budget in 2020 in relation to the UK's withdrawal from the EU (A9-0018/2019 - Johan Van Overtveldt)
J’ai voté pour ce texte. Un Brexit sans accord pourrait fortement perturber l’exécution des budgets de l’Union européenne en 2019 et 2020 pour les bénéficiaires britanniques. Cette proposition de règlement du Conseil vise à étendre le cadre d’urgence afin de permettre aux bénéficiaires britanniques de rester éligibles aux fonds européens jusqu’au 31 décembre 2020. Cela à la condition que le Royaume-Uni honore ses engagements budgétaires et participe comme convenu au budget 2020 de l’UE.
Draft general budget of the European Union for 2020 - all sections
J’ai voté contre ce texte. L’expérience montre clairement à quel point le budget de l’UE est mal utilisé. Nous savons grâce aux rapports de la Cour des comptes européenne que ces fonds sont mal utilisés: manque de transparence, de suivi et d’évaluation. Il y a aussi des dépenses auxquelles nous sommes particulièrement opposés: les fonds de préadhésion pour la Turquie ou d’autres; les salaires et les bénéfices excessifs des fonctionnaires; un programme Erasmus+ étendu au monde entier; les dépenses administratives excessives ou le Service européen pour l’action extérieure.
General budget of the European Union for 2020 - all sections (A9-0017/2019 - Monika Hohlmeier, Eider Gardiazabal Rubial)
J’ai voté contre ce texte. L’expérience montre clairement à quel point le budget de l’UE est mal utilisé. Nous savons grâce aux rapports de la Cour des comptes européenne que ces fonds sont mal utilisés : manque de transparence, de suivi et d’évaluation. Il y a aussi des dépenses auxquelles nous sommes particulièrement opposés : les fonds de pré-adhésion pour la Turquie ou d’autres ; les salaires et les bénéfices excessifs des fonctionnaires ; un programme Erasmus+ étendu au monde entier ; les dépenses administratives excessives ou le Service Européen de l’Action Extérieure.
Discharge 2017: European Asylum Support Office (EASO) (A9-0011/2019 - Petri Sarvamaa)
J’ai voté pour ce texte, ce qui signifie que je refuse la décharge du directeur. Le Bureau européen d'appui en matière d'asile (EASO) est une agence dont le seul but est de promouvoir l'immigration. De plus sa gestion a été catastrophique: la Cour européenne des comptes a relevé des cas « importants et systématiques de non-respect du règlement financier pour ses paiements ». Les paiements non conformes sont estimés à environ 7,7 millions d’euros, soit 10,3 % du total des paiements effectués par le Bureau européen d'appui en matière d'asile en 2017. L’organisme anti-fraude OLAF a également relevé des « irrégularités liées aux violations des procédures de passation de marché, au détournement des fonds de l’Union, à la mauvaise gestion, aux abus de ressources humaines, aux violations des règles de protection des données, au harcèlement et aux comportements inappropriés envers le personnel en 2017 ».
Discharge 2017: EU general budget - European Council and Council (A9-0010/2019 - Isabel García Muñoz)
J’ai voté contre ce texte, ce qui signifie que je refuse la décharge. Le Parlement européen demande que les dépenses du Conseil soient contrôlées de la même manière que les autres institutions, afin d'informer les citoyens sur la manière dont l'argent public est dépensé. Le Conseil refuse de répondre aux questions du Parlement et de se soumettre à son contrôle. En plus, bien que les effectifs aient été réduits de 5% sur la période 2013-2017, le budget du Conseil et du Conseil européen a augmenté de 16,5 millions d'euros en 2017 (3%).
Objection pursuant to Rule 112: Assessment of the impact of plant protection products on honeybees (B9-0149/2019)
J’ai voté pour cette résolution qui vise à s’opposer à un projet de la Commission de Bruxelles concernant l’évaluation de l’impact des pesticides sur les abeilles. En effet, l'agence européenne EFSA proposait que les pesticides soient testés pour protéger les abeilles contre une exposition aiguë et chronique et qu’ils ne restent disponibles sur le marché qu’en cas de réussite de ces nouveaux tests. Toutefois, la Commission propose de ne considérer que l’exposition aiguë. Le déclin des pollinisateurs est un enjeu majeur pour la protection de l’environnement mais également pour la production agricole. Nous souhaitons que la toxicité chronique, c’est-à-dire sur le long terme, de ces produits sur les abeilles (et les autres pollinisateurs) soit aussi prise en compte dans le traitement des demandes d’autorisation de mise sur le marché de tel ou tel pesticide.
Objection pursuant to Rule 112: partially granting an authorisation for a use of chromium trioxide (Cromomed S.A. and others) (B9-0151/2019)
J’ai voté contre ce texte qui créée des contraintes administratives lourdes sans résoudre la question. Le trioxyde de chrome est un produit soumis à une obligation d'autorisation règlementaire. En 2015, plusieurs entreprises ont déposé une demande d'autorisation pour l'utilisation du trioxyde de chrome en chromatation fonctionnelle. Selon la Commission, les requérants ont démontré l'absence de solutions de remplacement pour ce qui concerne le périmètre limité de l'utilisation. Une utilisation limitée du trioxyde de chrome est autorisée avec des mesures de gestion des risques et de surveillance. Il s’agit d’un vote portant sur une substance indispensable à l’industrie européenne, notamment française (EADS, industrie automobile, PME/TPE, et d’autres secteurs) dont l’interdiction nuirait à sa compétitivité et l’obligerait à se fournir auprès de pays tiers qui, eux, ne seraient pas soumis à ces restrictions.Si ce produit est effectivement dangereux car étant une substance pour laquelle on ne peut estimer pour l’heure un niveau sûr d’exposition, il est employé dans des circonstances précises (espace clos, personnel formé).
Search and rescue in the Mediterranean (B9-0130/2019, B9-0131/2019, B9-0132/2019, B9-0154/2019)
J’ai voté contre ce texte sur les « opérations de recherche et de sauvetage » en Méditerranée.La logique de fond du texte est qu’il faut nécessairement faciliter l’immigration, qui est toujours justifiée. C’est au point qu’il faudrait même créer de nouvelles voies légales d’immigration : cela serait en effet la seule façon de lutter contre les passeurs, dont le business repose sur les migrants clandestins.Notre résolution alternative rappelle que la seule façon efficace de réduire les morts en mer est d’empêcher les départs.
Opening accession negotiations with North Macedonia and Albania (B9-0155/2019, RC-B9-0156/2019, B9-0156/2019, B9-0157/2019, B9-0158/2019, B9-0159/2019, B9-0160/2019, B9-0161/2019)
J’ai voté contre cette résolution appelant à l’entrée de l’Albanie et la Macédoine du Nord dans l’Union européenne. Ces deux pays ont déposé leur candidature auprès de l’UE, respectivement en 2009 et 2004.Comme pour la vague d’adhésion de 2004, nous pouvons ici constater que l’appartenance à l’OTAN a toujours précédé l’appartenance à l’UE. L’Albanie est ainsi devenue membre de l’Alliance atlantique en 2009 et la Macédoine du Nord en février 2019.Outre les gangs et mafias albanaises, nous craignons que l’adhésion de l’Albanie se traduise par une immigration massive socio-économique alors que l’Europe compte près de 16 millions de chômeurs.
EU-Ukraine Agreement amending the trade preferences for poultry meat and poultry meat preparations provided for by the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement (A9-0024/2019 - Enikő Győri)
J’ai voté contre ce texte. Cette proposition entraîne une augmentation des exportations ukrainiennes vers l’Europe de 30 000 tonnes à 50 000 tonnes de volaille à taux zéro, soit la quantité astronomique d’environ 50 millions de poulets. Nous avons déjà exprimé notre opposition à l’accord d’association avec l’Ukraine, en particulier sa dimension commerciale qui pénalise nos agriculteurs. MHP, le principal exportateur (représentant 93 % des exportations de volaille ukrainiennes) est la propriété d’un oligarque et ne semble pas respecter les normes européennes en matière de bien-être des animaux.
Amending VAT and excise duty rules as regards defence effort within the Union framework (A9-0034/2019 - Paul Tang)
Je me suis abstenue sur ce vote.L’objectif de la présente proposition de directive est d’exonérer de TVA et de droits d’accises les livraisons de biens ou prestations de services dans le cadre direct d’opérations de sécurité et de défense menées par l’Union, et d’aligner ainsi le régime appliqué à l’Union et à l’OTAN. Elle entend ainsi anticiper sur la montée en puissance attendue de la politique européenne de défense. L’Europe de la défense reste un concept flou. Jusqu’à présent nos partenaires européens rechignent à acheter des matériels de défenses fabriqués en France et ont peiné à soutenir la France dans ses missions en Afrique contre les jihadistes.Nous ne voyons pas la nécessité de soutenir l’objectif indirect de cette proposition. Cependant, compte tenu de l’effet très indirect de la réforme sur la construction de la défense européenne, nous adoptons une position neutre sur cette proposition.
Children rights in occasion of the 30th anniversary of the Convention of the Rights of the Child (B9-0178/2019, B9-0179/2019, B9-0180/2019)
J’ai voté contre ce texte. Le texte de la résolution exploite la question des droits des enfants pour réclamer l’intervention de la Commission de Bruxelles dans l’enseignement et l’éducation des enfants. Pourtant, d’après les traités européens, le contenu de l’enseignement et l’organisation du système éducatif ainsi que les questions linguistiques sont une prérogative nationale. Le texte réclame ainsi une éducation sexuelle à l’école, basée sur l’idéologie du genre. Il appelle les États membres à consacrer au moins 0,7 % de leur PIB à l’aide au développement des pays hors d’Europe et fait la promotion de l’immigration. Nous n’acceptons pas une telle interférence.
Election of the Commission
La présidente et les commissaires sont inconnus des électeurs européens. J'ai donc voté contre cette Commission. Cette Commission de Bruxelles ne reflète en rien l’expression politique du scrutin de mai 2019 qui a vu le groupe Identité et Démocratie devenir le premier parti de l’Europe des 6 (France, Allemagne, Italie, Benelux). Aucun représentant de ce groupe ne figure dans cette Commission. Cette administration distante et déconnectée ne représente pas et ne défend pas les Français ni aucun peuple en Europe.
Mobilisation of the European Union Solidarity Fund to provide assistance to Greece (A9-0040/2019 - Eva Kaili)
J'ai voté pour cette aide. Le Fonds de solidarité de l’Union européenne (FSUE) vise à soutenir financièrement les États membres touchés par des catastrophes naturelles. Nous avons toujours soutenu la mobilisation du FSUE, qui incarne réellement l'esprit de solidarité européenne même s’il est d’abord financé par les impôts allemands et français.
Mobilisation of the Flexibility Instrument to finance immediate budgetary measures to address the on-going challenges of migration, refugee inflows and security threats (A9-0039/2019 - Monika Hohlmeier)
J'ai voté contre ce texte. Dans cette proposition, une partie du cadre financier pluriannuel (CFP) 2014-2020 doit être mobilisée sur les questions de migration. Cette nouvelle mobilisation de l’instrument de flexibilité budgétaire de 778,1 millions d’euros pour financer l’accueil des migrants en Europe est absurde quand on connaît toutes les autres priorités. L'accent devrait plutôt être mis sur l'investissement dans la protection de nos frontières et la réduction contrôlée des flux d’immigration.
Mobilisation of the EU Solidarity Fund to provide for the payment of advances in the general budget of the Union for 2020 (A9-0036/2019 - Monika Hohlmeier)
J'ai voté pour cette aide. Le Fonds de solidarité de l’Union européenne (FSUE) vise à soutenir financièrement les États membres touchés par des catastrophes naturelles. Nous avons toujours soutenu la mobilisation du FSUE, qui incarne réellement l'esprit de solidarité européenne, même s’il est d’abord financé les impôts allemands et français.
2020 budgetary procedure: joint text (A9-0035/2019 - Monika Hohlmeier, Eider Gardiazabal Rubial)
J'ai voté contre ce projet de budget.Comme chaque année, le Parlement européen doit voter sur le projet commun de budget général de l'Union européenne pour l'exercice 2020. Par les rapports de la Cour des comptes, nous savons que ces fonds sont souvent mal utilisés: manque de transparence, de contrôle ou d'évaluation. De plus, nous nous opposons fermement à certaines lignes budgétaires concernant les avantages des migrants, l’aide à la Turquie ou à l'Albanie, les salaires excessifs des fonctionnaires de l'administration de Bruxelles ou l'Erasmus mondial.
EU/USA Agreement on the allocation of a share in the tariff rate quota for imports of high-quality beef (recommendation) (A9-0038/2019 - Bernd Lange)
J'ai voté contre. En 2009, l’UE garantissait un nouvel accès du marché aux exportations américaines de «bœuf aux hormones». En échange, les États-Unis levaient les droits imposés sur certains produits européens précédemment imposés à titre de représailles.Ce nouvel accord, négocié par la Commission en 2019, prévoit que le contingent existant restera inchangé, mais sur les 45 000 tonnes du contingent tarifaire total, 35 000 seront, à terme, réservées pour les États-Unis. Les États-Unis sont gagnants dans l’accord, puisqu’ils bénéficieront d’une part plus importante du contingent existant, tout en s’autorisant de nouvelles taxes sur les vins et produits aéronautiques français.Nous sommes déterminés à défendre les intérêts des éleveurs français et européens. Dès lors, nous ne pouvons soutenir un texte aussi favorable aux États-Unis et aussi lacunaire s’agissant des intérêts commerciaux français (secteurs aéronautique et viticole).
EU/USA Agreement on the allocation of a share in the tariff rate quota for imports of high-quality beef (resolution) (A9-0037/2019 - Bernd Lange)
J'ai voté contre. En 2009, l’UE garantissait un nouvel accès du marché aux exportations américaines de «bœuf aux hormones». En échange, les États-Unis levaient les droits imposés sur certains produits européens précédemment imposés à titre de représailles.Ce nouvel accord, négocié par la Commission en 2019, prévoit que le contingent existant restera inchangé, mais sur les 45 000 tonnes du contingent tarifaire total, 35 000 seront, à terme, réservées pour les États-Unis. Les États-Unis sont gagnants dans l’accord, puisqu’ils bénéficieront d’une part plus importante du contingent existant, tout en s’autorisant de nouvelles taxes sur les vins et produits aéronautiques français.Nous sommes déterminés à défendre les intérêts des éleveurs français et européens. Dès lors, nous ne pouvons soutenir un texte aussi favorable aux États-Unis et aussi lacunaire s’agissant des intérêts commerciaux français (secteurs aéronautique et viticole).
Situation in Bolivia (RC-B9-0187/2019, B9-0187/2019, B9-0188/2019, B9-0189/2019, B9-0190/2019, B9-0191/2019, B9-0192/2019)
Je me suis abstenu sur ce vote. La Bolivie connaît des troubles importants, avec l’exil d’Evo Moralès, chef d’État depuis 2006, à Mexico pendant qu’une nouvelle présidente, Jeanine Añez, vient d’arriver au pouvoir. Cette histoire a de nombreuses facettes, mais au final, elle implique des problèmes nationaux et régionaux sud-américains que les Boliviens doivent résoudre eux-mêmes.
Climate and environmental emergency (RC-B9-0209/2019, B9-0209/2019, B9-0211/2019, B9-0212/2019, B9-0215/2019, B9-0216/2019, B9-0218/2019, B9-0220/2019)
J’ai voté contre ce texte.Si la surpopulation engendre bien une surpollution de l’environnement, la réponse au défi écologique ne sera pas globale. Elle ne peut être que locale, au sein de communautés enracinées et qui connaissent leur environnement.L’accord de Paris est mort avant d’avoir vécu car les États-Unis l’ont rejeté. Pourtant, cette résolution demande, au mépris de tout sens des réalités, des contributions au «Fonds vert» de 100 milliards de dollars par an. Quels Français ont accepté de payer de nouveaux impôts mondiaux?Cette ambition banco-climatique mondiale est irréaliste alors que nous savons que les objectifs de l’accord de Paris, par exemple la neutralité carbone pour 2050, ne seront pas atteints: il suffit de voir la multiplication des centrales à charbon en Chine et les ravages de la déforestation en Asie et en Afrique. A contrario, l’accord de Paris signe la victoire d’un globalisme faisant vibrer la corde de l’émotion écologique pour s’ingérer toujours plus dans l’économie et les affaires intérieures des États. Ce maillage dense d’institutions internationales et d’ONG fait vivre un biotope diplomatique parallèle dont l’utilisation massive de 4x4 n’est pas la moindre des hypocrisies.
2019 UN Climate Change Conference (COP25) (B9-0174/2019)
J’ai voté contre ce texte.Si la surpopulation engendre bien surpollution de l’environnement, la réponse au défi écologique ne sera pas globale. Elle ne peut être que locale, au sein de communautés enracinées et qui connaissent leur environnement.L’accord de Paris est mort avant d’avoir vécu car les États-Unis l’ont rejeté. Pourtant, cette résolution demande, au mépris de tout sens des réalités, des contributions au «Fonds vert» de 100 milliards de dollars par an. Quels français ont accepté de payer de nouveaux impôts mondiaux?Cette ambition banco-climatique mondiale est irréaliste alors que nous savons que les objectifs de l’accord de Paris, par exemple la neutralité carbone pour 2050, ne seront pas atteints: il suffit de voir la multiplication des centrales à charbon en Chine et les ravages de la déforestation en Asie et en Afrique. A contrario, l’accord de Paris signe la victoire d’un globalisme, faisant vibrer la corde de l’émotion écologique pour s’ingérer toujours plus dans l’économie et les affaires intérieures des États. Ce maillage dense d’institutions internationales et d’ONG fait vivre un biotope diplomatique parallèle dont l’utilisation massive de 4x4 n’est pas la moindre des hypocrisies.
EU accession to the Istanbul Convention and other measures to combat gender-based violence (B9-0224/2019, B9-0225/2019, B9-0226/2019)
J’ai voté pour la résolution proposée par le groupe ID. Je me suis abstenue sur le texte proposé par le groupe ECR et j’ai voté contre ce texte proposé par les autres partis.J’estime que l’Union n’est pas légitime pour ratifier cette convention car c’est une prérogative des États membres. De plus, sept États membres ont pour le moment fait le choix de ne pas la ratifier. Je renouvelle mon opposition à cette convention qui entend inclure la théorie du genre dans les programmes d’études à tous les niveaux d’enseignement. Cependant je soutiens évidemment la lutte contre les violences faites aux femmes. Je précise également que de nombreux hommes sont victimes de violences conjugales.
Recent actions by the Russian Federation against Lithuanian judges, prosecutors and investigators involved in investigating the tragic events on 13 January 1991 in Vilnius (RC-B9-0182/2019, B9-0182/2019, B9-0183/2019, B9-0184/2019, B9-0185/2019, B9-0186/2019)
J’ai voté contre cette résolution.En avril 2019, une cour de justice lituanienne a condamné plusieurs anciens dirigeants de l’Union soviétique à des peines allant de quatre à 15 ans de prison. Leur était reproché leur implication dans les événements tragiques du 13 janvier 1991 à Vilnius. Ce jour-là des éléments des forces armées russes avaient pris d’assaut la tour de radiodiffusion lituanienne, alors défendue par la foule lituanienne. L’assaut avait fait 14 morts parmi les manifestants lituaniens.En riposte, un comité d’enquête russe a lancé une procédure contre les juges lituaniens à l’origine du verdict.Une telle procédure judiciaire bilatérale ne répare pas le drame survenu, son «timing» tend à ramener dans les mémoires un conflit qui devrait apparaître comme suranné. La résolution conjointe ne va pas dans le sens d’une politique d’apaisement en Europe.
Measures to address the impact on European agriculture of the WTO ruling on the Airbus dispute (RC-B9-0197/2019, B9-0197/2019, B9-0198/2019, B9-0201/2019, B9-0203/2019, B9-0204/2019, B9-0206/2019, B9-0208/2019)
J’ai voté contre cette résolution.Dans le cadre d’un contentieux ancien entre les États-Unis et l’Union européenne, les États-Unis ont augmenté certains droits de douane le 18 octobre dernier: de 10 % sur les Airbus, mais également de 25 % sur des produits agricoles, en particulier les vins français. La France est l’un des principaux pays touchés et les agriculteurs subissent les répercussions d’un conflit non lié à l’agriculture.La proposition de résolution commune contient des éléments intéressants, parfois proches des nôtres. Néanmoins, l’engagement du Parlement européen pour le libre-échange et l’ouverture des marchés nous a fait décider de voter contre cette résolution.
Crisis of the WTO Appellate Body (B9-0181/2019)
J'ai voté contre ce texte.L’organe d’appel de l’OMC (l’OA) a été créé par l’Accord de Marrakech de 1994. Dès lors que plusieurs pays sont en litige par rapport à l’application des règles de l’OMC et que le processus de consultation entre plaignant(s) et défenseur(s) a échoué, un groupe d’experts choisi par l’Organe de Règlement des Différends de l’OMC (l’ORD) est constitué pour examiner la plainte.Les États-Unis refusent depuis des mois d'approuver la nomination de nouveaux juges à l'ORD, qui pourrait ainsi se retrouver paralysé à partir du 11 décembre, date à laquelle, en raison des départs prévus, l'organe d'appel n'aura plus suffisamment de juges pour fonctionner.Nous contestons tant le champ de compétences de l’OMC, qui inclut par exemple l’agriculture, que la ligne idéologique qui fonde ses règles. Nous déplorons également la «naïveté» de l’organe d’appel vis-à-vis de la Chine.
On-going negotiations for a new EU-ACP Partnership Agreement (B9-0175/2019)
EU-Switzerland Agreement on the stepping up of cross-border cooperation, particularly in combating terrorism and cross-border crime (A9-0043/2019 - Roberta Metsola)
J’ai voté pour cet accord de coopération transfrontalière conclu entre l’UE et la Suisse permettant à l’ensemble des États membres et à la Suisse de bénéficier d’un accès réciproque aux bases de données nationales concernant les fichiers d’analyses ADN, les systèmes d’identification dactyloscopique et les registres d’immatriculation des véhicules. Cet accord permettra une coopération transfrontalière plus efficace des services de police scientifique, ce qui est indispensable en matière de criminalité internationale et de terrorisme.
EU-Liechtenstein Agreement on the stepping up of cross-border cooperation, particularly in combating terrorism and cross-border crime (A9-0044/2019 - Roberta Metsola)
J’ai voté pour cet accord de coopération transfrontalière conclu entre l’UE et le Liechtenstein permettant à l'ensemble des États membres et au Liechtenstein de bénéficier d'un accès réciproque aux bases de données nationales concernant les fichiers d'analyses ADN, les systèmes d'identification dactyloscopique et les registres d'immatriculation des véhicules. Cet accord permettra une coopération transfrontalière plus efficace des services de police scientifique, ce qui est indispensable en matière de criminalité internationale et de terrorisme.
Protocol to EU-Switzerland Agreement concerning the criteria and mechanisms for establishing the State responsible for examining a request for asylum lodged in a Member State or in Switzerland regarding the access to Eurodac for law enforcement purposes (A9-0025/2019 - Jadwiga Wiśniewska)
J’ai voté pour cet accord de coopération transfrontalière conclu entre l’UE et la Suisse permettant à l'ensemble des États membres et à la Suisse de demander la comparaison de données dactyloscopiques avec celles saisies par les autres États participants, qu’il s’agisse d’États membres de l’Union ou de pays associés, et conservées dans la base de données Eurodac, lorsqu’elles tentent d’établir l’identité d’une personne soupçonnée de terrorisme ou d’une infraction grave, ou d’une victime, ou d’obtenir davantage d’informations sur cette personne.
Accession of Solomon Islands to the EU-Pacific States Interim Partnership Agreement (A9-0050/2019 - Bernd Lange)
J’ai voté contre ce texte qui pourrait porter préjudice à nos territoires français du Pacifique : Nouvelle-Calédonie, Wallis-et-Futuna et Polynésie française. Du fait de l’épuisement des ressources halieutiques en mer de Chine, les bateaux chinois pêchent, souvent sans autorisation, dans les eaux côtières des îles du Pacifique Sud. Il existe un risque réel que l’adhésion des Îles Salomon l'accord de partenariat économique régional (APE) comprenant 14 États insulaires du Pacifique bénéficie en dernier lieu à l’industrie chinoise de la pêche. Un groupe chinois, China Sam Group, vient d’ailleurs de conclure un accord avec la province centrale des Iles Salomon afin d’y établir une zone économique spéciale. L’accord exclusif, ouvre la porte à « tout secteur » y compris le « tourisme », « l’industrie chimique, le pétrole, le gaz et la pêche. Les Iles Salomon deviennent un cheval de Troie commercial de la Chine, et pourraient autoriser Pékin à y déployer des infrastructures militaires.
Requirements for payment service providers (A9-0048/2019 - Lídia Pereira)
Je me suis abstenue sur ce texte qui apporte quelques solutions mais ne va clairement pas assez loin dans la lutte contre la fraude. Les monnaies virtuelles ne seront considérées que dans 3 ans. L’obligation de conserver des informations sur les paiements s’applique lorsqu'un prestataire de services de paiement exécute plus de 25 opérations au profit du même bénéficiaire au cours d'un trimestre civil ou exécute un virement de fonds d'une valeur monétaire d'au moins 2 500 euros en une seule opération.
Measures to strengthen administrative cooperation in order to combat VAT fraud (A9-0047/2019 - Lídia Pereira)
Je me suis abstenue sur ce texte.La proposition prévoit de mettre en place un nouveau système électronique central pour le stockage des informations sur les paiements et leur traitement ultérieur par des fonctionnaires chargés de la lutte contre la fraude dans les États membres dans le cadre d’Eurofisc.Ce système, dit CESOP, sera mis au point par la Commission. Les États membres doivent collecter les données enregistrées des prestataires de services de paiement et les transmettre au CESOP, chaque trimestre. Le CESOP regrouperait les informations générales sur les paiements par bénéficiaire (destinataire des fonds). Il analyserait ces informations et permettrait d’avoir une vue d’ensemble des paiements reçus.Le but est que ces informations sur les paiements entrants permettent aux États membres de détecter les fournisseurs et prestataires nationaux qui vendent des biens et des services à l’étranger sans accomplir leurs obligations en matière de TVA.Vu les retards ou échecs répétés de la Commission dans le développement de systèmes informatiques, par exemple dans le domaine de la sécurité, nous pouvons douter de la pertinence de lui confier cette tâche utile.
Association of the overseas countries and territories with the European Union ('Overseas Association Decision') (A9-0033/2019 - Tomas Tobé)
CAP: Financial discipline as from financial year 2021 and flexibility between pillars in respect of calendar year 2020 (A9-0042/2019 - Norbert Lins)
J'ai voté pour ce texte.Les revenus des agriculteurs sont de plus en plus tributaires des aides de la PAC. Ces primes ont été rendues nécessaires par les politiques européennes qui n’ont cessé de tirer les prix vers le bas au nom de la compétitivité et du marché mondialisé. Si nous contestons ce système qui a artificialisé les revenus agricoles, nous ne pouvons que défendre des crédits, qui, au-delà de toute théorie politique, sont une réalité financière vitale pour le quotidien de nos paysans français.
EU-Gambia Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Agreement and the Implementation Protocol thereto (A9-0026/2019 - Carmen Avram)
J’ai voté contre ce texte.L’accord de pêche avec la Gambie fait partie d’une batterie d’accord conclus par l’Union européenne avec des pays en développement depuis les années 70. Le principe consiste à payer pour l’accès à la pêche dans des eaux territoriales en théorie non exploitées par les flottes nationales des pays avec qui les accords sont conclus. Il faut se rendre à l’évidence que ces accords ont été un échec. D’une part, ils ont conduit à une surpêche intense. D’autre part, ces accords n’ont pas permis l’émergence d’une filière de pêche vivrière locale, contrairement aux objectifs affichés. La fixation des populations sur leur territoire n’est donc pas assurée.
Objection pursuant to Rule 112: Active substances, including dimoxystrobin and mancozeb (B9-0230/2019)
J'ai voté pour ce texte.La dimoxystrobine est une substance considérée comme un perturbateur endocrinien et le mancozèbe est, lui, classé comme substance toxique pour la reproduction.Devant le retard pris dans l’évaluation de ces substances et afin d’éviter l’expiration de leur autorisation avant qu’une décision soit prise, la Commission a prolongé leur autorisation. C’est donc l’inverse du principe de précaution.Nous avons l’habitude de soutenir les objections formulées au titre du principe de précaution car la portée sanitaire dépasse le champ strictement partisan/politique.Tant que nous n’avons pas la garantie de l’innocuité de telle ou telle substance, il est nécessaire de soutenir ces initiatives.
Closure of the accounts for the European Asylum Support Office (EASO) for the financial year 2017 (B9-0235/2019)
J’ai voté contre l’acceptation des comptes du Bureau européen d’appui en matière d’asile. La gestion de cette agence a été catastrophique en 2017 : la Cour européenne des comptes a relevé des cas «importants et systématiques de non-respect des paiements» avec son règlement financier, en particulier dans le domaine des marchés publics et des procédures de recrutement liées aux paiements. La Cour en déduit que le système de contrôle interne est insuffisant. Les paiements non conformes sont estimés à environ 7,7 millions d’euros en 2017. L’OLAF a également relevé des «irrégularités liées aux violations des procédures de passation de marché, au détournement des fonds de l’Union, à la mauvaise gestion, aux abus de ressources humaines, aux violations des règles de protection des données, au harcèlement et aux comportements inappropriés envers le personnel en 2017».
Public discrimination and hate speech against LGBTI people, including LGBTI free zones (B9-0234/2019)
The Rule of Law in Malta, after the recent revelations around the murder of Daphne Caruana Galizia (B9-0240/2019)
EU Pollinators Initiative (B9-0233/2019)
J'ai voté pour ce texte.La disparition massive des insectes pollinisateurs est une menace grave pour la biodiversité, la production agricole mais aussi pour l’Homme. Face aux enjeux, nous soutenons des mesures fermes aujourd’hui indispensables. Ce texte demande le durcissement de l’initiative européenne sur les pollinisateurs qui a émané de la Commission le 1er juin 2018.
Enabling the digital transformation of health and care (B9-0239/2019)
J’ai voté pour ce texte. Ce rapport traite du potentiel des technologies numériques dans le domaine de la santé et des soins, en particulier la numérisation des soins de santé (ou « e-santé »). Les citoyens doivent avoir la garantie d’un accès permanent, sécurisé et plus intuitif à leur dossier médical. L’« e-santé » doit aider à améliorer la prévention et le contrôle des maladies, moderniser les systèmes de santé et permettre aux citoyens d'accéder plus facilement à des soins et à leurs données personnelles. Cela doit permettre aussi au corps médical de perfectionner sa prise en charge en disposant d’un dossier à jour des patients, de mieux communiquer entre collègues et de suivre leurs patients à distance.
Commemoration of the 30th anniversary of the Romanian revolution of December 1989 (B9-0241/2019)
J’ai voté en faveur de ce texte. Trente ans après la sanglante révolution roumaine, les députés, principalement roumains, veulent rendre hommage aux Roumains assassinés, blessés et torturés par les troupes du régime communiste de Ceausescu. La résolution vise en particulier à faire la lumière sur la violence communiste. Malgré le ton européiste, qui peut être regretté, je soutiens le texte, qui rend hommage aux victimes des violences communistes.
Situation of the Uyghur in China (China-cables) (RC-B9-0246/2019, B9-0246/2019, B9-0247/2019, B9-0248/2019, B9-0249/2019, B9-0250/2019)
Les Ouïghours sont un des cinquante-six peuples officiellement reconnus en Chine. Face à la menace islamiste, Pékin a engagé des mesures de surveillance et de répression fortes, qu’on peut comprendre même si elles sont parfois excessives. Cependant, la résolution appelle à la libération inconditionnelle des prisonniers alors même que certains pourraient être de vrais islamistes. Dès lors, je me suis abstenu.
Situation of human rights and democracy in Nicaragua (RC-B9-0251/2019, B9-0251/2019, B9-0252/2019, B9-0253/2019, B9-0254/2019, B9-0255/2019)
Violent crackdown on recent protests in Iran (RC-B9-0271/2019, B9-0271/2019, B9-0272/2019, B9-0273/2019, B9-0274/2019, B9-0275/2019, B9-0276/2019)
Je me suis abstenue sur ce texte. Cette résolution d’aujourd’hui exprime la volonté de perpétuer deux formes de pression contre l’Iran: la mise au ban de la communauté internationale et la poursuite des sanctions. Or cette option n’est pas efficace, car la société iranienne est particulièrement nationaliste. Les évolutions sociales du pays ne seront pas aidées par des manœuvres apparaissant comme «étrangères».
Numerical strength of committees (B9-0039/2020)
J'ai voté pour ce texte.En vue de la sortie du Royaume-Uni de l’Union européenne et de la diminution du nombre de députés européens, la conférence des Présidents du Parlement européen propose une nouvelle répartition numérique des commissions parlementaires. Le cas échéant, la vigilance sera de mise pour vérifier que la représentation en commission correspond au résultat des élections.
Protocol to the Agreement between the EU, Iceland and Norway concerning the criteria and mechanisms for establishing the State responsible for examining a request for asylum lodged in a Member State or in Iceland or Norway regarding the access to Eurodac for law enforcement purposes (A9-0053/2019 - Jadwiga Wiśniewska)
J'ai voté pour ce texte.Les menaces criminelles et terroristes se situant à un très haut niveau en Europe. L’extension à l’Islande et la Norvège de l’application des dispositions régissant l’accès à des fins répressives du règlement Eurodac leur permettra, ainsi qu’à tous les pays participant à ce règlement, de lutter plus efficacement contre la criminalité et le terrorisme.
EU-China Agreement on certain aspects of air services (A9-0041/2019 - Tomasz Piotr Poręba)
J'ai voté contre ce texte.Cette résolution vise à remplacer certaines dispositions des accords bilatéraux existants relatifs aux services de transports aériens conclus entre les États membres et la Chine par un accord décidé à Bruxelles. La Commission se confère un pouvoir de contrôle et d’intervention dans les affaires économiques des États membres en matière de transport aérien international avec des pays tiers.
Common system of value added tax as regards the special scheme for small enterprises (A9-0055/2019 - Inese Vaidere)
The European Green Deal (RC-B9-0040/2020, B9-0040/2020, B9-0041/2020, B9-0042/2020, B9-0043/2020, B9-0044/2020, B9-0045/2020, B9-0046/2020)
Je me suis abstenue sur ce texte.La nouvelle Commission a placé le Pacte vert au cœur de son ambition pour les prochaines années. La proposition principale se concentre beaucoup sur la neutralité des émissions de gaz à effets de serre à l’horizon 2050. L’expérience récente nous montre que, depuis l’accord de Paris, les objectifs ambitieux ne sont pas respectés et que le système actuel ne fonctionne pas. Le réchauffement climatique, sur lequel se concentre l’UE, n’est en effet qu’un aspect de la crise environnementale qu’il faut élargir à la pollution sous toutes ses formes (eaux, plastiques), à la perte de la biodiversité et au nivellement culturel et humain (dimension identitaire).Ces solutions globales ont montré leurs limites. Il faut donc agir au plus proche des problèmes, dans le cadre de frontières qui protègent, au local et non par une approche bureaucratique, autoritaire et normative. Je condamne le catastrophisme écologique de l'UE pour ses excès et préfère plutôt une approche plus équilibrée qui favorise les solutions aux niveaux local et national.
Implementing and monitoring the provisions on citizens’ rights in the Withdrawal Agreement (B9-0031/2020)
J'ai voté pour ce texte. L’Union européenne et le Royaume-Uni ont convenu, en vertu de la deuxième partie de l'accord de sortie, d'une approche globale et réciproque de la protection des droits des citoyens de l'Union européenne à 27 vivant au Royaume-Uni et des citoyens britanniques vivant dans l'Union européenne à 27. Je soutiens ce texte, car il ne fait que reprendre les termes de l’accord de retrait dans la quasi-totalité de son contenu.
Annual report 2018 on the human rights and democracy in the world and the European Union's policy on the matter (A9-0051/2019 - Isabel Wiseler-Lima)
J'ai voté contre le rapport annuel 2018 sur les droits de l'homme et la démocratie dans le monde et la politique de l'Union européenne en la matière.De nombreux sujets sont absents ou éludés du rapport: le terrorisme islamique dans la bande sahélienne ou dans le Maghreb, les persécutions religieuses anti-chrétiennes dans le monde, la question des violences lors de manifestation en Europe.Devant la frappante vacuité de ces initiatives du Parlement européen, j’ai voté contre.
Annual report on the implementation of the common foreign and security policy (A9-0054/2019 - David McAllister)
J’ai voté contre ce texte.Le rapport annuel sur la mise en œuvre de la politique étrangère et de sécurité commune (PESC) s’inscrit dans une ligne claire: remplacer les diplomaties souveraines des États par une simili politique étrangère émanant des technocrates de l’Union européenne. Ainsi le Service européen pour l’action extérieure (SEAE) est le «service diplomatique» de l’Union européenne, et son haut représentant et vice-président de la Commission européenne, ancien boursier du programme américain Fullbright, ne cesse d’en appeler à la mise en place de la majorité qualifiée quant aux questions de politique étrangère.
Annual report on the implementation of the common security and defence policy (A9-0052/2019 - Arnaud Danjean)
J'ai voté contre ce texte.Le projet de rapport s’inscrit dans la volonté affichée de constituer une politique de défense soi-disant européenne s’imposant à terme aux États membres, tout en étant inféodée à l’OTAN. Les questions de défense, à terme, ressortiraient du seul pouvoir d’initiative de la Commission de Bruxelles, et du mécanisme de décision fondé sur la majorité qualifiée alors que nos partenaires se refusent à engager leurs forces: jusqu’à présent, la solidarité militaire de nos partenaires européens au Sahel a été dérisoire. Enfin, Bruxelles n’a jamais cherché à dissuader les pays recevant des fonds européens d’acheter des armements américains au détriment de fournisseurs français ou européens.
European Parliament's position on the Conference on the Future of Europe (B9-0036/2020, B9-0037/2020, B9-0038/2020)
J'ai voté contre ce texte.La conférence sur le futur de l’Europe est une idée reprise par Ursula von der Leyen dans son programme à la tête de la Commission européenne. L’objectif de la conférence est conforme aux dogmes qui ont cours à Bruxelles. Loin de toute refondation du mode de fonctionnement et des objectifs politiques poursuivis par Bruxelles, les organisateurs semblent avoir déjà oublié le Brexit et les nombreux référendums populaires appelant au changement de cap.Il est à prévoir que le débat ouvert n’envisagera pas une Europe indépendante, mais une organisation soumise.
Situation in Venezuela after the illegal election of the new National Assembly Presidency and Bureau (parliamentary coup) (B9-0051/2020, B9-0052/2020, B9-0053/2020, RC-B9-0048/2020, B9-0048/2020, B9-0049/2020, B9-0050/2020)
Je me suis abstenu sur la résolution concernant la situation au Venezuela.La résolution ne présente pas de proposition viable au regard de l’inextricable difficulté politique actuelle. Les effets de l’embargo américain sur l’économie du Venezuela se font durement ressentir par la population. Enfin, il appartient aux Vénézuéliens de trouver une solution politique pour leur pays.
Ongoing hearings under article 7(1) of the TEU regarding Poland and Hungary (B9-0032/2020)
J’ai voté contre la résolution concernant la Pologne et la Hongrie.La Pologne est attaquée par la Commission depuis décembre 2017 pour ses réformes du système judiciaire qui porteraient atteinte à la séparation des pouvoirs. Dans le cas de la Hongrie, le rapport Sargentini, voté en septembre 2018, recensait plusieurs cas isolés illustrant ses supposées atteintes à l’état de droit et a servi de base à l’activation de l’article 7 contre la Hongrie.La motivation réelle et non assumée de ces attaques est plus politique : les gouvernements polonais et hongrois opposent un veto à la répartition imposée par Bruxelles des migrants demandeurs d’asile dans leurs pays. Bruxelles cherche donc à les faire rentrer dans le rang par la procédure dite de l’article 7 qui peut, à terme, priver ces pays de leur droit de vote au Conseil des ministres européens.
COP15 to the Convention on Biological Diversity (Kunming 2020) (B9-0035/2020)
Je me suis abstenu sur ce texte.Ce rapport présente la position du Parlement européen à l’aune de la 15ème édition de la Convention sur la diversité biologique (COP 15) et dresse un bilan utile des pertes en biodiversité et les moyens à mettre en œuvre pour l’enrayer. Ce texte souhaite faire adopter un cadre international contraignant, de nouveaux mécanismes financiers internationaux, une levée massive de fonds par la Banque Européenne d’Investissement dans le sillage de l’Accord de Paris, une date butoir...Si la dégradation de notre environnement est évidente, à l’exemple des rats qui pullulent à Paris, les solutions à ces problèmes sont locales et seront trouvées dans nos communautés, dans nos régions, villes et villages. Nous ne croyons pas aux mesures « mondiales » et au discours démagogique sur fond de « déclaration d’urgence environnementale ».
Activities of the European Ombudsman in 2018 (A9-0032/2019 - Peter Jahr)
Je me suis abstenue sur ce vote.Le rapport contient des avancées en matière de transparence ou de lutte contre le « pantouflage », mais il comprend également des positionnements idéologiques contraires à la défense des identités et des souverainetés (transformation du Conseil en instance « parlementaire », protection des migrants, déclaration européiste…).
Institutions and bodies in the Economic and Monetary Union: Preventing post-public employment conflicts of interest (B9-0047/2020)
J'ai voté en faveur de cette résolution, qui vise à empêcher les conflits d'intérêts post-emploi dans les institutions et organes de l'Union économique et monétaire.Ainsi, très récemment, on a encore eu à déplorer de nombreux pantouflages suspects : en septembre 2019, le directeur général de l’Agence bancaire européenne, le Hongrois Adam Farkas, a été débauché par un des principaux lobbies bancaires, l’Association pour les marchés financiers en Europe (AFME). Les pratiques de pantouflage sont monnaie courante. Le cas de José Manuel Barroso, ancien Président de la Commission européenne, parti vendre son carnet d’adresses chez Goldman Sachs, est emblématique. En France, les cas de François Pérol parti présider les Caisses d’épargne ou de Stéphane Richard, parti chez Orange, ont également fait parler.
Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community (A9-0004/2020 - Guy Verhofstadt)
J'ai voté pour. Même si nous n'approuvons pas entièrement tous les aspects de l'accord de retrait négocié, la décision britannique de quitter l'UE devrait être soutenue. Le peuple britannique a exercé son droit à l'autodétermination en exprimant à plusieurs reprises et démocratiquement son intérêt à quitter l'UE.
Verification of credentials (A9-0015/2020 - Lucy Nethsingha)
J’ai voté pour ce texte.Suite à l’élection controversée des députés catalans, la commission juridique (JURI) a tenté par ce rapport de clarifier les obligations de transparence des États membres quant à leur procédure électorale nationale et à la transmission officielle des listes de candidats élus au Parlement européen. Il a le mérite de rappeler que les États membres sont compétents pour déterminer les modalités des élections européennes sur leur territoire.
Objection pursuant to Rule 111(3): Classification, labelling and packaging of substances and mixtures - titanium dioxide (B9-0071/2020)
Le dioxyde de titane (E171) est un additif alimentaire qui peut contenir jusqu'à 3,2 % de nanoparticules par unité de poids.Il est utilisé sous forme de poudre pour ses propriétés colorantes et opacifiantes.Jusqu’ici, le dioxyde de titane est classé comme cancérogène de catégorie 2 par inhalation, ce qui signifie que des risques très graves avaient été identifiés dans le passé par des experts. En avril 2019, la France a signé un arrêté visant à l'interdire sur le marché français à partir du 1er janvier 2020. Nous soutenons ce principe de précaution et une interdiction pure et simple de cette substance tant qu’il subsiste des risques pour la santé.Nous refusons donc la proposition de retirer l’acte délégué correspondant tant que les preuves nécessaires n’auront pas été apportées.
Gender pay gap (B9-0069/2020, B9-0073/2020, B9-0083/2020, B9-0084/2020)
J'ai voté contre la résolution. Notre groupe politique avait déposé une proposition de résolution alternative plus raisonnable. Les questions des groupes «marginalisés» (qui comprennent les Roms ou les migrants) ou de la politique d’austérité budgétaire ne devraient pas être mélangées avec la question importante de l’équité salariale hommes-femmes. Il appartient aux États membres, et non à l'UE, de résoudre le problème de l'écart salarial entre hommes et femmes dans la mesure où il existe. Une méthode scientifique rigoureuse devrait être définie pour réfléchir au problème de l'écart salarial entre hommes et femmes, sans idéologie d'aucune sorte.
Conclusion of the EU-Viet Nam Free Trade Agreement (Resolution) (A9-0017/2020 - Geert Bourgeois)
J’ai voté contre cette résolution se félicitant de la conclusion de l’accord de libre-échange entre l’Union européenne et le Viêt Nam. Elle présente, certes, certains points critiques, mais elle aurait dû souligner davantage les conditions de production fortement divergentes en termes d’environnement et de droits des travailleurs en cours au Viêt Nam. Cette concurrence déloyale est un risque pour nos emplois en Europe.
EU-Viet Nam Investment Protection Agreement (A9-0002/2020 - Geert Bourgeois)
Objection pursuant to Rule 111: Union list of projects of common interest (B9-0091/2020)
Objection pursuant to Rule 112: Lead and its compounds (B9-0089/2020)
Automated decision-making processes: Ensuring consumer protection, and free movement of goods and services (B9-0094/2020)
Je me suis abstenu sur ce texte.Il est en effet essentiel que les critères et algorithmes utilisés par les applications qui nous aident et nous tracent au travail ou dans notre vie de tous les jours soient transparents. Un être humain doit toujours être responsable en dernier ressort et en mesure d’annuler les décisions automatiques prises par des ordinateurs ou des robots. L’anonymat de nos données doit être protégé.Cependant, cette résolution ne dit rien de la concentration des données au sein de quelques entreprises non européennes et de notre émancipation nécessaire dans ce domaine. C’est pourquoi nous ne croyons pas qu’il serait plus efficace que Bruxelles décide des critères de gestion de risques concernant l’intelligence artificielle.
Proposed mandate for negotiations for a new partnership with the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (B9-0098/2020)
European Central Bank - annual report 2018 (A9-0016/2020 - Costas Mavrides)
J’ai voté contre ce rapport car il appelle la Banque centrale européenne à modifier ses politiques afin d’appliquer le Pacte vert sur le climat de la Commission. Il s’agit d’investissements sur des critères subjectifs, qui devraient normalement être contrôlés par les États. En outre, le rapport omet les conséquences néfastes des taux négatifs (spéculation boursière, bulles immobilières, accroissement des inégalités, risque sur la viabilité des fonds euros des assureurs-vie).
The illegal trade in companion animals in the EU (B9-0088/2020)
J’ai voté pour ce rapport pointant les problèmes posés par le trafic d’animaux de compagnie dans l’Union européenne (maltraitance animale, propagation de maladies telles que la rage en raison de l’absence ou de l’inefficacité des vaccins, perte de revenus pour nos éleveurs et nos États). Il est également demandé aux États membres de prendre des mesures fermes contre les trafiquants et les falsificateurs de passeports.
False and Authentic Documents Online (FADO) system (A9-0022/2019 - Roberta Metsola)
Specific measures to mobilise investments in the health care systems of the Member States and in other sectors of their economies in response to the COVID-19 outbreak (Coronavirus Response Investment Initiative)
Financial assistance to Member States and countries negotiating their accession to the Union that are seriously affected by a major public health emergency
Face à la menace de crise économique majeure liée au COVID19, j'ai voté POUR que le fonds d'urgence européen puisse financer les urgences de santé publique majeures. Je regrette que la Turquie puisse bénéficier de ces fonds d'urgence. Que notre amendement ait été rejeté en ces temps de crise grave en Italie, Espagne et en France est inexcusable.
EU-Montenegro status agreement on actions carried out by the European Border and Coast Guard Agency in Montenegro (A9-0018/2020 - Bettina Vollath)
EU-Serbia status agreement on actions carried out by the European Border and Coast Guard Agency in Serbia (A9-0019/2020 - Bettina Vollath)
Renewal of the EU-Ukraine Agreement on cooperation in science and technology (A9-0095/2020 - Cristian-Silviu Buşoi)
EU-Belarus Agreement on readmission of persons residing without authorisation (A9-0097/2020 - Petar Vitanov)
EU-Belarus Agreement on facilitation of issuance of visas (A9-0090/2020 - Ondřej Kovařík)
J'ai voté contre.Ce rapport vise à faciliter la réadmission des ressortissants biélorusses qui ne remplissent pas ou plus les conditions en vigueur relatives à l’entrée, la présence ou la résidence sur le territoire d’un État membre.L’immigration étant déjà conséquente en France et en Europe, il est nécessaire de favoriser le retour des immigrés clandestins dans leurs pays.
Amending the International Convention for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) - Protocol (A9-0089/2020 - Rosanna Conte)
J'ai voté pour ce texte.Le plus important changement de ce rapport est les compétences étendues à cet organisme régional de gestion de pêche (CICTA) concernant la gestion des stocks de requins, espèce actuellement très menacée. Le mandat de négociation pour l’UE dans la participation aux discussions a été établi par le Conseil, donc par les États membres.
EC-Mauritania Fisheries Partnership Agreement: fishing opportunities and financial contribution. Extension of the Protocol (A9-0088/2020 - Clara Aguilera)
J'ai voté contre.Ce type d’accord de pêche déclenche une guerre côtière sur les rivages africains entre la pêche industrielle européenne et la pêche artisanale côtière africaine.La conséquence de l’échec de ce type d’accord consiste donc en des déplacements de population, soit dans les flux migratoire Sud-Sud (c’est à dire intra-africains pour la majorité) qui déstabilisent encore plus ces pays, soit dans les flux Sud-Nord (vers l’Europe) qui participent de la subversion migratoire que nous subissons.
A safety net to protect the beneficiaries of EU programmes: setting up an MFF contingency plan (A9-0099/2020 - Jan Olbrycht, Margarida Marques)
International road passenger transport services by coach and bus in the border regions: cabotage operations between Germany and Switzerland (A9-0006/2020 - Markus Ferber)
International road passenger transport services by coach and bus in the border regions: cabotage operations between Italy and Switzerland (A9-0007/2020 - Markus Ferber)
Automated data exchange with regard to dactyloscopic data in the United Kingdom (A9-0100/2020 - Juan Fernando López Aguilar)
Labelling of tyres: fuel efficiency and other essential parameters (A9-0094/2020 - Henna Virkkunen)
J’ai voté pour.Cet étiquetage des pneumatiques fait partie de la législation européenne sur l’efficacité énergétique des produits. Nous soutenons les politiques visant à favoriser l’efficacité énergétique, dans la mesure où elles sont réalistes vis-à-vis des capacités d’adaptation des producteurs et des consommateurs.
Minimum requirements for water reuse (A9-0098/2020 - Simona Bonafè)
2018 discharge: Clean Sky 2 Joint Undertaking (A9-0032/2020 - Ryszard Antoni Legutko)
2018 discharge: Bio-based Industries Joint Undertaking (A9-0034/2020 - Ryszard Antoni Legutko)
Discharge 2018: European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (A9-0042/2020 - Ryszard Czarnecki)
Discharge 2018: European Union Agency for Railways (A9-0061/2020 - Ryszard Czarnecki)
J’ai voté contre.Cette agence voit son mandat étendu dans le cadre 4e paquet ferroviaire : il s’agit de fait de privatiser le ferroviaire. Le danger portera sur toutes les lignes les moins rentables, situées dans la « France périphérique », qui ne seront pas couvertes par les nouveaux opérateurs en vertu du principe aujourd’hui solidement établi de privatisation des bénéfices et de socialisation des pertes.
Discharge 2018: European GNSS Agency (A9-0067/2020 - Ryszard Antoni Legutko)
Discharge 2018: European Union Aviation Safety Agency (A9-0074/2020 - Ryszard Antoni Legutko)
Je me suis abstenue sur la décharge. L’AESA a publié une étude auprès de 24 compagnies aériennes qui a montré que malgré la récente législation européenne, les pilotes sont confrontés à des niveaux de fatigue inhabituellement élevés et incompatibles avec un niveau de sécurité de vol acceptable. Toutefois, lors du scandale des crashs de Boeing 737, l’AESA ne s’est pas montrée très réactive.
Discharge 2018: European Asylum Support Office (A9-0077/2020 - Ryszard Czarnecki)
J’ai voté contre la décharge.La Cour des comptes européenne relève que la plus importante procédure de marché mise en œuvre par le bureau en 2018 (pour un montant d’environ 50 millions d’euros) était irrégulière en raison de faiblesses majeures. En outre, cette agence a pour seul but de favoriser l’immigration.
Discharge 2018: EU general budget - Court of Justice of the European Union (A9-0027/2020 - Tomáš Zdechovský)
Discharge 2018: EU general budget - European Ombudsman (A9-0028/2020 - Tomáš Zdechovský)
J’ai voté pour. Le Médiateur européen est basé à Strasbourg. Il pointe sans hésiter les cas de mauvaise gestion dans les institutions européennes. Ce fut le cas, par exemple, lorsqu’il a confirmé que la promotion de Martin Selmayr au poste de Secrétaire général de la Commission européenne était un cas de mauvaise administration.
Discharge 2018: European Agency for Safety and Health at Work (A9-0033/2020 - Joachim Stanisław Brudziński)
Discharge 2018: Translation Centre for the Bodies of the European Union (A9-0035/2020 - Joachim Stanisław Brudziński)
Discharge 2018: European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training (A9-0040/2020 - Joachim Stanisław Brudziński)
J’ai voté contre. Les procédures de passation des marchés sont jugées insuffisamment détaillées pour garantir l'attribution du meilleur marché. De plus, le Centre ne publie toujours pas les CV de ses directeurs sur Internet. Ce centre produit également de nombreuses études sur l'intégration des migrants sur le marché du travail européen.
Discharge 2018: European Fisheries Control Agency (A9-0041/2020 - Ryszard Czarnecki)
Discharge 2018: EU general budget - European External Action Service (A9-0043/2020 - Tomáš Zdechovský)
J’ai voté contre.Au départ, le Service européen pour l'action extérieure devait juste aider à la coordination et faciliter la résolution des conflits mais ce service a échappé au contrôle des États : il est devenu une vraie administration qui emploie de nombreux fonctionnaires et dispose d’ambassades dans le monde entier, qui doublonnent les services diplomatiques des États membres, notamment ceux qui ont une politique étrangère très développée comme la France. De plus, le SEAE soutient l’immigration.
Discharge 2018: SESAR Joint Undertaking (A9-0044/2020 - Joachim Stanisław Brudziński)
J’ai voté contre.Le bilan de cette entreprise commune apparait mince au regard des sommes considérables qui sont engagées. Le rapport rappelle qu’en décembre 2016, le programme SESAR 1 a été officiellement clôturé mais qu’il restait grand nombre d'engagements ouverts : 61 400 000 euros. En clair, les ressources allouées à l'entreprise commune ne sont pas pleinement utilisées.
Discharge 2018: Eurojust (A9-0048/2020 - Ryszard Czarnecki)
Discharge 2018: European Joint Undertaking for ITER and the Development of Fusion Energy (A9-0049/2020 - Ryszard Antoni Legutko)
Discharge 2018: European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions (A9-0051/2020 - Joachim Stanisław Brudziński)
Discharge 2018: Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (A9-0052/2020 - Ryszard Czarnecki)
Discharge 2018: European Institute of Innovation and Technology (A9-0054/2020 - Ryszard Antoni Legutko)
J’ai voté contre. En matière de marchés publics, la Cour constate que l’Institut n’a pas systématiquement vérifié les prix et les surcoûts du soumissionnaire choisi. En plus, le Service d'Audit Interne (SAI) de la Commission relevé « des faiblesses très importantes dans le domaine de la prévention et détection des fraudes ». Enfin, les démarches administratives complexes rendent le financement trop compliqué pour les petites entreprises.
Discharge 2018: eighth, ninth, tenth and eleventh European Development Funds (A9-0057/2020 - Michèle Rivasi)
J’ai voté contre. À l’instar de la précédente décharge, ce rapport promeut les fonds fiduciaires et autres “instruments innovants” mis en place par la Commission pour contourner les États et le Parlement : ces mécanismes financent presque uniquement des projets portés ou sous-traités par des ONG internationales et ne contribuent pas efficacement à l’éradication de la pauvreté, notamment en Afrique.
Discharge 2018: European Institute for Gender Equality (A9-0058/2020 - Ryszard Czarnecki)
J’ai voté contre. Ces travaux de L'EIGE sont utilisés par la commission FEMM pour justifier de nouvelles réglementations ou de nouveaux quotas, quotas qui se révèlent souvent à sens unique, ce qui finit par poser problème en termes d’égalité des sexes. Le Conseil d’Administration de cet Institut accueille très peu d’hommes, ce qui est étonnant pour une agence intitulée : « Institut européen pour l'égalité entre les hommes et les femmes »
Discharge 2018: European Securities and Markets Authority (A9-0059/2020 - Ryszard Czarnecki)
J’ai voté contre. Si le rapport approuve le partage des pratiques, des initiatives et des modèles avec l'Autorité européenne des marchés financiers (AEMF) et l'Autorité européenne des assurances et des pensions professionnelles, il critique l’interruption de la passation de marchés communs pour la location de bureaux à Paris.
Discharge 2018: European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Training (CEPOL) (A9-0062/2020 - Ryszard Czarnecki)
Discharge 2018: European Chemicals Agency (A9-0063/2020 - Ryszard Antoni Legutko)
J’ai voté contre. Le fait que les revenus de cette agence soient essentiellement constituées des redevances compromet son indépendance, d’autant qu’elle ne vérifie pas assez les informations fournies par les entreprises, ce qui a conduit à des ratées considérables comme le scandale de Monsanto Papers.
Discharge 2018: EU general budget – Commission and executive agencies (A9-0069/2020 - Monika Hohlmeier)
J’ai voté contre. La Commission européenne continue d’imputer aux États membres ses problèmes comptables. Elle n’a pourtant pas particulièrement lutté contre la fraude et l’optimisation fiscale. Surtout, l’exercice de décharge est évidemment politique et nous ne pouvons la donner à une institution qui dicte des politiques contraires à notre intérêt national, notamment en matière migratoire.
Discharge 2018: European Border and Coast Guard Agency (A9-0072/2020 - Joachim Stanisław Brudziński)
Discharge 2018: European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (Europol) (A9-0075/2020 - Ryszard Czarnecki)
Discharge 2018: European Medicines Agency (A9-0076/2020 - Ryszard Czarnecki)
J’ai voté contre. Alors que son budget augmente chaque année, l’agence déplore un manque de moyens humains. Le fait que les revenus de cette agence soient essentiellement constitués des redevances compromet son indépendance.Le problème du bail à Londres persiste : l’EMA devra payer un loyer à Londres par obligation contractuelle jusque 2039, alors que le siège n’est plus dans cette ville depuis le 1er Mars 2019. Le problème de double loyer pourrait faire perdre 489 000 000 euros aux contribuables européens.
Discharge 2018: General budget of the EU – European Economic and Social Committee (A9-0078/2020 - Tomáš Zdechovský)
Temporary measures concerning the general meetings of European companies (SE) and of European Cooperative Societies (SCE)
J’ai voté pour.En raison de ces circonstances exceptionnelles, il risque d’être très compliqué d’organiser des assemblées générales avant la fin du mois de juin 2020. Cette proposition de dérogation temporaire devrait fournir aux sociétés et sur les sociétés coopératives la flexibilité nécessaire pour convoquer leur assemblée générale dans les douze mois qui suivent la clôture de l’exercice, et dans tous les cas au plus tard le 31décembre 2020.
Parliament's estimates of revenue and expenditure for the financial year 2021 (A9-0102/2020 - Olivier Chastel)
J’ai voté contre. La présentation est très séduisante mais en réalité, par expérience, ces fonds sont mal utilisés et ne sont jamais suffisants : manque de transparence, de suivi et d’évaluation.En plus, je m’oppose fermement à certaines lignes budgétaires, notamment concernant les dépenses liées avec la propagande (« communication »), tels que l’instauration des nouveaux bureaux et musées en Europe (bureaux de liaison du Parlement européen (EPLO) etc.) alors même que le siège de Strasbourg du Parlement européen est critiqué dans le rapport.
Macro-financial assistance to enlargement and neighbourhood partners in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic crisis
Temporary measures concerning the operation of air services
J’ai voté pour.Ce règlement vise à modifier temporairement un certain nombre de dispositions des lois existantes dans le domaine de l'aviation afin de permettre aux autorités nationales de traiter plus facilement un certain nombre de conséquences négatives de la pandémie de COVID-19, et surtout d'atténuer les impacts sur le secteur de l'aviation pour toute la durée de la crise.
Temporary measures concerning the validity of certificates and licences (omnibus)
Le présent règlement établit des mesures spécifiques et temporaires applicables au renouvellement et à la prolongation de la période de validité de certains certificats, licences et autorisations et au report de certains contrôles et formations périodiques en réponse aux circonstances extraordinaires causées par l'épidémie de COVID-19 dans le domaine du transport routier, ferroviaire et fluvial et de la sécurité maritime.J’ai voté pour.
Port infrastructure charges
Le présent règlement introduit un nouveau paragraphe à l'article 21 du règlement (UE) 2017/352, permettant à l'entité gestionnaire du port ou à l'autorité compétente de suspendre ou de réduire la redevance d'infrastructure portuaire, ou encore, de différer un paiement de la redevance d'infrastructure portuaire due pour la période du 1er mars 2020 au 31 décembre 2020.J’ai voté pour.
4th railway package: extension of the transposition periods
La présente directive modifie les délais lié au 4e paquet ferroviaire. En raison de l'épidémie de COVID-19, la plupart des États membres ont demandé un délai de transposition. L'objectif de ces propositions est de reporter le délai de mise en conformité avec certaines dispositions du 4e paquet ferroviaire de trois mois du 16 juin 2020 au 16 septembre 2020.J’ai voté pour.
Protocol on the implementation of the Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Community and the Republic of Cape Verde (2019-2024) (A9-0024/2020 - Cláudia Monteiro de Aguiar)
Protocol on the implementation of the Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Community and the Republic of Cape Verde (2019-2024) (Resolution) (A9-0023/2020 - Cláudia Monteiro de Aguiar)
Protocol on the implementation of the Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Community and Guinea-Bissau (2019-2024) (A9-0012/2020 - João Ferreira)
J’ai voté contre. Ces accords de pêche permettent de transporter l’effort de pêche des navires européens hors des eaux de l’Union, ce qui permet à la Commission de se féliciter de sa politique de conservation des stocks en Europe. La réalité est tout autre, puisqu’on a en réalité déclenché une guerre côtière sur les rivages africains entre la pêche industrielle européenne et la pêche artisanale côtière africaine, les deux n’arrivant plus à se partager la ressource. La conséquence est une déstabilisation des populations locales.
Protocol on the implementation of the Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Community and Guinea-Bissau (2019-2024) (Resolution) (A9-0013/2020 - João Ferreira)
J’ai voté contre. Ces accords de pêche permettent de transporter l’effort de pêche des navires européens hors des eaux de l’Union ; ce qui permet à la Commission de se féliciter de sa politique de conservation des stocks en Europe. La réalité est toute autre, puisqu’on a en réalité déclenché une guerre côtière sur les rivages africains entre la pêche industrielle européenne et la pêche artisanale côtière africaine, les deux n’arrivant plus à se partager la ressource. La conséquence est une déstabilisation des populations.
Protocol on the implementation of the Fisheries Partnership Agreement between São Tomé and Príncipe and the European Community (A9-0001/2020 - Nuno Melo)
J’ai voté contre. Ces accords de pêche permettent de transporter l’effort de pêche des navires européens hors des eaux de l’Union ; ce qui permet à la Commission de se féliciter de sa politique de conservation des stocks en Europe. La réalité est toute autre, puisqu’on a en réalité déclenché une guerre côtière sur les rivages africains entre la pêche industrielle européenne et la pêche artisanale côtière africaine, les deux n’arrivant plus à se partager la ressource. La conséquence est une déstabilisation des populations.
EU-Swiss Confederation Agreement on the modification of Switzerland’s WTO concessions (Article XXVIII of the GATT 1994) with regard to seasoned meat (A9-0092/2020 - Jörgen Warborn)
J’ai voté pour.Afin d’avoir accès au marché unique de l’UE, la Suisse a accepté de reprendre certains aspects de la législation de l’Union. L’UE et la Suisse gèrent leurs relations commerciales par le biais d’une série d’accords bilatéraux auxquels nous sommes favorables. Il s’agit d’un exemple de relations qui présentent des bénéfices pour les 2 parties. Cette mesure d’augmentation du contingent est favorable au producteurs européens qui exportent vers la Suisse.
Request for funding for biomedical research on Myalgic Encephalomyelitis (B9-0186/2020)
J’ai voté pour.Cette proposition de résolution répond à la nécessité d’améliorer le diagnostic d’une maladie mal connue et de remédier à une situation de sous-financement de la recherche, qui empêche de parvenir à un traitement pour cette maladie qui handicape fortement les relations sociales et la vie professionnelle.
Mobilisation of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund: technical assistance at the initiative of the Commission (A9-0109/2020 - Victor Negrescu)
J'ai voté pour.Nous avons toujours soutenu le Fonds européen d'ajustement à la mondialisation, qui vient à l’aide des travailleurs qui ont perdu leur travail à cause de la mondialisation. Même si c'est surtout un exercice de communication de la Commission de Bruxelles, certains chômeurs français peuvent parfois en bénéficier.
Mobilisation of the European Union Solidarity Fund to provide assistance to Portugal, Spain, Italy and Austria (A9-0105/2020 - José Manuel Fernandes)
J’ai voté pour.Le Fonds de solidarité de l’Union européenne vise à soutenir financièrement les États membres touchés par des catastrophes naturelles. Même si le passage par Bruxelles des fonds permet un exercice de communication pour la Commission de Bruxelles, nous avons toujours soutenu l’esprit de la solidarité européenne. Nous supportons cette proposition pour venir en aide à nos voisins touchés par les catastrophes naturelles.
Draft amending budget No 3/2020: Entering the surplus of the financial year 2019 (A9-0104/2020 - Monika Hohlmeier)
J’ai voté contre.Ce rapport préconise de transférer dans la réserve budgétaire de l’Union européenne. En avril dernier, nous avons déposé une proposition de résolution visant à redistribuer chaque excédent budgétaire aux États membres contributeurs nets afin de les aider à amortir le choc de cette crise sanitaire.
Conclusion of the EU-Moldova Common Aviation Area Agreement (A9-0084/2020 - Roberts Zīle)
Je me suis abstenu.L’accord établit un espace aérien commun entre l’Union européenne et la Moldavie dans le cadre du partenariat oriental et de la politique de grand voisinage de l’Union européenne.Rien ne garantit que l’accord n’engendrera pas de distorsions de concurrence commerciale et sociale qui impacteraient les travailleurs européens du secteur aérien et les compagnies qui les emploient si certaines parties ne le respectent pas.
Amendment of the EU-Morocco Euro-Mediterranean Aviation Agreement (accession of Bulgaria and Romania) (A9-0005/2020 - Sven Schulze)
Compte tenu de la politique des transports que pratiquent déjà la Bulgarie et la Roumanie dans le domaine des transports routiers au sein de l’UE, et du préjudice économique qu’elle porte aux États membres d’Europe de l’Ouest en matière de concurrence déloyale et de fraude sociale, on peut émettre de sérieux doutes sur la pérennité et la pertinence de l’entrée de ces deux pays dans l’accord euro-méditerranéen relatif au transport aérien.Je me suis abstenue.
Conclusion of the EU-Jordan Euro-Mediterranean Aviation agreement (A9-0086/2020 - Andris Ameriks)
L’accord euro-méditerranéen relatif aux services aériens régit les relations ayant trait au domaine de l’aviation entre l’Union et ses États membres et le Royaume hachémite de Jordanie. Bien qu’il soit basé sur la réciprocité, rien ne garantit que l’accord n’engendre pas de distorsions de concurrence commerciale et sociale qui impacteraient les travailleurs du secteur aérien et les compagnies qui les emploient si l’accord n’est pas respecté.Je me suis abstenue.
Conclusion of the EU-China Civil Aviation Safety Agreement (A9-0087/2020 - Tomasz Piotr Poręba)
L’accord vise à renforcer la coopération dans le domaine de la certification et de la surveillance des produits, pièces et équipements aéronautiques, ainsi qu’en matière de contrôle et de certification environnementale de la production.Cependant, cet accord ne prévoit rien en matière de standards de qualité pour les pièces et produits du secteur aéronautique qui pourraient être issues de filières échappant aux contrôles nécessaires dans le cadre de certifications et d’homologations. Dès lors je me suis abstenue.
Conclusion of the EU-Israel Euro-Mediterranean Aviation Agreement (A9-0085/2020 - Andor Deli)
J'ai voté abstention. Cet accord comprend des mesures de sauvegarde particulières en ce qui concerne la concurrence loyale, le respect des normes de travail et sociales, la protection des droits des passagers et la coopération dans le domaine de l’environnement. Cependant, bien qu’il soit basé sur la réciprocité, rien ne garantit que l’accord n’engendre pas de distorsions de concurrence commerciale et sociale qui impacteraient les travailleurs du secteur aérien ou les compagnies aériennes.
Recommendations on the negotiations for a new partnership with the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (A9-0117/2020 - Kati Piri, Christophe Hansen)
Conference on the Future of Europe (B9-0170/2020, B9-0179/2020)
J’ai voté contre.Par cette résolution, les groupes politiques euro-mondialistes font pression sur le Conseil pour qu’il lance dès à présent la Conférence sur l’avenir de l’Europe. Leur objectif semble de donner plus de pouvoir à Bruxelles sans avoir recours à un référendum ou à un vote des peuples sur la question des prérogatives de la Commission.
Amending Regulations (EU) No 575/2013 and (EU) 2019/876 as regards adjustments in response to the COVID-19 pandemic (A9-0113/2020 - Jonás Fernández)
J’ai voté contre.Cet acte délégué vise à atténuer les conséquences de la volatilité des marchés sur les obligations prudentielles. Les banques bénéficient d’une bienveillance particulière de la Commission depuis le début du Covid-19. C’est l’objet même des normes mises en place que d’appréhender les risques supplémentaires en période de forte incertitude, il ne faut donc pas les remettre en cause à chaque crise.
Competition policy - annual report 2019 (A9-0022/2020 - Stéphanie Yon-Courtin)
J'ai voté pour.Ce rapport constitué d’une somme d’orientations concernant la politique de concurrence reste dans l’ensemble positif notamment pour l’amélioration du suivi des investissements étrangers directs, de la garantie de réciprocité avec des pays tiers; le contrôle des aides d’Etat visant à prévenir les distorsions de concurrence notamment en faveur des PME; le renforcement des actions contre les cartels.
Setting up a special committee on foreign interference in all democratic processes in the European Union, including disinformation, its responsibilities, numerical strength and term of office (B9-0190/2020)
J’ai voté contre.Cette commission n’aura qu’un seul but réel : dépeindre la Russie comme une menace pour la démocratie en Europe et se servir de ce prétexte pour contrôler un peu plus les discours tenus par des personnalités européennes en privé et public.Par ailleurs, Bruxelles ne mentionne curieusement jamais d'autres acteurs, à l'exemple de l'intervention de l'ancien président américain Obama le 4 mai 2017, en faveur d'Emmanuel Macron trois jours avant les élections présidentielles françaises.
Setting up a special committee on artificial intelligence in a digital age, its responsibilities, numerical strength and term of office (B9-0189/2020)
J’ai voté pour.Cette décision vise à créer une commission spéciale sur l’Intelligence Artificielle. La création de cette commission spéciale est justifiée par l’explosion des technologies de l’IA amorcée lors des cinq dernières années. Nous avons eu l’occasion de mettre en avant l’importance de ce sujet depuis plusieurs années. Il rejoint en effet nos préoccupations centrales, sur l’émergence d’industries du futur, mais aussi sur les actions à mener pour adapter et préserver l’emploi face aux transformations technologiques, en particulier pour les personnes les moins qualifiées.
The reopening of the investigation against the Prime Minister of the Czech Republic on the misuse of EU funds and potential conflicts of interest (B9-0192/2020)
J’ai voté pour cette enquête.Il semblerait que le détournement des fonds européens continue en Europe de l’Est. Ces détournements se font aux dépens du contribuable européen mais aussi des petits exploitants agricoles. On ne sera pas surpris que ces détournements soient souvent opérés par des anciens dirigeants sous la période communiste.
Guidelines for the 2021 Budget - Section III (A9-0110/2020 - Pierre Larrouturou)
J’ai vote contre.Aucun accord n’a été trouvé pour le moment sur le prochain cadre financier pluriannuel (CFP 2021/2027). Raison pour laquelle le rapporteur demande que le plan d’urgence visant à protéger les bénéficiaires des fonds européens par le report des crédits de 2020 en 2021, soit adopté le plus rapidement possible. Cependant, le rapporteur français socialiste souhaite accentuer les mécanismes de répartition des migrants entre États membres en soutenant une politique d’asile commune et la réforme de Dublin IV. Au lieu de geler les fonds alloués à la Turquie à la suite du chantage inacceptable d’Erdogan sur les migrants, ce texte demande à l’UE de poursuivre son soutien financier.
Tourism and transport in 2020 and beyond (RC-B9-0166/2020, B9-0166/2020, B9-0175/2020, B9-0177/2020, B9-0178/2020, B9-0180/2020, B9-0182/2020, B9-0184/2020)
Administrative cooperation in the field of taxation: deferring certain time limits due to the COVID-19 pandemic (C9-0134/2020)
J’ai voté contre.Prétextant des contraintes découlant de la crise du Covid-19, la directive propose de reporter de 3 mois les différentes échéances pour se conformer aux exigences en matière d’échanges automatiques d’informations sur des comptes financiers dont les bénéficiaires sont fiscalement domiciliés dans un autre État membre. La demande s’inscrit dans un contexte où le monde bancaire saisit toutes les occasions pour réclamer des délais ou des ajustements à la baisse de leurs obligations.
Exceptional temporary support under EAFRD in response to the COVID-19 outbreak (amendment of Regulation (EU) No 1305/2013) (C9-0128/2020 - Norbert Lins)
J’ai voté pour.Les conséquences de la crise sanitaire du Coronavirus se font déjà sentir pour les agriculteurs. Les plus petites exploitations, déjà fragiles avant la crise, se retrouvent aujourd’hui avec de considérables difficultés de trésorerie. La proposition est une mesure urgente et temporaire qui permettra aux exploitations les plus en difficultés de se donner un peu d’air, grâce à un paiement unique fixé par les États membres.
European citizens’ initiative: temporary measures concerning the time limits for the collection, verification and examination stages in view of the COVID-19 outbreak (C9-0142/2020 - Loránt Vincze)
J’ai voté pour.L’initiative citoyenne européenne qui aurait pu être utile mais est en fait un faux-semblant démocratique. Cette procédure vise à empêcher qu'une mesure populaire comme le contrôle des flux de population entrant en Europe soit étudiée. La Commission décidant en dernier ressort, elle se réserve le droit d'ignorer les initiatives qui ne correspondent pas à son agenda politique.Toutefois j'ai voté pour car le rapport se borne à permettre le traitement équitable des Initiatives en cours, qui concernent l’interdiction de la pêche aux ailerons et la sauvegarde des abeilles.
The PRC national security law for Hong Kong and the need for the EU to defend Hong Kong's high degree of autonomy (RC-B9-0169/2020, B9-0169/2020, B9-0171/2020, B9-0173/2020, B9-0174/2020, B9-0176/2020, B9-0181/2020, B9-0193/2020)
Situation in the Schengen area following the Covid-19 outbreak (B9-0165/2020)
J’ai voté contre.Cette proposition de résolution commune critique la réintroduction du contrôle des frontières intérieures ou leur fermeture par les États-membres. Alors que l'idéologie du libre-échange et de la libre-circulation de l'Europe de Bruxelles va entraîner une crise économique majeure en Europe, les euro-mondialistes réclament la suppression des frontières dans l'espace Schengen, son élargissement à la Bulgarie et la Roumanie et encore plus de pouvoir délégué à Bruxelles dans sa gestion.
Amending Regulation (EU) 2017/2454 as regards the dates of application due to the outbreak of the COVID-19 crisis (A9-0123/2020 - Luděk Niedermayer)
International and domestic parental abduction of EU children in Japan (B9-0205/2020)
J’ai voté pour. On peut regretter que cette proposition de résolution ne comporte aucun considérant qui rappelle le respect pour les particularités culturelles du Japon et pour la souveraineté de ce pays. Cependant, le Japon ne respecte pas ses obligations internationales, qui ont pourtant été librement consenties dès lors que ce pays a adhéré à la Convention de La Haye et la Convention des Nations Unies relatives aux droits de l’enfants. En outre, le sujet soulevé par cette proposition de résolution concernerait près d’une centaine d’enfants franco-japonais et leurs parents français.
The rights of persons with intellectual disabilities in the COVID-19 crisis (B9-0204/2020)
Ces recommandations veulent promouvoir une inclusion des individus souffrant de déficience mentale ce qui est louable. Le rapport est assez approximatif. En effet comme il le précise, très peu de données existent sur l’impact de la crise sur ces individus. De ce fait, les solutions proposées sont assez vagues. Le rapport souhaite davantage d’inclusion pour les handicapés. J’ai voté pour.
Ειδικοί κανόνες για την απόσπαση οδηγών στον τομέα των οδικών μεταφορών και απαιτήσεις επιβολής (A9-0114/2020 - Kateřina Konečná) (A9-0114/2020 - Kateřina Konečná)
L’absence de règles en la matière applicables au secteur routier a contribué au développement de sociétés « boites aux lettres » établies dans les pays d’Europe de l’Est où la législation sociale des travailleurs est moins contraignante pour les employeurs. Les transporteurs immatriculés dans ces pays ont alors très rapidement envahi le marché des pays de l’Ouest européen en pratiquant des prix défiants toute concurrence, venant ainsi concurrencer les transporteurs locaux sur notre marché national.J’ai voté contre cette tentative par les députés des pays de l’Est d’empêcher toute législation du secteur.
Daily and weekly driving times, minimum breaks and rest periods and positioning by means of tachographs (A9-0115/2020 - Henna Virkkunen)
J’ai voté contre. Le vote a porté sur les amendements déposés par les différents Députés des États de l’Est qui s’opposent à la mise en application du Paquet Mobilité dans son ensemble. Afin de permettre la continuité de la procédure jusqu’à la mise en application de ce Paquet Mobilité, il convient de voter contre.
Adapting to development in the road transport sector (A9-0116/2020 - Ismail Ertug)
J’ai voté contre. Le vote ne portera que sur les amendements déposés par les différents Députés des États de l’Est qui s’opposent à la mise en application du Paquet Mobilité dans son ensemble. Afin de permettre la continuité de la procédure jusqu’à la mise en application de ce Paquet Mobilité, il convient de voter contre.
European citizens’ initiative: temporary measures concerning the time limits for the collection, verification and examination stages in view of the COVID-19 outbreak (C9-0142/2020 - Loránt Vincze)
J’ai voté pour. L'initiative citoyenne européenne est une procédure inutile et un faux-semblant démocratique (la Commission décidant en dernier ressort). Nous pouvons toutefois soutenir ce règlement car il se borne à permettre le traitement équitable des ICE en cours, qui concernent l’interdiction de la pêche aux ailerons et la sauvegarde des abeilles.
Amending Directives (EU) 2017/2455 and (EU) 2019/1995 as regards the dates of transposition and application due to the outbreak of the COVID-19 crisis (A9-0122/2020 - Ondřej Kovařík)
Financial activities of the European Investment Bank - annual report 2019 (A9-0081/2020 - David Cormand)
J’ai voté abstention. Ce rapport contient des éléments positifs en ce qui concerne la révision de la politique de transparence concernant la nature des activités financées, le renforcement des clauses contractuelles concernant la fraude et la corruption. Malgré des points positifs, il nous est difficile de soutenir un rapport positif concernant une institution détenue à hauteur de 16 % par la France, dont les prêts à des pays extra-européens questionnent à la fois sur leur principe même mais aussi sur la faiblesse du suivi des normes environnementales et sociales.
Control of the financial activities of the European Investment Bank - annual report 2018 (A9-0118/2020 - Bas Eickhout)
Protection of the European Union's financial interests - combating fraud - annual report 2018 (A9-0103/2020 - Joachim Kuhs)
La lutte contre la fraude est évidemment utile et légitime en elle-même. Cependant, au lieu de se concentrer sur la fraude concernant les fonds européens, et elle est conséquente, l'OLAF, l'organisme de lutte anti-fraude de la Commission a été instrumentalisée par les institutions de Bruxelles pour violer les droits des parlementaires d’opposition. Dès lors je me suis abstenue sur ce rapport.
Humanitarian situation in Venezuela and migration and refugee crisis (RC-B9-0211/2020, B9-0211/2020, B9-0212/2020, B9-0213/2020, B9-0214/2020, B9-0215/2020)
J’ai voté abstention.Derrière l’annonce d’un souci pour les réfugiés, les rédacteurs de cette résolution condamnent vertement le Président du Vénézuela Nicolas Maduro et répètent leur soutien intégral à son opposant Juan Guaido très discrédité, et se plaignent de la menace de renvoi de l’Ambassadeur de l’Union Européenne. Ils proposent que l’UE applique une mesure de rétorsion contre l’Ambassadeur du Venezuela. Un virage important car l’UE agirait ainsi directement comme un Etat et mettrait en péril l’équilibre diplomatique des Etats Membres.
Guidelines for the employment policies of the Member States (A9-0124/2020 -José Gusmão)
J’ai voté contre. Ces lignes directrices ont une nette orientation idéologique sociale-libérale. Elles participent directement à des dispositifs intrusifs comme le "Semestre Européen". Ils sont donc de nature à contraindre des États sur des sujets essentiels comme le gel du SMIC ou le rabotage des retraites des français.
Draft amending budget no 5 to the general budget 2020 Continuation of the support to refugees and host communities in response to the Syria crisis in Jordan, Lebanon and Turkey (A9-0127/2020 - Monika Hohlmeier)
J’ai voté contre l’octroi de 485 millions d’euros supplémentaires. La Turquie dispose de ressources financières suffisantes pour subvenir aux besoins des migrants installés sur son sol au regard des aides déjà reçues de l’Union européenne en contrepartie de la maitrise de ses frontières. Le chantage aux migrants doit désormais cesser et l’Union européenne ne doit plus verser de fonds à un pays qui entretient des relations douteuses avec les islamistes présents en Libye et au Moyen-Orient.
Objection pursuant to Rule 112(2) and (3): Certain uses of chromium trioxide (B9-0202/2020)
J’ai voté contre. Il s’agit d’un vote portant sur une substance indispensable à l’industrie européenne, notamment française (EADS, industrie automobile, PME/TPE, et d’autres secteurs) dont l’interdiction nuirait à sa compétitivité et l’obligerait à se fournir auprès de pays tiers qui, eux, ne seraient pas soumis à ces restrictions.
Objection pursuant to Rule 112(2) and (3): Active substances, including flumioxazine (B9-0203/2020)
J’ai voté pour. Soutenir cette objection fait partie du devoir de protéger la santé des citoyens européens, leurs garantir des produits agricoles de qualité, et renouer avec des pratiques plus paysannes face aux industrielles de la chimie. Depuis 17 ans la recherche a conclu que cette substance active, la flumioxazine est un produit toxique pour la reproduction de catégorie 1B et un perturbateur endocrinien probable et les agriculteurs utilisent de plus en plus des substituts.
A comprehensive European approach to energy storage (A9-0130/2020 - Claudia Gamon)
J’ai voté abstention. On s’attend, à ce que la décarbonation ait principalement lieu grâce à l’électrification des plus grands secteurs (énergie, transport, chauffage et refroidissement), ce qui entraînera une augmentation massive de la demande d’électricité. Le texte aurait dû insister sur l'énorme augmentation de la consommation d'énergie électrique qui nous attend, exigeant un système mixte de production et une capacité de stockage. L’étude d’options de stockage dans le secteur de l’énergie nucléaire serait nécessaire.
Revision of the guidelines for trans-European energy infrastructure (B9-0122/2020)
J’ai voté abstention. La résolution souligne la nécessite d’assurer l’approvisionnement énergétique et un niveau adéquat de compétitivité de l’industrie européenne. Je regrette que le critère transfrontalier dans l’évaluation des demandes de subventions se traduira par la mise à l’écart de financements pour des projets locaux et des infrastructures existantes contribuant à la décarbonation, au couplage sectoriel et à la conversion énergétique en France.
Conclusion of an EU - New Zealand agreement, under negotiation, on the exchange of personal data for fighting serious crime and terrorism (A9-0131/2020 - Annalisa Tardino)
J’ai voté pour. Cette recommandation du Parlement européen ayant pour auteur un député du groupe Identité et Démocratie dont est membre le RN préconise au Conseil et à la Commission européenne de conclure un accord sur l’échange de données entre l’Office européen de police (Europol) et la Nouvelle-Zélande afin de mieux lutter contre le terrorisme et la criminalité organisée.
Chemicals strategy for sustainability (B9-0222/2020)
J’ai voté pour. Cette stratégie de l'UE en matière de produits chimiques doit permettre de relever le niveau de protection de la santé et de l’environnement en limitant notamment au maximum l’exposition aux produits chimiques dangereux ou préoccupants, notamment les perturbateurs endocriniens et les pesticides.
Transitional provisions in order to address the impact of COVID-19 crisis (amendment of Regulation (EU) 2016/1628) (C9-0161/2020)
A comprehensive Union policy on preventing money laundering and terrorist financing – Commission's Action plan and other recent developments (B9-0207/2020)
Bien que plusieurs points soient positifs, cette résolution proposée est incomplète car elle oublie la question des ONG alors que certaines d'entre elles sont souvent impliquées dans le financement du terrorisme ou de blanchiment d'argent, notamment en rapport avec populations migrantes.Dès lors je me suis abstenue.
The EU’s public health strategy post-COVID-19 (RC-B9-0216/2020)
J’ai voté contre. Cette résolution, ne fait qu’un mea culpa très partiel suite à l’inefficience et de l’impréparation de l’UE face à cette crise inattendue. Elle n’en tire aucune conclusion face à ses responsabilités, et en appelle à encore plus de prérogatives. Loin d’avoir l’attitude d’autocritique et d’apprentissage que l’on pourrait espérer, l’UE saisit cette occasion de s’attribuer plus de pouvoir et de prérogatives.
Proposal for a Council decision authorising Portugal to apply a reduced rate of excise duty on certain alcoholic products produced in the autonomous regions of Madeira and the Azores (A9-0140/2020 - Younous Omarjee)
The EU’s role in protecting and restoring the world’s forests (A9-0143/2020 - Stanislav Polčák)
EU-African security cooperation in the Sahel region, West Africa and the Horn of Africa (A9-0129/2020 - Javier Nart)
Je me suis abstenue car s’il faut souligner le remarquable et objectif travail du rapporteur, sa vision générale et ses conclusions sont marquées par une confiance excessive dans la "Politique de sécurité et de défense commune" de l'Union européenne. Une réelle politique étrangère de l'UE paraît difficile tant les nations européennes ont des histoires, des amitiés et des ambitions différentes dans ce domaine.
Amending Decision No 1313/2013/EU on a Union Civil Protection Mechanism (A9-0148/2020 - Nikos Androulakis)
La solidarité entre États européens, entre peuples voisins ou proches voire lointains lors d'une catastrophe est formidable.Malheureusement, le texte proposé contient des formules étranges qui bureaucratisent cette solidarité européenne, voire envisage de placer certaines de nos capacités dans des pays tiers sous contrôle «international».Lors de la dernière catastrophe (COVID-19), la gouvernance par Bruxelles a été lente à démarrer et inefficace.Dès lors, j'ai dû m'opposer à ce texte.
Draft Council decision on the system of own resources of the European Union (A9-0146/2020 - José Manuel Fernandes, Valerie Hayer)
J'ai voté contre car toutes ces nouvelles taxes vont être répercuté sur les citoyens, en aggravant encore leur situation. Bien qu’on pourrait supporter la taxe sur des déchets d’emballages en plastique non recyclés, le montant de 2 euros par kg semble très injuste, surtout que c’est la France qui va être le premier payeur de ce taxe. Concernant le budget, il faut aussi en finir avec cette pratique de Bruxelles qui octroie des rabais budgétaires à certains pays riches mais jamais à la France.
Type approval of motor vehicles (Real Driving Emissions) (A9-0139/2020 - Esther de Lange)
Le facteur de conformité consiste à intégrer dans le calcul de la limite règlementaire d'émissions de NOx une marge d’erreur reflétant les écarts inévitables entre les tests en laboratoire ou en conduite réelle du fait d’incertitudes liées aux équipements de mesure portables (PEMS).Ce rapport propose la fin de cette concession pour 2022 alors que les facteurs techniques et scientifiques rendent impossible un niveau de précision parfait de mesure des émissions (qualité du carburant, multiplicité des dispositifs PEMS, etc.).Cet unilatéralisme idéologique abrupt du climatisme menace la compétitivité de l’industrie automobile française et sa capacité d’innovation. J'ai donc voté contre pour protéger nos emplois.
Just Transition Fund (A9-0135/2020 - Manolis Kefalogiannis)
Le Fonds de Transition Juste est le bras financier chargé de « verdir » les politiques de l’UE. Il est destiné à accompagner les régions les plus impactées par la fin des énergies fossiles en leur proposant une aide financière.Ce texte lie étroitement les financements du FTJ aux financements du FEDER et du FSE+ ; cela risque de grever les budgets de ces deux derniers fonds structurels, au détriment des projets ou des entreprises qui n’entrent pas dans les critères d’éligibilité au FTJ. Même si certains objectifs sont positifs, je me suis abstenue car la France ne sera assurément pas la première bénéficiaire des sommes prévues. Ce montant a, du reste, beaucoup varié (de 7,5 à 40 puis à 17,5 Mds €).
Arms export: implementation of Common Position 2008/944/CFSP (A9-0137/2020 - Hannah Neumann)
Le rapport est une tentative des instances de l’UE de mettre la main sur le secteur encore indépendant de l’industrie de défense. Il est pour nous inconcevable que les emplois français dépendent du bon vouloir d'autres acteurs ou d'une administration à Bruxelles alors qu'un certain pourcentage d'exportation est nécessaire pour que cette filière survive et que la France demeure indépendante ans ce domaine. J'ai donc voté contre.
Determination of a clear risk of a serious breach by the Republic of Poland of the rule of law
Shortage of medicines - how to address an emerging problem
Soutenir ce rapport s’inscrit dans une démarche que nous avons appelée de nos vœux. Le RN a été le premier parti de France à alerter sur les conséquences possibles/probables de la pandémie (pénuries de médicaments/dispositifs médicaux, défaut de système d’alerte efficace au niveau de l’UE, incapacité de l’UE à bloquer l’entrée du virus sur le territoire de l’UE ou du moins à le freiner). Sur ce point les autres partis reconnaissent désormais que nous avions raison de demander de relocaliser la production en Europe, et cela bien avant la pandémie.
Implementation of National Roma Integration Strategies: combating negative attitudes towards people with Romani background in Europe
Preparation of the Special European Council, focusing on the dangerous escalation and the role of Turkey in the Eastern-Mediterranean
Derrière une prétention de condamnation de la Turquie, cette résolution minore la menace et prend mollement la défense des États Membres malmenés par Erdogan. Cette résolution ne mentionne toujours pas de mettre un terme au processus d’adhésion de la Turquie à l’UE. Nous sommes donc contraints de voter contre.
Situation in Belarus
Sustainable rail market in view of COVID-19 outbreak
J'ai voté pour ce texte visant à modifier certaines règles de l'UE en matière de transport ferroviaire et d’infrastructure; cela afin d'éviter les risques de faillites et de défaillances d'entreprises ferroviaires, y compris d’opérateurs privés.Le texte prévoit un certain nombre de dispositions et de dérogations visant à apporter davantage de souplesse aux entreprises ferroviaires et aux États membres en matière de gestion de l’infrastructure et de paiement des redevances.
Draft amending budget no 8: Increase of payment appropriations for the Emergency Support Instrument to finance the COVID-19 vaccines strategy and for the impact of the Corona Response Investment Initiative Plus (C9-0290/2020 - Monika Hohlmeier)
J'ai voté pour.La santé publique est une priorité cardinale et la crise du Covid-19 a en effet souligné la grande dépendance de l'UE face aux laboratoires implantés en Chine. Il faudra rester vigilant sur la question des vaccins.En ce qui concerne l’Initiative CRII+, le relèvement des plafonds du cofinancement au niveau de 100%, ainsi que la flexibilité accrue, pourrait aider les Pays Membres dans la situation difficile de la crise. Il est donc important de soutenir ce projet, qui pourra profiter à tous les États Membres.
Objection pursuant to Rule 112(2) and (3) and (4)(c): Maximum residue levels for several substances including flonicamid, haloxyfop and mandestrobin (B9-0245/2020)
Covid-19: EU coordination of health assessments and risk classification and the consequences on Schengen and the single market (RC-B9-0257/2020)
The importance of urban and green infrastructure - European Year of Greener Cities 2022 (B9-0243/2020)
Amending Regulation (EU) No 514/2014 of the European Parliament and the Council, as regards the decommitment procedure
J'ai voté contre.Il s’agit d’un rapport technique accordant plus de temps que prévu aux États membres pour dépenser l’argent des contribuables européens en faveur de la submersion migratoire de l’Europe. Il serait beaucoup plus utile que cet argent soit utilisé pour lutter contre cette submersion et renforcer ainsi la sécurité des peuples européens.
Guadeloupe, French Guiana, Martinique and Réunion: indirect taxes on 'traditional' rum
AIEM tax in the Canary Islands
J’ai voté pour ce texte sur la même base que le taux réduit d’impôt sur le rhum en provenance des Antilles françaises et de la Réunion. L’Espagne demande à prolonger jusque 2027 la réduction / facilité fiscale qu’elle souhaite accorder à ses producteurs de boissons locales.Il s’agit ainsi de compenser le manque de compétitivité tenant à l’insularité et le fait de devoir exporter d’une île sur le continent les produits fabriqués.
Draft amending budget No 7/2020: Update of revenue (own resources)
J'ai voté contre. Malgré le Brexit, la France continue à contribuer plus à la quote-part anglaise que ses partenaires européens. Avec la chute des ressources douanières, la contribution de la France à Bruxelles augmente de 23,3 milliards à 24,7 milliards d'euros, soit une augmentation de 1,37 milliard.Le projet de budget rectificatif présenté est très en défaveur de la France. Les ristournes réalisées au profit de l'Autriche, de l'Allemagne, des Pays-Bas et de la Suède augmentent la contribution de la France sans raison. La France n’a pas à contribuer à elle seule pour le quart des montants additionnels de ce projet de budget rectificatif.
The Establishment of an EU Mechanism on Democracy, the Rule of Law and Fundamental Rights (A9-0170/2020 - Michal Šimečka)
La Commission s’écarte de plus en plus des traités européens sans vergogne (emprunts sur les marchés, fonctionnaires britanniques conservés malgré le Brexit…). La création d’un mécanisme de l’Union pour la démocratie, l’état de droit et les droits fondamentaux en est un autre exemple. J’ai donc voté contre la création d’un tel mécanisme car il doterait la Commission d’une nouvelle arme financière pour imposer un gouvernement des juges contre la volonté des peuples exprimée dans les urnes.
Implementation of the common commercial policy – annual report 2018 (A9-0160/2020 - Jörgen Warborn)
J’ai voté contre ce rapport car notre groupe se positionne contre les traités de libre échange et le dumping social et environnemental en général. Il nous apparaît donc difficile de voter en faveur d'un rapport qui se félicite de la signature du CETA avec le Canada et de l'accord de libre échange avec le Vietnam ou avec le Mercosur.
European Climate Law (A9-0162/2020 - Jytte Guteland)
J’ai voté contre cette résolution car le règlement proposé repose sur des bases scientifiques peu solides, à la faisabilité incertaine et aux conséquences économiques discutables pendant la crise actuelle. La loi Climat inscrit dans le droit européen des objectifs climatiques (aux horizons 2030, 2040, 2050) contraignants extrêmes (60% de réduction du CO2 d'ici à 2050) . Les ménages vont voir leurs coûts augmenter (voiture, énergie...). Il est prévu que 25 à 30 % des 1 800 milliards d’euros du budget européen 2021-2027 et du plan de relance seront affectés à la "lutte climatique". Lutter contre le vent au lieu de cibler l'innovation et la création d'emploi. Nous prônons à l’inverse une vraie politique industrielle et la relocalisation de nos entreprises. Produire localement, retrouver nos souverainetés et défendre l'Europe par des mesures contre le dumping social et environnemental.
Equivalence of field inspections carried out on cereal seed-producing crops and equivalence of cereal seed produced in Ukraine (A9-0164/2020 - Veronika Vrecionová)
J’ai voté contre ce texte autorisant l’équivalence des inspections sur pied des cultures productrices de semences de céréales effectuées et équivalence des semences de céréales produites en Ukraine.En effet, par cette mesure, la France sera durement touchée par les hausses d’importations induites par cette équivalence. Nous ne devons pas laisser notre filière agricole être déstabilisée par un ultra-libéralisme destructeur. Il en va de notre souveraineté alimentaire et des 20 000 exploitations françaises qui en dépendent.
Objection pursuant to Rule 112(2) and (3) and (4)(c): Specifications for titanium dioxide (E 171) (B9-0308/2020)
J’ai voté pour l’objection au dioxine de titane car nous souhaitons mettre en avant l’exigence de protection des consommateurs et la nécessité de voir cette règle appliqué pour tous au niveau de l’UE.Nous souhaitons également rappeler la Commission à l’ordre, en contestant une décision dangereuse et profondément abusive. En effet, la Commission essaie de prolonger l’espérance de vie d’un additif dans nos cosmétiques, dont la science a démontré qu’il est un cancérigène possible et qui fait l’objet d’une interdiction temporaire sur le marché français.
Objection pursuant to Rule 112(2) and (3) and (4)(c) : Maximum levels of acrylamide in certain foodstuffs for infants and young children (B9-0311/2020)
Il s’agit d’un dossier de santé publique, où les problématiques liées à l’alimentation transformée entrainent de plus en plus de déficiences chez les jeunes en bas âge et les enfants (perturbateur endocriniens, substances cancérigènes, sucres et graisses saturées, etc.…).J’ai voté pour cette objection s’opposant à la définition par la Commission de seuils acceptables de taux d’acrylamide dans les denrées alimentaires pour bébé bien trop élevés. Nous souhaitons des seuils plus bas en la matière pour préserver la santé de nos enfants européens.
The European Forest Strategy - The Way Forward (A9-0154/2020 - Petri Sarvamaa)
J’ai voté contre ce rapport d’initiative qui apparaît incongru au vu de la bonne gestion par les États membres des surfaces forestières en Europe et n’a donc pas lieu d’être car il s'agit d'une compétence nationale. J’ai en revanche voté pour la résolution alternative déposée par le groupe ID. Nous aurions souhaité en revanche que soit dénoncé l’importation illégale de bois ou encore des importations de produits agricoles issus de la déforestation.
Application of railway safety and interoperability rules within the Channel tunnel (C9-0212/2020)
J’ai voté pour ce texte, qui autorise la France à négocier directement avec le Royaume-Uni les contrats de concession ferroviaire privés relatifs à la maintenance, à la construction et à l’exploitation de la ligne transmanche. Par ce biais, la France retrouve ainsi une partie de souveraineté économique. De plus, cette proposition en matière de règles européennes de sécurité ferroviaire s’inscrit dans les standards européens déjà maîtrisés et déjà en place dans les processes d’exploitation ferroviaires de la SNCF.
Decision empowering France to conclude an international agreement concerning the Channel tunnel (C9-0211/2020)
Organic production: date of application and certain other dates (C9-0286/2020)
J’ai voté pour ce règlement relatif à la production biologique. En effet, il convient aujourd’hui de ne pas perturber un marché relativement fragile, et de laisser le temps à la filière bio de s’adapter au nouveau cadre juridique. De plus c’est la demande unanime des associations interprofessionnelles et des États membres.
The rule of law and fundamental rights in Bulgaria (B9-0309/2020)
L’objet de cette résolution est très clairement de nuire au gouvernement conservateur en place, et à son Premier ministre Borissov, coupable notamment de s’opposer de façon très ferme à l’immigration clandestine – ce qui est indiqué dans le texte. Borissov et son parti, le GERB, ont pourtant été réélus à plusieurs reprises et restent toujours en tête des sondages, ce qui témoigne d’un soutien populaire important.Dès lors, et même si je suis critique sur l’utilisation des impôts des Français en Bulgarie, j’ai voté contre cette résolution.
Digital Finance: emerging risks in crypto-assets - regulatory and supervisory challenges in the area of financial services, institutions and markets (A9-0161/2020 - Ondřej Kovařík)
Further development of the Capital Markets Union (CMU): improving access to capital market finance, in particular by SMEs, and further enabling retail investor participation (A9-0155/2020 - Isabel Benjumea Benjumea)
Je soutiens la simplification de la directive prospectus ou la création d’un cadre transfrontière pour le financement participatif. Cependant, j’ai voté contre ce rapport car les simplifications réclamées sont susceptibles de ne profiter qu’aux très grosses PME et d’oublier celles de plus petites tailles. De plus les modifications favorisent avant tout les concurrents anglo-saxons des grandes banques françaises. Un certain nombre de propositions sont tout à fait contestables, notamment l’égalité de traitement prudentiel en faveur de la titrisation synthétique ou la demande aux Etats de mettre fin aux retenues à la source (ingérence dans les affaires fiscales).
Reinforcing the Youth Guarantee (B9-0310/2020)
J’ai voté contre cette résolution car la Cour des comptes européenne a publié un rapport critiquant ce programme. Les manquements identifiés ne sont pas suffisamment pris en compte dans ce texte. De plus, nos jeunes en difficulté ne sont pas tous «migrants» et il est peut-être temps de réfléchir à réorienter nos priorités.
Amending Regulation (EU) No 168/2013 as regards specific measures on L-category end-of-series vehicles in response to the COVID-19 pandemic (A9-0190/2020 - Maria Grapini)
J'ai voté en faveur de cette proposition. Le 1er janvier 2021, la norme environnementale Euro 5 entrera en vigueur. En raison des mesures de confinement, les ventes n'ont pas pu avoir lieu pendant la haute saison, entre mars et juillet. Avec les nombreux véhicules supplémentaires en stock en raison de la crise du Covid-19, ceux-ci ne seraient plus conformes aux nouvelles normes environnementales, qui ne pourraient donc plus être vendus. Cette dérogation permettra d'éviter le démantèlement inutile de motos qui auraient été mises sur le marché si la pandémie de COVID-19 n'était pas survenue.
Mobilisation of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund: application EGF/2020/001 ES/Galicia shipbuilding ancillary sectors (A9-0192/2020 - Valerie Hayer)
J'ai voté en faveur de cette proposition. Le Fonds européen d’ajustement à la mondialisation vise à apporter une aide aux travailleurs licenciés et aux travailleurs indépendants en cessation d’activité. Il est important d'aider les travailleurs licenciés à faire face aux conséquences d'une mondialisation sauvage.
Discharge 2018: General budget of the EU - European Council and Council (A9-0189/2020 - Tomáš Zdechovský)
Digital Services Act: Improving the functioning of the Single Market (A9-0181/2020 - Alex Agius Saliba)
J'ai voté abstention sur ce texte. L’instrument envisagé étant une directive, et le modèle de gouvernance étant très décentralisé, il laisse de la liberté aux États. Cependant, elle est accablée de nombreuses propositions malvenues, notamment l'insistance sur la nécessité d'un libre-échange aussi complet que possible.
Digital Services Act: adapting commercial and civil law rules for commercial entities operating online (A9-0177/2020 - Tiemo Wölken)
Cela fait de nombreuses années que la gestion des contenus en ligne pose un problème aux plateformes et au législateur. Cette tendance législative est parfaitement illustrée par ce texte en deux lignes directrices :- un équilibre entre droit des internautes à la protection face à des contenus toxiques et leur droit d’expression- un partage des rôles entre un régulateur public qui contrôle les plateformes souveraines et le juge judiciaire qui tranche sur l’illégalité d’un contenu. J'ai donc voté pour ce texte.
Digital Services Act and fundamental rights issues posed (A9-0172/2020 - Kris Peeters)
J’ai voté contre. Ce texte comporte quelques points positifs comme l’interdiction du filtrage automatique des publications, la lutte contre la pédopornographie ou encore la suppression des contenus illégaux. Mais ce texte est dangereux car il encourage l'UE à restreindre la liberté d'expression sur les réseaux sociaux, ces derniers espaces où il existe encore une certaine liberté.
Framework of ethical aspects of artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies (A9-0186/2020 - Ibán García Del Blanco)
J'ai voté l'abstention sur ce rapport. La ligne générale est bonne puisqu'elle postule que les nouvelles technologies doivent rester sous la responsabilité et le contrôle de l'homme. Toutefois, L’inclusion des habituels concepts de ‘discours de haine, fake news et désinformation’ qui sont beaucoup trop vagues et subjectifs, ouvre la voie à de possibles censures sur la base de vérités dogmatiques décrétées et qui seraient par nature officielles et incontestables.
Civil liability regime for artificial intelligence (A9-0178/2020 - Axel Voss)
J’ai voté pour. Si nous voulons jouer un rôle majeur dans l'ère numérique, les institutions européennes doivent envoyer un message politique clair à notre industrie et à nos chercheurs qui travaillent sur les nouveaux systèmes d'intelligence artificielle. Ce cadre de responsabilité s'efforce de trouver un équilibre entre la protection des victimes potentielles de dommages et une marge de manœuvre suffisante pour le développement de nouvelles technologies, de nouveaux produits ou services.
Intellectual property rights for the development of artificial intelligence technologies (A9-0176/2020 - Stéphane Séjourné)
Ce rapport va dans le bon sens puisqu’il propose un cadre juridique opérationnel pour le développement de l’intelligence artificielle qui protégera l'innovation et la créativité nécessaire et encouragera les PME et start ups européennes en pointe dans ce domaine. Enfin, le rôle de l'intervention humaine est rappelé pour la programmation des dispositifs d'intelligence artificielle, la sélection des données d'entrée et l'application des résultats obtenus. J'ai donc voté pour ce texte.
Recommendation to the Council and the VPC/HR concerning the Implementation and governance of Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO) (A9-0165/2020 - Radosław Sikorski)
Ce rapport semble oublier que la disparité des capacités militaires des autres pays européens et de leur appétance pour une activité militaire ou diplomatique. Au vu de la récente quasi-confrontation entre la marine française et turque, on peut s'interroger sur l'aide apportée par nos partenaires européens. De Gaulle disait : « Si grand que soit le verre que l'on nous tend du dehors, nous préférons boire dans le nôtre, tout en trinquant aux alentours. J'ai donc voté contre ce texte.
Recommendation to the Council, the Commission and the VPC/HR on relations with Belarus (A9-0167/2020 - Petras Auštrevičius)
Ce rapport propose que l’Union européenne se comporte en marraine financière, politique et économique de l’opposition en Biélorussie. Quels que soit les qualités et défauts du président du Belarus, je suis circonspecte sur le concept d'ingérence dans la politique et les élections d'un pays étranger, J'ai voté contre ce texte.
Recommendation to the VPC/HR and to the Council in preparation of the 10th Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons Treaty (NPT) review process, nuclear arms control and nuclear disarmament options (A9-0020/2020 - Sven Mikser)
Obligations of the Commission in the field of visa reciprocity in accordance with Article 7 of Regulation (EU) 2018/1806 (B9-0339/2020)
L’UE et les États-Unis ont noué un accord sur l’exemption de visas pour leurs ressortissants concernant les visas dits de « court séjour » (durée maximale de 90 jours sur une période de 180). Cependant, les États-Unis ont remarqué que les ressortissants de certains États abusaient de cette exemption et avaient plus souvent tendance à dépasser la durée autorisée de séjour. Cinq pays de l’UE (Pologne, Chypre, Bulgarie, Roumanie, Croatie) ont ainsi, depuis 2016, été suspendus du programme d’exemption américain. J'ai donc voté contre ce texte.
Economic policies of the euro area 2020 (A9-0193/2020 - Joachim Schuster)
J'ai voté contre. Si le rapport dresse des constats justes concernant les conséquences de la COVID-19 sur les inégalités budgétaires, il propose des solutions aux antipodes de la liberté et de la souveraineté des États. Il semble établir un véritable coup de force contre l’indépendance des pays membres. Un coup de force justifié, en l’espèce, par la crise de la COVID-19. Le rapport poursuit sa logique destructrice d’emplois à travers le libre-échangisme et la lutte contre le protectionnisme.
Employment and social policies of the euro area 2020 (A9-0183/2020 - Klára Dobrev)
Gender Equality in EU’s foreign and security policy (A9-0145/2020 - Ernest Urtasun)
J'ai voté contre.Les relations internationales sont avant tout la prérogative des États souverains.Ce rapport vise à prétendre que la politique étrangère et de défense de l’UE devrait avoir pour principe directeur le niveau d’égalité femme-homme dans les pays tiers. Ainsi le texte demande explicitement des quotas de femmes (mais aussi des objectifs de diversité) à certains postes mais ne mets pas assez l'accent sur la situation des femmes du quotidien. Enfin le rapport demande la quasi exclusivité des politiques d’aides au développement aux programmes liés à l’égalité homme femme, alors que la santé publique, l'eau, l'alimentation, la maitrise des questions migratoires ou démographiques devraient également être des priorités.
Common agricultural policy: financing, management and monitoring (A8-0199/2019 - Ulrike Müller)
Sur ce texte, le sentiment est partagé. J'ai voté pour car il propose des améliorations évidentes, comme le système de conseils agricoles ou encore la réforme de la réserve de crise, qui doit devenir un élément essentiel dans la prévention et la gestion des crises. Mais le système de financement et de contrôle, fondé sur la conformité des États au respect d’objectifs précis laisse craindre une complexification administrative sans précédent pour le bénéficiaire final.
Common agricultural policy – amendment of the CMO and other Regulations (A8-0198/2019 - Eric Andrieu)
J'ai voté en faveur.En ce qui concerne la protection des indications géographiques, nous sommes d'accord avec la demande d'une protection accrue de nos produits et de notre savoir-faire, d'autant plus dans le contexte malheureux du libre-échange mondialisé. L'extension des autorisations de plantation de vignes profitera également à nos viticulteurs.
Introducing exceptional trade measures for countries and territories participating in or linked to the European Union's Stabilisation and Association process (A9-0175/2020 - Emmanuel Maurel)
J’ai voté contre ce rapport, ses préconisations favorisant un élargissement de l’UE vers les pays des Balkans, ce à quoi je suis clairement opposée. L’élargissement de l’UE n’a jamais été notre objectif. Le caractère libre-échangiste d’un tel rapport, ne permettant pas de contrôler les normes de production des fruits et légumes de ces pays, inscrit ce rapport contre les intérêts de nos producteurs et de nos consommateurs.
Objection pursuant to Rule 112: Genetically modified maize MON 87427 × MON 89034 × MIR162 × NK603 and genetically modified maize combining two or three of the single events MON 87427, MON 89034, MIR162 and NK603 (B9-0346/2020)
Objection pursuant to Rule 112: Genetically modified soybean SYHT0H2 (SYN-ØØØH2-5) (B9-0349/2020)
Objection pursuant to Rule 112: Genetically modified maize MON 87427 × MON 87460 × MON 89034 × MIR162 × NK603 and genetically modified maize combining two, three or four of the single events MON 87427, MON 87460, MON 89034, MIR162 and NK603 (B9-0347/2020)
EU/Senegal Fisheries Partnership Agreement: implementation of the Agreement. Protocol (A9-0180/2020 - Izaskun Bilbao Barandica)
J’ai voté contre cette recommandation, car elle ne fera qu’accroître la pression de la pêche dans des eaux sénégalaises d’ores et déjà très sollicitées. Les captures de merlu noir dans la zone de pêche du Sénégal et dans les zones de pêche de pays voisins ont contribué à accroître la pression de pêche - déjà menacée par un mauvais contrôle de la pêche illégal - sur ces populations. Il ne s’agit pas d’un modèle de pêche que je défends et les populations locales y sont également hostiles.
EU/Senegal Fisheries Partnership Agreement: implementation of the Agreement. Protocol (Resolution) (A9-0182/2020 - Izaskun Bilbao Barandica)
J’ai voté contre cette recommandation car elle ne fera qu’accroître la pression de la pêche dans des eaux sénégalaises d’ores et déjà très sollicitées. Les captures de merlu noir dans la zone de pêche du Sénégal et dans les zones de pêche de pays voisins ont contribué à accroître la pression de pêche - déjà menacée par un mauvais contrôle de la pêche illégal - sur ces populations.Il ne s’agit pas d’un modèle de pêche que je défends et les populations locales y sont également hostiles.
EU/Seychelles Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Agreement and Implementation. Protocol (2020-2026) (A9-0185/2020 - Caroline Roose)
EU/China Agreement: cooperation on and protection of geographical indications (A9-0199/2020 - Iuliu Winkler)
J’ai voté pour la proposition de résolution relative à la conclusion de l’accord entre l’Union européenne et le gouvernement de la République Populaire de Chine sur la coopération et la protection des indications géographiques car il permet une bien plus grande protection des indications géographiques qu’actuellement. Pour cette même raison, j’ai voté pour la recommandation associée.
EU/China Agreement: cooperation on and protection of geographical indications (Resolution) (A9-0202/2020 -Iuliu Winkler)
J’ai voté pour la proposition de résolution relative à la conclusion de l’accord entre l’Union européenne et le gouvernement de la République Populaire de Chine sur la coopération et la protection des indications géographiques car il permet une bien plus grande protection des indications géographiques qu’actuellement. Pour cette même raison, j’ai voté pour la recommandation associée.
Introduction of capacity limits for Eastern Baltic cod, data collection and control measures in the Baltic Sea and permanent cessation for fleets fishing for Eastern Baltic cod (A9-0093/2020 - Niclas Herbst)
Je me suis abstenue sur cette proposition de règlement. En effet, les objectifs poursuivis sont louables mais les moyens mis en œuvre peu efficients. De plus, je considère que cette mesure appliquée seule ne saurait être efficace quant à l’empêchement de la mortalité du cabillaud en mer Baltique car la surmortalité des cabillauds semble être due à des phénomènes complexes. La mortalité naturelle, à savoir les facteurs de mortalité autres que la pêche, est environ trois fois plus importante que la mortalité par pêche. Ce sujet requiert une approche globale à plus long terme prenant en compte les multiples autres facteurs influant sur cette surmortalité.
Enhanced cooperation between Public Employment Services (PES) (A9-0128/2020 - Manuel Pizarro)
Je me suis abstenue lors du vote sur ce texte car il comporte trop d’ambiguïtés et entrave la marge de manœuvre des États membres dans ce domaine. Le budget alloué à ce projet n’est par ailleurs pas chiffré. Enfin, cette proposition forcerait une politique semblable pour des États membres alors que leurs réalités nationales du marché de l’emploi sont très différentes.
General budget of the European Union for the financial year 2021 - all sections (A9-0206/2020 - Pierre Larrouturou, Olivier Chastel)
J’ai voté contre cette proposition de budget car l’emploi de celui-ci est annoncé comme servant de nombreuses causes auxquelles je suis opposée comme l’accueil des migrants clandestins ou l’aide à la Turquie. De plus, même lorsque les causes recherchées sont acceptables ce budget est constamment dilapidé dans des procédures de dépense inefficientes.
Sustainable Europe Investment Plan - How to finance the Green Deal (A9-0198/2020 -Siegfried Mureşan, Paul Tang)
J’ai voté contre ce rapport. Sur le fond, je suis favorable pour en finir avec la civilisation du plastique. Mais le rapport propose de financer la transition verte de manière dirigiste pour les États, par exemple en fixant des objectifs contraignants sur la part des dépenses qui y seront consacrées. Réserver 30 % des dépenses aux questions climatiques paraît démesuré. Quant à lever des impôts supplémentaires sur les Français pour trouver les 662 à 1 000 milliards d’euros estimés nécessaires d’ici 2030, j’y suis opposée.
InvestEU Programme (A9-203/2020 - José Manuel Fernandes, Irene Tinagli)
Je me suis abstenue sur ce texte.Plusieurs éléments sont positifs: la création d’un fonds européen stratégique, les engagements envers les PME... Mais ce programme financera également des entreprises et projets de pays non européens: Turquie et pays balkaniques «en voie d’adhésion», ce que nous condamnons fermement.
The impact of Covid-19 measures on democracy, fundamental rights and rule of law (B9-0343/2020)
Mobilisation of the European Union Solidarity Fund: assistance to Croatia and Poland in relation to a natural disaster and advances to Croatia, Germany, Greece,Hungary, Ireland, Portugal and Spain in relation to a public health emergency (A9-0221/2020 - Olivier Chastel)
Draft amending budget No 9/2020: assistance to Croatia, Poland, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Portugal and Spain (A9-0223/2020 - Monika Hohlmeier)
Tackling homelessness rates in the European Union (B9-0363/2020)
En dépit de certains éléments qui auraient mérités de figurer dans cette résolution sur le sans-abrisme commel’importante présence de sans-papiers sur le sol européen par exemple, il s’agit d’un texte équilibré.En réclamant une prise en compte plus importante des sans-abris dans les politiques européennes sans pour autant impliquer un transfert de compétences nationales vers l’UE, j'ai voté en faveur de ce texte qui va dans le bon sens.
The Schengen system and measures taken during the COVID-19 crisis (B9-0362/2020)
Ce texte prend une position dogmatique en faveur de la librecirculation, sans tenir compte des possibilités de restrictions temporaires permises par le système Schengen. Il s'attaque à la souveraineté des États tout en mettant en péril la santé de leurs citoyens. En outre, la demande d’un retour aux frontières pleinement ouvertes de l’espace Schengen, moins d'un mois après l'attentat de Nice perpétré par un migrant fraîchement débarqué à Lampedusa, est tout à fait indécente. J'ai donc voté contre.
Markets in financial instruments: amending information requirements, product governance requirements and position limits to help the recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic (A9-0208/2020 - Markus Ferber)
Le texte, peu clair de par sa forte complexité, modifie les obligations de reporting des opérateurs financiers vis à vis de leurs clients et la réglementation actuelle concernant les obligations des professionnels sur les marches de dérivés et de matières premières. Certaines mesures sont sans doute souhaitables, mais on voit mal le rapport avec le Covid, qui est ici prétexte à une accélération des réformes attendues par le secteur financer.Le secteur bancaire a reçu beaucoup depuis mars sans avoir en contrepartie d’obligations claires quant aux prêts à l’économie réelle, la moderation sur les dividendes ou les bonus, par exemple. Enfin, la revision du texte est déjà engagéeet mérite mieux qu’un examen rapide comme ici. J'ai donc voté contre
Towards a more sustainable single market for business and consumers (A9-0209/2020 - David Cormand)
Ce rapport en faveur d’un marché unique plus durable pour les entreprises et les consommateurs prône plusieurs orientations à suivre, que je soutiens dans leur ensemble car je me situe avant tout dans l’optique de la défense du consommateur. Le modèle actuel d’obsolescence programmée et de surconsommation de produits, que l’on rachète plutôt que de les réparer car c’est « moins cher », les Français n’en veulent plus. La stratégie de protectionnisme intelligent et de relocalisation que je soutiens passe nécessairement par une montée en gamme des produits et un étiquetage obligatoire des origines et des conditions dans lesquelles ils ont été fabriqués.Je soutiens ce rapport car je suis contre l’obsolescence programmée et pour une économie circulaire avec la réparabilité et la recyclabilité des produits, porteuse d’emplois au sein nos territoires. Le rapport suggère d’étendre les durées de garantie légale et de garantir une période minimum obligatoire de mise à disposition des pièces détachées ainsi qu’un étiquetage obligatoire de durabilité et de « réparabilité », ce qui est positif.
Addressing product safety in the single market (A9-0207/2020 - Marion Walsmann)
La directive relative à la sécurité générale des produits, datant de 2001, n'est pas adaptée aux défis de sécurité spécifiquesliés aux achats en ligne et à la mondialisation des marchés du 21e siècle.Bien que ce rapport n'aborde pas l'hypermondialisation comme un problème en soi, il souligne néanmoins notamment : 1/ que la protection des consommateurs doit être renforcée, notamment en ce qui concerne les produits achetés en ligne et importés de pays tiers, 2/ il faut garantir des conditions de concurrence équitables entre les entreprises européennes et celles des pays tiers en ce qui concerne le respect des règles de l'UE sur la sécurité des produits.Les suggestions du rapport concernant les contrôles et la surveillance supplémentaires des produits importés contribueront également à lutter contre la concurrence déloyale des entreprises de pays tiers qui sont en concurrence avec les entreprises françaises et européennes. C’est une bonne base en attendant la prochaine révision de la Directive.
Strengthening media freedom: the protection of journalists in Europe, hate speech, disinformation and the role of platforms (A9-0205/2020 - Magdalena Adamowicz)
A New Industrial Strategy for Europe (A9-0197/2020 - Carlo Calenda)
Cette stratégie s’appuie globalement sur la dette contractée pour la relance européenne (qui justifiera plus tard les ressources propres, car il faudra bien rembourser nos créanciers !), mais aussi sur la « grande réinitialisation » post-Covid qui veut annihiler toutes initiatives nationales au profit d’un grand pilotage depuis Bruxelles (qui imposera à tous ,les réformes "nécessaires").
Improving development effectiveness and efficiency of aid (A9-0212/2020 - Tomas Tobé)
L’objectif de ce texte ainsi que certaines dispositions relatives à l’efficacité de l’aide sont louables et suscite notresoutien.J'ai voté pour suite à l’adoption de l’amendement 1, qui conditionne les aides au développement au contrôle migratoire - une revendication de longue date du RN et de ses alliés du groupe ID.
Elimination of customs duties on certain products (A9-0217/2020 - Bernd Lange)
L’accord prévoit la suppression des droits de douanes sur certains produits dont le homard. Cette suppression neprésente aucune menace pour la production française L’accord est plutôt perçu comme un premier pas pour apaiser les tensions commerciales avec les Etats-Unis Il semblerait judicieux d'envoyer un signal positif aux US afin d'affirmer que nous souhaitons avoir de bonnes relations commerciales et conclure des accords là où cela est utile et ne risque pas de créer des problématiques ou de distorsions sur le marché français et européen. J'ai donc voté pour.
Union General Export Authorisation for the export of certain dual-use items from the Union to the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (C9-0345/2020 - Bernd Lange)
EU Trade Policy Review (B9-0370/2020)
Malgré quelques poussées globalistes, le texte présente plusieurs améliorations sur la vision du Parlement européen de la politique commerciale que nous ne pouvons que saluer: les accords de libre-échange ne sont point cités. Une attention particulière est portée à la préservation de la compétitivité de l’industrie européenne avec une mention pour l’agriculture également. Le concept de relocalisation est introduit, certes de manière légère mais la mention est déjà une avancéemajeure. Le texte dénonce quelques pratiques déloyales employées par certains partenaires et souligne le besoin d’avoirrecours à des instruments de défense commerciale adéquats. Une attention particulière est portée aux PME. J'ai donc voté pour.
Management, conservation and control measures applicable in the Inter-American Tropical Tuna Convention area (A9-0231/2020 - João Ferreira)
J'ai voté pour. Il s’agit essentiellement de modifications techniques relatives à la conservation et la gestion des stocks qui ne sont pas intrusives pour les professionnels. Il y a par exemple des précisions sur les protocoles de sécurité quant au scellement des cuves qui servent à conserver le poisson ou encore la réaffirmation de la nécessité de protéger certaines espèces menacées de requins.
Conclusion of the EU-Japan Civil Aviation Safety Agreement (A9-0239/2020 - Cláudia Monteiro de Aguiar)
J'ai voté pour. La proposition fixe le cadre réglementaire en matière de sécurité aérienne entre l’Union européenne et le Japon, garantissant ainsi une meilleure sécurité des passagers européens au-delà même de l’espace aérien européen et selon des protocoles de sécurité établis sur des standards européens. Par ailleurs, cet accord permettra de réduire les formalités administratives en matière et de contrôle de conformité et de certificats délivrés à la suite de procédures spécifiques menées par les autorités compétentes ; cette simplification administrative permettra aux compagnies aériennes européennes de gagner du temps et de réaliser des économies tout en garantissant des niveaux de conformité et de sécurité aérienne élevés.
Transitional provisions for support from the EAFRD and EAGF in the years 2021 and 2022 (A9-0101/2020 - Elsi Katainen)
Il est difficile d’accepter qu’une part importante des crédits du plan de relance - en théorie purement économique - soit obligatoirement consacrée aux actions climatiques (37 %). Les États membres devraient avoir la liberté de décider de l’affectation de ce nouveau budget, en fonction de leurs besoins, les conséquences de la crise ayant été très variables selon les pays.Malgré tout, ce paquet de mesures est nécessaire et urgent. La prolongation des règles actuelles de la PAC en 2021 et le déblocage des crédits qui en découlent est une décision de bon sens qui permettra d’éviter toute rupture brutale dans le financement de la politique agricole.
European Year of Rail (2021) (A9-0191/2020 - Anna Deparnay-Grunenberg)
J'ai voté pour. La proposition fixe les principales priorités du secteur ferroviaire, en particulier en ce qui concerne la technologie et l'innovation, y compris la technologie ERTMS spécifique à la gestion du trafic ferroviaire entre les États membres, contribuant ainsi à l’amélioration de la sécurité ferroviaire.
Draft amending budget No 10/2020: Increase of payment appropriations and other adjustments to expenditure and revenue (A9-0252/2020 - Monika Hohlmeier)
Ce projet de budget rectificatif englobe plusieurs lignes budgétaires positives comme l’aide pour les agriculteurs et les entrepreneurs. Cependant, il comporte de nombreuses lignes budgétaires inacceptables comme ces 110 millions d'euros pour l'Albanie et ses voisins (Bosnie-Herzégovine, au Kosovo...) ou les 221 millions destinés aux pays du sud de la méditerranée. Dès lors, je me suis abstenue.
Additional resources in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic: REACT-EU (A9-0150/2020 - Andrey Novakov, Constanze Krehl)
Council regulation laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2021 to 2027 (A9-0260/2020 - Jan Olbrycht, Margarida Marques)
Ces propositions prévoient un montant total de 1 100 milliards d’euros pour le CFP (cadre financier pluriannuel) pour la période 2021-2027 et un instrument de relance supplémentaire, appelé Next Generation EU, doté de 750 milliards d’euros.La France est deuxième contributrice nette au budget européen. Autre point négatif, les rabais budgétaires accordés à cinq pays dont l'Allemagne.Concernant le plan Next generation UE, il n’est pas acceptable que la France contribue à hauteur de plus de 65 milliards d’euros pour ne recevoir que 40 milliards d’euros.La France est donc la grande perdante sur les deux volets (budget, plan de relance).J'ai donc voté contre.
Interinstitutional Agreement on budgetary discipline, on cooperation in budgetary matters and on sound financial management, as well as on new own resources, including a roadmap towards the introduction of new own resources (A9-0261/2020 - Esteban González Pons)
A new strategy for European SMEs (A9-0237/2020 - Paolo Borchia)
Il y a un besoin immédiat de rétablir la liquidité des PME pour assurer leur fonctionnement de base. En effet, la survie des PME à la sortie de la crise sanitaire dépendra d’une prise de décision rapide, d’un financement adéquat et d’une disponibilité rapide des liquidités. Il est également nécessaire de réduire les charges réglementaires pour améliorer l’accès au financement national des PME.Ce rapport souligne l’importance des modèles bancaires traditionnels, y compris les petites banques régionales et les coopératives d’épargne. Le texte invite la BEI à collaborer plus étroitement avec les intermédiaires financiers des États membres afin de diffuser les informations pertinentes aux PME et ainsi améliorer leur accès au financement. De plus, ce rapport veut garantir un accès non discriminatoire aux prêts bancaires pour les PME. J'ai donc voté pour.
Implementation of the Dublin III Regulation (A9-0245/2020 - Fabienne Keller)
Ce rapport voudrait enterrer Dublin III et le remplacer par un nouveau système de répartition obligatoire des migrants tel que proposé pour Dublin IV ou le pacte de l’UE sur la migration et l’asile. Cette piste ne ferait pourtant qu’encourager toujours plus d’immigration. La seule solution est faite de fermeté, de dissuasion et de protection des frontières extérieures de l’Europe. J'ai donc voté contre.
Objection pursuant to Rule 112(2) and (3): Genetically modified soybean MON 87751 × MON 87701 × MON 87708 × MON 89788 (B9-0411/2020)
Objection pursuant to Rule 112(2) and (3): Genetically modified maize MON 87427 × MON 89034 × MIR162 × MON 87411 and genetically modified maize combining two or three of the single events MON 87427, MON 89034, MIR162 and MON 87411 (B9-0413/2020)
Objection pursuant to Rule 112(2) and (3): Genetically modified maize MIR604 (SYN-IR6Ø4-5) (B9-0414/2020)
Objection pursuant to Rule 112(2) and (3): Genetically modified maize MON 88017 (MON-88Ø17-3) (B9-0415/2020)
Objection pursuant to Rule 112(2) and (3): Genetically modified maize MON 89034 (MON-89Ø34-3) (B9-0416/2020)
Union action for the European Capitals of Culture for the years 2020 to 2033 (A9-0201/2020 - Željana Zovko)
Implementation of the EU water legislation (B9-0401/2020)
Cette proposition de résolution va dans le bon sens notamment en raison des nombreuses mesures en faveur de la biodiversité et des écosystèmes aquatiques. En outre, elle intègre la question des produits chimiques et des polluants. Cependant, un point sensible est à mettre en avant. Il s’agit des infractions susceptibles d’être commises par les États membres par rapport à la directive-cadre sur l’eau. Les dérogations sont supprimées dans le texte final alors que certaines exceptions sont utiles.
Amendments to the Rules of Procedure in order to ensure the functioning of Parliament in extraordinary circumstances (A9-0194/2020 - Gabriele Bischoff)
Certain aspects of railway safety and connectivity with regard to the Channel Tunnel (C9-0379/2020)
J'ai voté pour afin de permettre aux compagnies ferroviaires françaises et britanniques de continuer à exploiter le tunnel sous la Manche au-delà de la fin de la période de transition liée au Brexit. La proposition vise à proroger de 9 mois supplémentaires la validité des certificats et licences de sécurité concernant la liaison ferroviaire Eurotunnel entre la France et le Royaume Uni, le temps pour les deux pays de renégocier un accord bilatéral en matière de gestion d’infrastructures ferroviaires.
Deliberations of the Committee on Petitions 2019 (A9-0230/2020 - Kosma Złotowski)
Ce texte est un rapport d’activité et nous pouvons donc le soutenir. Notons toutefois que le droit de pétition reste largement méconnu des citoyens des pays membres de l’Union, et que cet outil est surtout utilisé par des groupes de pression politiques dans le but de pousser leurs revendications. Dans ces conditions, on imagine mal que le droit de pétition soit un moyen efficace de pallier le déficit démocratique dont souffre l’Union européenne.
Agreement for co-operation in dealing with pollution of the North Sea by oil and other harmful substances (Bonn Agreement): extension of its material and geographical scope of application (A9-0268/2020 - Pascal Canfin)
European Arrest Warrant and surrender procedures between Member States (A9-0248/2020 - Javier Zarzalejos)
Ce texte étend le mandat d'arrêt européen, un outil de coopération judiciaire plutôt efficace, ce qui est positif. Cependant certaines notions peuvent parfois être ambigües (état de droit...). Un double contrôle de la criminalité dans ces domaines pour vérifier que les deux États considèrent que les faits relèvent d’une infraction pénale. Dès lors je me suis abstenue.
Strengthening the single market: the future of free movement of services (A9-0250/2020 - Morten Løkkegaard)
Même si la proposition d’un numéro européen unique de sécurité sociale, pour lutter contre les fraudes professionnelles pouvait être intéressante, j’ai voté contre rapport.Malgré le bilan calamiteux pour la France de 30 ans de politiques dictées par Bruxelles, ce rapport appelle à y mettre en place un nouvel organisme de surveillance chargé de punir les États européens dans tous les domaines : « la task-force sur le respect de l’application des règles du marché unique » (SMET). Ce rapport critique aussi sans vergogne l’« intérêt général », un principe pourtant fondateur et au service des citoyens. J’ai donc voté contre ce rapport
Achieving an effective policy legacy for the European Year of Cultural Heritage (A9-0210/2020 - Dace Melbārde)
J’ai voté pour ce texte: l’Union devrait jouer un rôle plus actif dans la promotion de la restauration, de la conservation et de la protection du patrimoine culturel, ce que nous soutenons également. Je regrette que le texte rappelle «la nécessité d’inclure à part entière le patrimoine culturel des minorités présentes en Europe dans toute réflexion sur le patrimoine européen», mais ne définit par ces minorités (art. 4).
Artificial intelligence: questions of interpretation and application of international law (A9-0001/2021 - Gilles Lebreton)
J’ai voté pour ce rapport préparé par un député RN définissant les lignes directrices sur l'usage de l'intelligence artificielle à des fins militaires ainsi que, notamment, dans les secteurs de la santé et de la justice. Dans le domaine militaire, les systèmes d’armes létales autonomes devraient être soumis à un contrôle humain, étant donné que c'est aux humains qu'il incombe ici de décider entre la vie et la mort. Lorsqu’elle est utilisée dans le domaine de la santé publique (par exemple pour la chirurgie assistée par robot, les prothèses intelligentes, la médecine prédictive), les données personnelles des patients doivent être protégées et le principe de l'égalité de traitement doit être respecté.
Revision of the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T) guidelines (A9-0251/2020 - Jens Gieseke)
Monitoring the application of EU law 2017, 2018 and 2019 (A9-0270/2020 -Sabrina Pignedoli)
J’ai voté contre ce rapport qui traite peu du sujet essentiel de la transposition du droit de l’UE en droit national mais insiste sur un catalogue de sujets: discrimination contre les «groupes vulnérables», crise financière, vente de la citoyenneté européenne (comme cela se pratique à Malte par exemple), directives environnementales, réforme du droit d’asile européen, et l’on peut dès lors légitimement se poser la question du sens même de ce texte.
Implementation of the Common Foreign and Security Policy - annual report 2020 (A9-0266/2020 -David McAllister)
Après le fiasco de la guerre en Iraq, il paraît difficile de concevoir une politique militaire qui serait décidée à Bruxelles à la majorité. Avec ce système majoritaire, la France aurait dû bombarder les Iraquiens lors de la deuxième guerre du Golfe. Quant à l’aide de nos partenaires européens, la situation au Mali montre ce que l’on peut en attendre. Enfin, la plupart des députés approuvant ce rapport soutiennent aussi l’entrée de la Turquie et de l’Albanie dans l’Union européenne. J’ai donc voté contre ce rapport.
Implementation of the Common Security and Defence Policy - annual report 2020 (A9-0265/2020 - Sven Mikser)
Après le fiasco de la guerre en Iraq, il paraît difficile de concevoir une politique militaire qui serait décidée à Bruxelles à la majorité. Avec ce système majoritaire, la France aurait dû bombarder les Iraquiens lors de la deuxième guerre du Golfe. Quant à l’aide de nos partenaires européens, la situation au Mali montre ce que l’on peut en attendre. Enfin, la plupart des députés approuvant ce rapport soutiennent aussi l’entrée de la Turquie et de l’Albanie dans l’Union européenne. J’ai donc voté contre ce rapport.
Human Rights and Democracy in the World and the EU policy on the matter - annual report 2019 (A9-0259/2020 - Isabel Santos)
L’UE se donne une mission prosélyte à ce sujet, affirmant qu’elle a pour mission de propager les droits de l’homme par le monde. On note cependant qu’elle en fait fi quand des intérêts industriels sont en jeu (traité avec le Vietnam, statut favorisé GSP + accordé au Pakistan pour ses exportations textiles malgré son attitude ambigüe avec les islamistes...). J’ai donc voté contre.
Measures to promote the recovery of fish stock above MSY (A9-0264/2020 - Caroline Roose)
The latest developments in the National Assembly of Venezuela (RC-B9-0056/2021, B9-0056/2021, B9-0060/2021, B9-0062/2021, B9-0064/2021, B9-0065/2021)
L’Union européenne se donne une mission prosélyte à ce sujet, affirmant qu’elle a pour mission de propager les droits de l’homme par le monde. On note cependant qu’elle en fait fi quand des intérêts industriels sont en jeu (traité avec le Vietnam, statut favorisé SPG + accordé au Pakistan pour ses exportations textiles malgré son attitude ambiguë avec les islamistes...). J’ai donc voté contre.
Decent and affordable housing for all (A9-0247/2020 - Kim Van Sparrentak)
The right to disconnect (A9-0246/2020 - Alex Agius Saliba)
Les principes directeurs du rapport, à savoir la préservation de la vie privée, surtout depuis l’explosion du télétravail avec tous les risques psycho-sociaux observés depuis le confinement, vont dans le bon sens. Le problème de ce rapport est qu’il est totalement en dehors des compétences de l’Union européenne. Ce qui empêche donc de soutenir pleinement le rapport. Je me suis abstenue.
Reforming the EU list of tax havens (B9-0052/2021)
J’ai voté pour réformer la liste des paradis fiscaux de l’Union européenne. La résolution rappelle au passage que la liste ne concerne que les pays tiers, mais que plusieurs pays membres ne remplissent pas les critères de coopération loyale ou de fiscalité équitable (sans les citer, on reconnait le Luxembourg, l’Irlande et les Pays-Bas).
Mitigating the consequences of earthquakes in Croatia (RC-B9-0057/2021, B9-0057/2021, B9-0058/2021, B9-0059/2021, B9-0061/2021, B9-0063/2021)
Plusieurs séismes ont frappé la Croatie en mars et en décembre 2020, occasionnant des dégâts considérables. On compte 8 morts, 36 blessés, 26 000 bâtiments endommagés, dont 1 900 inutilisables, et autant de dommages agricoles ou infrastructurels. Il coûterait 11,5 milliards d’euros à la Croatie. J’ai voté pour autoriser le versement de 683,7 millions d’euros par l’Union européenne.
Control of the acquisition and possession of weapons (codification) (A9-0010/2021 - Magdalena Adamowicz)
Cette révision est illégitime puisqu’elle n’est pas proportionnée aux objectifs visés qui sont de combattre les terroristes islamistes frappant l’Europe et d’assécher leurs sources privilégiées d’approvisionnement d’armes à feu mais qu’à l’inverse elle est injuste car elle ne vise qu’à restreindre les libertés publiques des honnêtes gens dans leurs démarches pour l’acquisition et la détention d’armes à feu, démarches déjà particulièrement règlementées. Accepter cette codification serait symboliquement valider ladite révision a posteriori.Pour cette raison, j’ai voté contre.
Establishing the Recovery and Resilience Facility (A9-0214/2020 - Eider Gardiazabal Rubial, Siegfried Mureşan, Dragoș Pîslaru)
Les investissements visant la relance après la crise semblent tout à fait indispensables pour la relance de nos économies. L’idée du Fonds pour la reprise me semble juste, les technicités ainsi que les coûts pour la France sont certes d'ampleur mais compte tenu de la situation exceptionnelle, j'ai voté pour.
European Central Bank – annual report 2020 (A9-0002/2021 - Sven Simon)
La BCE, comme la FED aux États-Unis, est devenue le principal bailleur de fonds des États, contrôlant par la masse de ses injections le sort des gouvernements et la faisabilité des politiques publiques, en permettant ou non le financement des déficits.Or, un tel pouvoir ne peut à mes yeux s’exercer sans contrepartie démocratique. L’indépendance de la BCE, érigée en dogme, peut mener à l’arbitraire et grandes sont mes craintes d’une telle prise de pouvoir sur le destin de mes concitoyens.J’ai voté contre.
New Circular Economy Action Plan: see Minutes (A9-0008/2021 - Jan Huitema)
Je soutiens, ainsi que mes collègues depuis le mandat précédent, cette initiative qui peut contribuer à briser un peu plus la logique de concurrence mondialisée et de division internationale du travail. Il s’agit également d’accompagner favorablement une volonté de sécuriser notre approvisionnement en ressources stratégiques et de transformer une production orientée vers le l’usage unique et jetable en une production orientée vers des produits de qualité, dont l’usage est durable, et qui peuvent être valorisés lorsqu’ils sont en fin de vie. J’ai voté pour.
Implementation of the Anti-Trafficking Directive (A9-0011/2021 - Juan Fernando López Aguilar, María Soraya Rodríguez Ramos)
Il est indispensable de lutter contre le trafic d’êtres humains et dans ces trafics internationaux une coordination européenne est logique. Le rapport veut donner priorité à la lutte contre l’exploitation sexuelle. Il pointe également le recrutement en ligne de potentielles victimes. Il propose davantage d’intégration et de coordination européenne sur ces sujets, veut renforcer les sanctions pour l’utilisation délibérée des services de la traite et conseille, encore à juste titre, de « suivre l’argent » issu de la traite pour mieux lutter contre ce phénomène. J’ai voté pour.
Implementation of Article 43 of the Asylum Procedures Directive (A9-0005/2021 - Erik Marquardt)
Ce rapport est une attaque en règle contre les États qui défendent leurs frontières et, par-là, protègent les frontières extérieures de l’Europe. Il préconise dans les faits de détruire la « procédure à la frontière » qui permet de traiter les demandes d’asile sans laisser entrer les migrants sur le sol européen. Je combats toute la philosophie globale qui est déployée dans ce texte. J’ai voté contre.
Public access to documents for the years 2016-2018 (A9-0004/2021 - Ioan-Rareş Bogdan)
Ce texte promeut la transparence du processus législatif européen et de l’UE en général et demande notamment à ce que le contenu des contrats d’achat de vaccins contre la Covid-19 conclus par la Commission européenne soit divulgué, comme le réclamait notre groupe politique européen ID.Contrairement au texte voté en commission, ce texte voté en plénière ne critique plus de manière exagérée Frontex, invite la Commission à divulguer entièrement ces contrats de fourniture de vaccins et se félicite de l’aboutissement très récent de l’accord interinstitutionnel sur un registre de transparence obligatoire que le Conseil a donc validé. M'étant engagé personnellement sur cette demande de transparence des contrats de fournitures des vaccins, j'ai voté pour.
Reducing inequalities with a special focus on in-work poverty (A9-0006/2021 - Özlem Demirel)
Même si ce rapport passe à côté de ce qu’il aurait pu être, à savoir un texte fort sur les problèmes de l’immigration, des délocalisations, des traités de libre-échange qui organisent la concurrence déloyale et le dumping social à l’égard des travailleurs européens, les conséquences dramatiques de la crise actuelle qui frappe de plein fouet les travailleurs pauvres m’obligent à voter en sa faveur, même si je déplore son ampleur bien trop limitée. J’ai voté pour.
The impact of Covid-19 on youth and on sport (B9-0115/2021)
Ce texte est positif et part d’un bon sentiment: protéger les jeunes et sauver les différents secteurs sportifs (notamment le secteur amateur) fortement touchés par la COVID-19. Il propose par exemple d’accroître les investissements dans les solutions numériques, de soutenir psychologiquement les jeunes, d’offrir des rémunérations décentes, de préserver les structures sportives et d’associer les autorités locales. Il rappelle l’importance du sport à différents niveaux: la santé physique et psychologique, la promotion des valeurs et l’engagement civique. Même si je déplore certaines tournures de phrases permettant une interprétation favorable à l’immigration illégale, je soutiens ce texte. J’ai voté pour.
Markets in financial instruments (A9-0208/2020 - Markus Ferber)
Le système financier aura obtenu beaucoup pendant cette crise, non seulement des conditions de financement privilégiées et un filet de sécurité quasi-illimité par les prêts et rachats massifs de la BCE, mais également par tout un paquet de mesures d’allègement des contraintes réglementaires et prudentielles. Or ce que ne prévoit pas assez ce texte, c’est la contrepartie qu’il faudrait juridiquement rendre contraignante d’une manière ou d’une autre: l’obligation de prêter aux entreprises, pour peu qu’elles restent solvables, ou encore l’encadrement des politiques de dividendes ou de bonus. Ainsi je m’oppose à ce texte qui fait la part belle aux grandes banques sans contrepartie suffisante à mes yeux. J’ai voté contre.
EU Recovery prospectus and targeted adjustments for financial intermediaries to help the recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic (A9-0228/2020 - Ondřej Kovařík)
Ce Prospectus de relance de l’Union apporte des simplifications pour les émetteurs ainsi que pour les intermédiaires financiers. La taille du document serait réduite, se concentrant sur les informations essentielles. Elles devraient permettre aux investisseurs, en particulier les non-professionnels, de prendre une décision d’investissement en connaissance de cause plus facilement. Ces propositions me semblent ainsi de bon sens.J’ai voté pour.
Slot utilisation rules at Union airports: temporary relief (C9-0420/2020)
Air France ayant connu une chute vertigineuse de son chiffre d’affaires, liée à l’effondrement du trafic aérien mondial, il est essentiel que la compagnie puisse bénéficier de l’assouplissement des règles d’attribution des créneaux horaires, pour lui permettre de conserver son positionnement commercial dans les aéroports de l’Union européenne et de rester compétitive.Pour cette raison, j’ai voté pour.
Temporary measures concerning the validity of certificates and licences (Omnibus II) (C9-0004/2021)
Cette proposition permet une reconnaissance mutuelle, par les États membres, des mesures nationales adoptées pour garantir la validité des licences, permis et certificats non renouvelés dans les temps en raison de l’épidémie de Covid-19. Mon objectif étant la sécurité dans tous les secteurs des transports et la garantie de la continuité des services de transport, la sauvegarde de l’activité des entreprises du secteur face au risque réel de défaillance financière, et surtout la protection des travailleurs, j’ai donc voté pour.
EU Association Agreement with Ukraine (A9-0219/2020 - Michael Gahler)
Ce rapport est ouvertement hostile envers la Russie et dépasse clairement le sujet de l’adhésion de l’Ukraine à l’UE. Cette résolution tire un bilan partial de l’accord d’association avec l’Ukraine, dissimule des incitations à la privatisation à tout va des quelques ressources nationales, et reste tributaire d’un atlantisme pavlovien. Je me suis abstenue.
European Skills Agenda for sustainable competitiveness, social fairness and resilience (B9-0108/2021)
En soulevant des problèmes majeurs en termes d’apprentissage et de compétences des travailleurs dont l’accélération des nécessaires changements se sont par ailleurs accentués lors de cette crise sanitaire, cette résolution est pondérée et n'oblige en rien d’éventuels transferts de souveraineté en matière de formation professionnelle. C’est la raison pour laquelle j'ai soutenu ce texte en commission. J'ai voté pour.
Safety of the nuclear power plant in Ostrovets (Belarus) (B9-0109/2021)
La dualité de la politique de l’UE en fonction du pays est parfaitement illustrée par la présente résolution. La volonté de l’UE d’empiéter sur la souveraineté des États à travers ses choix diplomatiques animés par une haine de Moscou ne me permet pas de m’exprimer en faveur de ce texte. J’ai voté contre.
Humanitarian and political situation in Yemen (B9-0119/2021)
Cette résolution ne se contente pas de dénoncer les exactions commises par la coalition saoudienne sur le terrain mais ajoute des éléments de compréhension sur les conséquences déstabilisatrices de l’affrontement irano saoudien dans la région. Elle souligne à raison l’urgence humanitaire sur place et donne un satisfecit à la décision américaine de permettre le retour de l’aide humanitaire dans le Yémen du Nord. Cette résolution m'apparaît bienvenue. J'ai voté pour.
The situation in Myanmar (B9-0116/2021)
Même si je déplore que la résolution se perde dans des considérations qui s’éloignent de la situation en évoquant longuement le cas des Rohingas, et ne fasse preuve d’aucun recul sur l’affaiblissement interne d’Aug San Suu Kyi provoqué par la vindicte internationale à son endroit, les circonstances et la ferme condamnation de la junte militaire présente dans le texte, m’obligent à le soutenir. J’ai voté pour.
Challenges ahead for women’s rights: more than 25 years after the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action (B9-0114/2021)
InvestEU Programme (A9-0203/2020 - José Manuel Fernandes, Irene Tinagli)
Dans la situation actuelle de reprise, ces fonds semblent indispensables pour nos économies, pourtant la dernière version du texte inclut des ambitions climatiques trop élevées, ainsi que de nombreuses dispositions permettant l’utilisation des fonds par les pays tiers, ce qui n’est pas acceptable à mes yeux. Je me suis donc abstenue.
Programme for the Union's action in the field of health for the period 2021-2027 (“EU4Health Programme”) (A9-0196/2020 - Cristian-Silviu Buşoi)
Même si ce programme est bien meilleur que la position arrêtée par le Parlement en novembre dernier, il comporte malgré ces améliorations, de nombreux points problématiques: le concept de «la santé partout et en tout» est maintenu, ce qui signifie que l'UE pourra, au nom de la santé, s'ingérer dans tous les textes, avec la même systématisation que les références au climat ou aux genres. Je me suis donc abstenue.
A WTO-compatible EU carbon border adjustment mechanism (A9-0019/2021 - Yannick Jadot)
Afin d’être en cohérence avec le contre-projet au référendum écologique que je soutiens et malgré mes réserves, je privilégie un vote politique entérinant un discours protectionniste en gardant à l’esprit que l’ambition du Parlement est toujours revue à la baisse par la Commission. Ce texte va dans le bon sens. J’ai voté pour.
Administrative cooperation in the field of taxation (A9-0015/2021 - Sven Giegold)
Si je pouvais soutenir le renforcement de la coopération entre États membres concernant les plateformes numériques rendant très difficiles la traçabilité et la détection des faits générateurs de l'impôt par les autorités fiscales, cette proposition ne me paraît finalement pas satisfaisante.En effet, l’article 11, paragraphe 2, permet d’interroger des personnes et d’examiner des documents sans que la législation nationale de l’État membre requis n'impose de restriction.Par ailleurs, le bénéfice chiffré de la coopération n’est pas clairement démontré. J’ai donc choisi de m’abstenir sur ce texte. Je me suis abstenue.
Corporate due diligence and corporate accountability (A9-0018/2021 - Lara Wolters)
Cette proposition participe à une forme de moralisation du capitalisme international. Les travaux préparatoires ont beaucoup tourné autour de son champ d’application. Au final, la chaîne d'approvisionnement, sur laquelle porte le devoir de vigilance, est insuffisamment réduite. D'autre part, même si le texte final prend soin de diminuer les conséquences d'une telle législation sur les PME, il ne les en exclut pas toutes et risque de constituer, pour celles qui sont concernées (PME cotées en bourse ou portant sur un secteur à haut risque), une charge supplémentaire. Je considère que qu’il faut protéger nos PME et que c’est aux États et non aux entreprises de s’occuper des droits de l’homme. J’ai voté contre.
Implementation of the Construction Products Regulation (A9-0012/2021 - Christian Doleschal)
J’ai considéré que ce rapport prenait en compte des inquiétudes et demandes des professionnels concernant la sécurité des produits de construction. En effet, il rappelle les risques liés à l’importation de produits défectueux non européens et la faiblesse de la surveillance des autorités des États membres. Par ailleurs, l’ambition d’un recyclage et de produits plus durables est affirmée. J’ai voté pour.
Equal treatment in employment and occupation in light of the UNCRPD (A9-0014/2021 - Katrin Langensiepen)
Partagée entre le refus de l’idéologie inter-sectionnelle d’un côté, et le désir de montrer un engagement palpable en faveur des personnes handicapés de l’autre j’ai décidé de voter contre ce texte. Néanmoins, une proposition de résolution alternative a été déposée en plénière, pour défendre les travailleurs handicapés tout en refusant ce texte fourre-tout digne de l’extrême-gauche. J’ai voté contre.
Fisheries control (A9-0016/2021 - Clara Aguilera)
Je refuse totalement et complètement toute caméra imposée par l’UE, car j’estime que cela est du ressort des États d’imposer ou non des caméras à leurs pêcheurs. Par ailleurs, la question des compétences des inspecteurs mandatés par l’UE pose un réel problème de souveraineté, en effet, le texte prévoit que les inspecteurs ne sont pas obligés de rendre des comptes aux États membres lorsqu’ils mènent des inspections dans leurs eaux territoriales, rendant ainsi compte directement à la Commission des résultats de leurs inspections s’ils le souhaitent. Cette disposition m’apparait comme contraire à la souveraineté d’un État sur ses eaux. Elle est d’ailleurs contraire à l’esprit du droit international maritime. J’ai voté contre.
Objection pursuant to Rule 112(2) and (3): Active substances, including dimoxystrobin (B9-0162/2021)
Malgré six années de retard dans l’évaluation d’une substance et alors que la Commission n’est jamais sanctionnée pour ces retards, tandis qu’elle le fait systématiquement lorsque les Etats membres ne sont pas en conformités avec la législation de l’UE, je considère cette objection bienvenue. J'ai voté pour.
Objection pursuant to Rule 112(2) and (3): Genetically modified cotton GHB614 × T304-40 × GHB119 (B9-0160/2021)
Cette objection rejoint toutes les objections précédentes (36 pour la huitième mandature, 16 pour la mandature en cours) sur les substances OGM que la Commission souhaite autoriser sur le marché, parfois au profit d’entreprises non-européennes. Tant que l’innocuité de ces substances n’aura pas été prouvée et que l’avis des États-membres, pour le moment hostile à ces substances OGM, n’aura pas été pris en compte, je soutiendrai ces objections. J’ai voté pour.
Objection pursuant to Rule 112(2) and (3): Genetically modified maize MZIR098 (SYN-ØØØ98-3) (B9-0161/2021)
L'autorisation n'a pas été soutenue par une majorité qualifiée d'États membres le 11 janvier 2021 au sein du Comité permanent de la chaîne alimentaire. Treize États ont voté contre et dix ont voté pour. La Commission reconnaît d’ailleurs cette opposition majoritaire des États-membres, sans pour autant revenir sur sa position. Comme trop souvent, ces tentatives de passage en force de la Commission européenne se font au profit d’entreprises non-membres de l’Union européenne; ici, une entreprise suisse. Tant que l’innocuité de ces substances n’aura pas été prouvée et que l’avis des États-membres, pour le moment hostile à ces substances OGM, n’aura pas été pris en compte, je soutiendrai ces objections. J’ai voté pour.
Activities of the European Ombudsman - annual report 2019 (A9-0013/2021 - Sylvie Guillaume)
Étant donné l’opacité dont font preuve les institutions européennes, récemment illustrée par le processus de négociation des contrats de vaccins que j’ai dénoncé à plusieurs reprises, je ne peux évidemment que soutenir le souhait d’une meilleure transparence exprimé par le texte. Cependant, l’orientation fédéraliste que le texte souhaite donner au Médiateur européen, en l’incitant à déborder de ses prérogatives, ainsi que ses considérations idéologiques hors de propos sur les réfugiés et la GPA, me poussent à m’abstenir. Je me suis abstenue.
European Semester: Annual Sustainable Growth Strategy 2021 (A9-0036/2021 - Markus Ferber)
Ce rapport n’a aucune cohérence économique. Il affirme que nous sommes mieux préparés à gérer une crise qu’en 2008, ce qui est faux. On y trouve pêle-mêle des objectifs parfaitement contradictoires: augmenter les investissements tout en réduisant la dette et en promouvant des politiques budgétaires « responsables » c’est-à-dire de l’austérité, ce qui a montré son inefficacité à régler la question de l’endettement privé comme public. J’ai donc voté contre.
European Semester: employment and social aspects in the Annual Sustainable Growth Strategy 2021 (A9-0026/2021 - Lina Gálvez Muñoz)
Le semestre européen tend à se pérenniser comme mode de fonctionnement habituel de l’Union européenne, laissant présager le pire avec la crise économique qui s’annonce. S’il fut l’instrument nécessaire à la politique d’austérité que les peuples ont subie, rien ne nous dit que demain, il n’aura pas la même fonction dans le cadre d’une mise au pas liée aux dérapages budgétaires résultant de la crise sanitaire. Je souhaite ainsi réaffirmer mon refus de la tutelle européenne tout en revendiquant le fait que les politiques sociales doivent être gérées au niveau national. J’ai voté contre.
The Syrian conflict - 10 years after the uprising (B9-0175/2021, B9-0176/2021, B9-0177/2021, B9-0178/2021, B9-0179/2021, B9-0180/2021, B9-0181/2021)
Cette proposition de résolution développe la notion de «lutte contre l’impunité». Cette notion présente sous des aspects prétendument moraux une volonté de détournement du droit international et de la CPI. Les exactions islamistes et le développement, par la faute de la politique occidentale, d’un puissant foyer djihadiste en Syrie, et notamment dans la poche d’Idlib, sont très peu évoqués. De plus, l’Union européenne continue à n’incriminer que l’Iran et la Russie, puissances qui interviennent sur invitation du gouvernement de Damas, sans condamner les autres pays en jeu. Enfin, le rôle extrêmement nocif de la Turquie est trop légèrement évoqué. J’ai voté contre.
Declaration of the EU as an LGBTIQ Freedom Zone (B9-0166/2021, B9-0167/2021)
Cette résolution est une nouvelle attaque en règle contre la Pologne. Selon les auteurs du texte, la Commission devrait utiliser les procédures d’infraction, le cadre de l’état de droit, l’article 7 du TUE, ainsi que le règlement récemment adopté sur la protection du budget de l’Union contre la Pologne. La résolution s’attaque aussi aux lois hongroises en matière d’adoption. Les discours de haine sont dénoncés sans qu’ils soient définis. Par ailleurs, le texte considère que certains enfants ont deux parents du même sexe et exige la reconnaissance mutuelle d’un certificat de naissance avec deux parents du même sexe entre les États membres, en violation de leur souveraineté. J’ai voté contre.
Children's Rights (B9-0164/2021)
En vue de la prochaine publication par la Commission de sa stratégie en matière de droits des enfants, cette résolution suggère plusieurs pistes de réflexion. Si elle défend une cause juste et évidente, la protection des droits des enfants, cette résolution l’instrumentalise cependant pour faire avancer la cause immigrationniste et progressiste et tenter de déposséder les États membres de leur politique éducative. Pour cette raison, je me suis abstenue.
System of own resources of the European Union (A9-0047/2021 - José Manuel Fernandes, Valérie Hayer)
Il s’agit d’un dossier technique qui fixe les mesures d’application du système des ressources propres, y compris les nouvelles ressources propres prévues. Ces mesures devraient être plus transparentes et plus claires. Cependant, je ne suis pas pour la mise en œuvre de l’intégralité des nouvelles ressources propres, ce qui justifie mon abstention sur ce texte. Je me suis abstenue.
Shaping digital education policy (A9-0042/2021 - Victor Negrescu)
Pour une fois, ce texte ne dénature pas le sujet (développer l’éducation numérique) par des considérations politiques éloignées de la problématique. Les amendements, en revanche, ne peuvent s’empêcher de réécrire le texte dans un combat idéologique différent: le caractère «inclusif» (cité 28 fois, sans être défini) a, par exemple, une belle place. Cependant, on ne peut être que favorable à un enseignement du numérique, du code, de l’Intelligence artificielle (IA) et à une égalité homme-femme. Le «tout numérique» pourrait représenter des dangers, mais les garde-fous sur le principe de subsidiarité, sur «la liberté des enseignants», les «dangers du numérique» et le rôle de l’interaction avec l’enseignant me permettent de proposer un vote positif. J’ai voté pour.
Impact on fisheries of marine litter (A9-0030/2021 - Catherine Chabaud)
Si ce texte pousse pour un renforcement de la législation européenne et en fait naïvement la panacée contre les désastres environnementaux, le ton global du rapport n’est cependant pas punitif à l’encontre des pêcheurs déclarés en proposant une démarche écologie incitative plutôt que répressive. J’ai donc voté pour.
Cohesion Policy and regional environment strategies in the fight against climate change (A9-0034/2021 - Tonino Picula)
Tout en condamnant l’écologie punitive et dans le respect de la souveraineté des États membres de l’union européenne, il est selon moi opportun de ne pas être systématiquement opposée à des propositions qui peuvent s’inscrire dans la lutte contre les conséquences du changement climatique auxquelles nos compatriotes sont sensibles. Aussi, j’ai voté pour.
European strategy for data (A9-0027/2021 - Miapetra Kumpula-Natri)
Les données sont une ressource essentielle, un bien personnel et commun qui révolutionne l’économie et les décisions prises dans nos sociétés. D’où la nécessité d’une vraie stratégie, qui s’affranchirait des rengaines en matière de législation européenne (notamment pour rattraper notre retard conséquent sur les États-Unis et la Chine).Mais le rapport passe largement à côté du sujet, et il prépare en réalité la création d’un nouveau marché à l’échelle de l’UE, celui de la donnée. Outre la maîtrise effective et la souveraineté sur celle-ci, une question éthique s’impose face au monde ultra-rationnalisé que nous prépare Bruxelles: souhaitons-nous vraiment d’une société basée intégralement sur la collecte et le traitement des données personnelles, même anonymes ? En raison de ces interrogations j’ai préféré m’abstenir.
General framework for securitisation and specific framework for simple, transparent and standardised securitisation to help the recovery from the COVID-19 crisis (A9-0215/2020 - Paul Tang)
Là encore, on minimise le risque potentiel de la titrisation synthétique, qui est particulièrement risquée et on souhaite étudier la possibilité de dissocier le cadre STS du risque transféré, ce qui est inapproprié puisqu’on aurait une déconnection entre le risque réel et la qualification de la titrisation. J’ai voté contre.
Amending Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 as regards adjustments to the securitisation framework to support the economic recovery in response to the COVID-19 crisis (A9-0213/2020 - Othmar Karas)
On minimise le risque potentiel de la titrisation synthétique, qui est particulièrement risquée, et on souhaite étudier la possibilité de dissocier le cadre STS du risque transféré, ce qui est inapproprié puisqu’on aurait une déconnexion entre le risque réel et la qualification de la titrisation. Le présent rapport part d’un supposé idéologique très préoccupant, à savoir que la gravité de la crise économique issue de la pandémie de COVID-19 doit conduire à une dérégulation financière afin de permettre un financement plus simple et fluide de l’économie pour faciliter la reprise. Il est clair que le lobby financier pousse beaucoup en ce sens sur plusieurs points que l’on retrouve dans ce rapport. Aussi, j’ai voté contre.
Control of exports, brokering, technical assistance, transit and transfer of dual-use (A9-0390/2017 - Markéta Gregorová)
Si l’inclusion des nouvelles technologies de cybersurveillance semble opportune, intégrer un critère objectif des droits de l’homme sur l’exportation de ce type de biens fera perdre des marchés à nos entreprises et aura un impact néfaste sur notre compétitivité, la préservation de notre savoir-faire et l’innovation. J’ai donc voté contre cette proposition.
Procurement in the fields of defence and security and transfer of defence-related products: implementation of relevant Directives (A9-0025/2021 - Andreas Schwab)
Les États membres ont acheté 70 milliards d’euros d’armes américaines entre 2016 et juillet 2020. En refusant d’affirmer avec nous que le marché européen des équipements de défense doit être ouvert en priorité aux matériels européens ou produits localement, je ne peux voter pour ce rapport. Pire, ce rapport demande à ceux qui ont une importante industrie de défense (la France) de montrer l’exemple (en achetant à l’étranger). Quant à la politique d’exportation, sa formulation est ambiguë alors qu’elle relève de la seule compétence des États membres.Cependant, le rapport souligne justement que les deux directives précédentes ont eu un effet quasi nul et évoque le recours abusif aux exceptions. Il prend en compte la complexité des dispositions relatives à la sous-traitance, les coûts élevés de la certification et globalement les obstacles administratifs rencontrés par les PME et acteurs du secteur. Mais le refus d’affirmer que le marché européen des équipements de défense doit être ouvert en priorité aux matériels européens ou produits localement, et l’ingérence dans les politiques étrangères des États membres, m’obligent à voter contre. J’ai voté contre.
Application of Regulation (EC) 2020/2092, the Rule of Law conditionality mechanism (B9-0206/2021, B9-0207/2021, B9-0208/2021)
Ici, le Parlement entend s’imposer face au Conseil et exige l’application immédiate du nouveau mécanisme de conditionnalité liée à l’état de droit. Sans même devoir s’interroger sur le bien-fondé des accusations d’atteinte à l’état de droit ni sur la légalité du mécanisme, il est à mes yeux nécessaire de faire respecter la volonté politique des États et donc du Conseil, par principe. J’ai voté contre.
Own resource based on non-recycled plastic packaging waste and certain aspects of the GNI-based own resource (A9-0048/2021 - José Manuel Fernandes, Valérie Hayer)
Même s’il est important de recycler le plastique qui est fabriqué à partir de ressources non renouvelables, ce texte soulève trois objections. La France et l’Allemagne étant des pays peu vertueux en la matière, ils seront les premiers contributeurs. Ensuite, il est prévu un rabais sur cette taxe pour les pays ayant un RNB par habitant inférieur à la moyenne européenne. Enfin, cette nouvelle taxe pourrait surtout peser sur les finances des industriels, et indirectement sur les consommateurs, en les incitant à des pratiques plus vertueuses. Concrètement, le principe de la taxe imposera aux industriels de changer leurs résines plastiques actuelles, utilisées par exemple pour les pots de yaourts ou les capsules de café, entraînant une hausse des prix pour les entreprises forcées de revoir leurs chaînes de production. Ce projet retire également aux États membres la possibilité de demander un réexamen des calculs réalisés par la Commission. J’ai donc voté contre.
Collection of own resources accruing from value added tax (A9-0049/2021 - José Manuel Fernandes, Valérie Hayer)
La rationalisation et la simplification du calcul de la ressource propre TVA sont à soutenir.Il s’agit d’un texte essentiellement technique pour lequel un vote contre de ma part ne serait pas compris d’autant que le projet du Conseil est favorable aux États membres, qui auront la possibilité de demander à la Commission de réexaminer les montants demandés par cette dernière. Pour l’ensemble de ces raisons, je soutiens ce texte. J’ai voté pour.
Guidelines for the 2022 Budget - Section III (A9-0046/2021 - Karlo Ressler)
En apparence, ce rapport est parfait : plus de fonds pour les jeunes, pour les chômeurs, pour le développement durable, etc. En réalité, ces fonds ne suffisent jamais parce qu’ils sont mal utilisés : manque de transparence, de suivi et d’évaluation. De plus, je m’oppose fermement à certaines lignes budgétaires, notamment concernant l’accueil des migrants, l’instrument de préadhésion, les salaires et les bénéfices excessifs des fonctionnaires, la défense européenne, le programme Erasmus+, les dépenses administratives et le Service européen pour l’action extérieure. Malgré quelques références bienvenues à la nécessité de concentrer les ressources sur les secteurs qui ont particulièrement souffert de la crise, ce rapport a encore mis l'accent sur tous les principes clés de l'action de l'UE, démontrant ainsi que Bruxelles ne comprend pas complètement quelles sont les initiatives sur lesquelles il faut se concentrer, en ce moment critique plus que jamais. Par conséquent, tout ceci confirme ma conviction que le budget de l'UE est un instrument dont les États membres tirent moins de bénéfices par rapport à ce qu'ils paient, puisqu'il vise à soutenir des priorités européennes souvent sans rapport avec les intérêts nationaux. J’ai voté contre.
New EU-Africa Strategy (A9-0017/2021 - Chrysoula Zacharopoulou)
Le rapport souligne un grand nombre d’enjeux affectant le continent africain, notamment la dépendance vis-à-vis des importations de denrées alimentaires et la nécessité de mettre en valeur des chaînes de valeur locales et l’agroécologie. Cependant, sur le front migratoire, il appelle à un partenariat Union européenne-Afrique qui viserait notamment à un «renforcement substantiel» des voies de migrations légales, notamment via le programme Erasmus+ en ce qui concerne les séjours d’étude. La «mobilité des travailleurs» serait une réponse aux «défis démographiques» auxquels fait face l’Union européenne et il faudrait en conséquence encourager la «migration circulaire». Une procédure harmonisée de gestion des migrations professionnelles serait instaurée.Sur le plan sécuritaire, la résolution appelle certes à une implication accrue des États membres dans le Sahel, mais sans demande ou proposition concrète ou évocation de l’opération militaire menée par la France. Ce rapport m’apparaît donc contre-productif. J’ai voté contre.
EU Strategy for Sustainable Tourism (A9-0033/2021 - Cláudia Monteiro de Aguiar)
La situation du secteur du tourisme est aujourd’hui dramatique: il a traversé la plus grave crise de son histoire. En France, ce secteur représente deux millions d’emplois et 8 % du produit intérieur brut. En France, pays le plus visité au monde (90 millions de touristes en 2019), les indicateurs macroéconomiques observés, comme le produit intérieur brut, le taux de chômage et le nombre de faillites ont vite tourné au rouge l’année dernière, et même pour cette année la perspective d’une reprise est encore lointaine. L'impact de la crise sur l'emploi a été très fort dans ce secteur, en particulier pour les régions dont l'économie est fortement dépendante de ce secteur, comme l’Île-de-France ou la Provence-Alpes-Côte d’Azur. Pour cette raison, j’ai voté pour.
Strengthening the international role of the euro (A9-0043/2021 - Danuta Maria Hübner)
Ce rapport est en décalage avec les inquiétudes des Français concernant l’euro, car il ne s’agit pas ici de conservation de l’épargne, ou même de se poser la question de son existence. Ce rapport incohérent économiquement s’attaque directement à des éléments essentiels de notre souveraineté: notre budget et notre politique étrangère. J’ai voté contre.
Commission evaluation report on the implementation of the General Data Protection Regulation two years after its application (B9-0211/2021)
Cette résolution non législative évaluant l'application du RGPD au cours de ses deux premières années de fonctionnement souligne ses aspects positifs et demande, entre autres, que les PME, les jeunes entreprises, les organisations et le milieu associatif soient soutenus lors de son application. Cette règlementation va en effet dans le sens d'une protection améliorée des données personnelles et donc de la vie privée des citoyens en France et en Europe mais il est important, cependant, que la France et les autres États membres puissent apporter des accents propres en matière de protection des données personnelles. J'ai voté pour.
2019-2020 Reports on Albania (A9-0041/2021 - Isabel Santos)
Le rapport s’échine à demander l’adhésion de l’Albanie à l’Union malgré l’opposition de nombreux peuples européens et la fin de non-recevoir de la France. Il ignore par ailleurs beaucoup de dangers liés à l’évolution de l’Albanie, notamment la forte présence de mafias dans le pays et ses liens plus que troubles avec la Turquie de Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. J’ai voté contre.
2019-2020 Reports on Kosovo (A9-0031/2021 - Viola Von Cramon-Taubadel)
Le rapport pèche avant tout par de gros manques sur des questions essentielles: la non reconnaissance du Kosovo par cinq pays membres est mentionnée, mais n’est pas vue comme un obstacle rédhibitoire. Sur le statut du Kosovo, il n’évoque par les propos récents du nouveau Premier ministre kosovar, qui entend poser la question de l’union avec l’Albanie, alors que celle-ci est actuellement proscrite par la constitution du Kosovo, issue de la résolution 1244 du Conseil de sécurité de l’ONU. La question des enclaves serbes est mise de côté, alors que des unités armées albanaises pratiquent régulièrement des incursions à l’intérieur de celles-ci, en infraction avec les résolutions du Conseil de sécurité. N’est pas non plus évoqué le rôle majeur en termes d’influence que remplit désormais la Turquie au Kosovo. La question de l’islamisme radical n’est pas mentionnée dans le texte, alors que le Kosovo est la région d’Europe qui a fourni le plus de djihadistes à la Syrie et à l’Irak par rapport au nombre d’habitants. J’ai voté contre.
2019-2020 Reports on North Macedonia (A9-0040/2021 - Ilhan Kyuchyuk)
Le principal écueil de ce rapport est avant tout sa promotion vers l’élargissement et l’adhésion de la Macédoine du Nord, qui justifie à lui seul un vote contre. De plus, ce texte pose plusieurs problèmes de fond.Totalement inspiré par la vision fédéraliste de la Commission, il nie à chaque pays membre d’avoir son propre point de vue sur les adhésions des pays des Balkans occidentaux.Le fait de souligner la connexion entre l’adhésion à l’OTAN et à l’Union européenne est révélateur d’une posture visant à faire de l’Union européenne un sous-ensemble du système stratégique euro-atlantique, placé sous la domination intérêts des États-Unis.L’adhésion de la Macédoine du Nord à l’Union européenne, qui serait vraisemblablement concomitante avec celle de l’Albanie, puis suivie de celle du Kosovo, pourrait avoir des conséquences des plus néfastes. En effet, elle favoriserait certainement la constitution d’une Grande Albanie, les Albanais représentant désormais plus de 25% de la population du pays. A l’heure actuelle, aucun gouvernement n’a pu se former en Macédoine du Nord sans l’apport des partis albanophones. Sans parler de l’attractivité d’une telle perspective sur les minorités albanaises de Serbie et du Monténégro. J’ai voté contre.
2019-2020 Reports on Serbia (A9-0032/2021 - Vladimír Bilčík)
Ce rapport est favorable à l’élargissement de l’UE à laquelle nous sommes totalement opposés. Par ailleurs, il est particulièrement critique d’une Serbie qui cherche simplement à maintenir son autonomie stratégique et économique. C’est d’ailleurs une tendance qui devrait inquiéter Belgrade dans sa volonté d’adhésion à l’UE : des mœurs à la politique étrangère, c’est bien l’intégralité de l’agenda mondialiste que Bruxelles veut imposer au pays.Je regrette donc de ne pas pouvoir analyser ce dossier de manière isolé, en prenant en compte la longue amitié franco serbe. Pour que cela soit possible, il faudrait isoler le dossier serbe du reste des Balkans occidentaux, ce qui n’est pas la stratégie de l’UE. J’ai donc voté contre ce rapport.
EU/Norway Agreement: modification of concessions on all the tariff-rate quotas included in the EU Schedule CLXXV as a consequence of the United Kingdom's withdrawal from the European Union (A9-0035/2021 - Jörgen Warborn)
Le principe à la base de la méthode appliquée se fonde sur les flux commerciaux dans l’Union à 27 et dans le Royaume-Uni pendant une période de référence représentative (de trois ans entre 2013 et 2015) pour tous les contingents tarifaires de l’OMC. Les négociations se sont basées sur une approche commune entre le Royaume-Uni et l’UE pour répartir quantitativement les contingents et maintenir pleinement le volume des contingents entre celui de l’UE et celui du Royaume-Uni. Cette répartition faite, en l’espèce, les négociations entre l’UE et la Norvège ont abouti à un accord sous forme de lettres, validé par le Conseil. Conformément au traité sur le fonctionnement de l’UE, cet accord doit être approuvé par la présente recommandation. J’ai voté pour.
Implementation report on the road safety aspects of the Roadworthiness Package (A9-0028/2021 - Benoît Lutgen)
Sur la forme, le rapporteur demande à la Commission de généraliser le contrôle technique périodique à tous les véhicules à deux ou trois roues : c’est une mesure purement coercitive et punitive ; d'autant plus qu'en matière de sécurité routière, dans sa campagne « Vision zéro », l’objectif que s'était fixé la Commission de réduire de moitié le nombre de décès sur les routes de l'UE entre 2010 et 2020 n’a pas été atteint ; c'est bien là la preuve que la politique de taxation des automobilistes mise en place par la Commission n’a jamais permis de réduire le nombre de morts sur les routes. J’ai voté contre.
Chemical residues in the Baltic Sea based on petitions 1328/2019 and 0406/2020 under Rule 227(2) (B9-0224/2021)
La résolution a le mérite de souligner l’aspect global du problème: les résidus chimiques dans la mer Baltique sont une menace à la fois pour l’environnement, pour la santé des consommateurs des produits de la pêche, et pourraient à terme mettre plusieurs filières en péril économique. Le texte apporte des solutions pragmatiques et préconise des mécanismes de coopération qui laissent un rôle important aux États membres, et en particulier à ceux qui sont les plus concernés. J’ai voté pour.
Establishing Horizon Europe – laying down its rules for participation and dissemination (A9-0122/2021 - Dan Nica)
Ce programme est destiné aux chercheurs des secteurs publics et privés; il est réparti en piliers de financements (voir la note de session sur les «programmes spécifiques Horizon Europe») et basé sur des appels à projets. La plupart des projets sont collaboratifs avec plusieurs partenaires issus de plusieurs pays membres de l’Union européenne. Les conditions de participation et d’éligibilité sont précisées dans chaque appel, et la dimension du programme est déclinable à toutes les échelles territoriales (locales, régionales, nationales, européennes). Nous soutenons, dans le cadre de la relance et de la nécessaire réindustrialisation de l’UE, cet effort de ciblage, qui bénéficiera aux entreprises françaises et à l’éclosion de nouvelles compétences sur notre territoire. J’ai voté pour.
Specific Programme implementing Horizon Europe – the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation (A9-0118/2021 - Christian Ehle)
Il s’agit ici du volet opérationnel des règles de participation et de diffusion du programme Horizon Europe pour la recherche et l’innovation. Ce programme a démontré son efficacité dans sa version précédente («Horizon 2020») pour le financement de la recherche et de l’innovation dans l’Union européenne (Euratom, l’initiative pour un processeur européen – le supercalculateur exaflops de Barcelone, qui sera opérationnel en 2023,...). Sur l'ensemble du budget à long terme de l'Union pour la période 2021-2027, le programme spécifique devrait bénéficier de 83 milliards d’euros et le Conseil européen de la recherche devrait recevoir plus de 16 milliards d'euros provenant de cette enveloppe, ce qui représente une augmentation de 22 % par rapport à Horizon 2020. Une augmentation à laquelle nous souscrivons pour soutenir au moins deux points positifs de ce programme de travail: 1/ la contribution à la recherche fondamentale en mathématique pour augmenter la puissance de calcul de l’Europe (recherche quantique) 2/ le financement de projet de recherche dans les régions et dans les régions ultrapériphériques. J’ai voté pour.
European Institute of Innovation and Technology (A9-0120/2020 - Marisa Matias)
On reconnaît la valeur de cet institut, qui permet aux entreprises du territoire d’améliorer leur capacité d’innovation et leurs performances à travers l’intégration du triangle de la connaissance: l’éducation, la recherche et l’innovation. Par exemple, en France, il existe deux pôles reconnus comme Communautés de la connaissance et de l’innovation (CCI), l’IET Santé à Paris et l’IET Énergie à Grenoble. Le pôle grenoblois, centré autour des «Vallées alpines de l’énergie», de Grenoble à Cadarache, s’appuie sur l’environnement favorable à l’innovation développée par ces deux régions et sur leur tissu industriel. Ce centre d’excellence porte, entre autres, les thématiques axées autour du «nucléaire durable». Compte tenu des avantages de l’étude menée par les centres français pour les entreprises nationales dans le domaine de l’énergie, et du soutien apporté en commission ITRE au programme de recherche et d’innovation Horizon Europe, sur lequel le règlement IET est aligné, il est selon moi raisonnable de soutenir une telle structure. J’ai voté pour.
Strategic Innovation Agenda of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology (A9-0121/2020 - Maria da Graça Carvalho)
La nouvelle base juridique dote également l’IET d’un modèle de financement léger et simplifié, destiné à encourager plus efficacement les investissements privés et publics supplémentaires.Deuxièmement, le Rapporteur a accueilli les demandes du groupe ID portant sur le fonctionnement de l’IET, la distribution de fonds aux CCI, les coûts internes, l’efficacité et la «prestance» de l’organisme dans le long terme, l’importance des PME. J’ai donc voté pour.
Union Civil Protection Mechanism (A9-0148/2020 - Nikos Androulakis)
Le projet est ici de confier la gestion de ce mécanisme européen de protection civile à la Commission européenne, jugée plus capable et plus réactive que les États membres, au mépris du principe de subsidiarité et de leur souveraineté, et de l’étendre aux États tiers en y installant du matériel à demeure (sans savoir véritablement lesquels). En outre, il est question d’associer le Parlement européen à la mise en œuvre du mécanisme et au contrôle des montants alloués.Récemment, le mécanisme a été utilisé pour acheminer une aide supplémentaire aux réfugiés de Lesbos à la suite de l’incendie du camp de Moria.La pandémie de coronavirus et le nombre des feux de forêts et autres catastrophes ne doivent pas être instrumentalisés pour servir les intérêts de fédéralistes opportunistes. Il est nécessaire de rappeler que la protection civile est une compétence nationale. J’ai donc voté contre.
EU/Honduras Voluntary Partnership Agreement (Resolution) (A9-0054/2021 - Karin Karlsbro)
Sur le constat social et économique du Honduras, la fidélité du rapport semble proche de la réalité et des crises successives subies par ce pays. Même s’il n’est pas mesuré d’une part l’impact économique pour nos acteurs français d’un tel accord. Et d’autre part, si le Honduras dispose certainement de nombreux intérêts pour finaliser cet accord, l’ingérence totale de l’UE dans les affaires du Honduras paraît démesurée par rapports aux objectifs. Elle en est d’autant plus démesurée que l’UE n’est pas, et de loin, le premier partenaire commercial du Honduras. Toutefois, il y a également des points très positifs dans cet accord. Pour cette raison j’ai voté pour.
Interinstitutional agreement on mandatory transparency register (A9-0123/2021 - Maria Hübner)
Cet accord estime qu’il est important de définir quelles sont les réunions avec les représentants d’intérêts qui devraient être publiées en tant que réunions programmées à l’avance. Il se félicite de la pratique de la Commission consistant à publier également les réunions ayant lieu dans un format différent de celui des réunions en face-à-face, par exemple les réunions par vidéoconférence. Il insiste pour qu’un appel téléphonique planifié soit également considéré comme une réunion. Toutes ces dispositions vont dans le sens d'une plus grande transparence que je demande aux institutions européennes de mettre en œuvre. J'ai donc voté pour.
More efficient and cleaner maritime transport (A9-0029/2021 - Karima Delli)
Bien qu’il prévoit la mise en place d'une filière européenne de démantèlement des navires afin de faire cesser cette activité jusqu'à présent confiée à des pays tiers, ce rapport repose essentiellement sur les objectifs écologiques contraignants du Green Deal : les compagnies maritimes sont actuellement, de manière générale, très impactées économiquement par les conséquences de la crise sanitaire ; les investissements pour les transporteurs maritimes afin d’atteindre les objectifs écologiques restent tout de même très conséquents à terme, et cela dans un contexte de reprise économique encore très incertain pour les années à venir dans ce secteur. Je me suis abstenue.
Objection pursuant to Rule 112(2) and (3), and (4)(c): Maximum residue levels for certain substances, including lufenuron (B9-0223/2021)
L’avis rendu par l’EFSA et repris par la Commission justifie l’augmentation des limites maximales résiduelles pour le lufénuron uniquement par la nécessité de respecter les valeurs normatives au Brésil et de ne pas entraver les lois de la concurrence mondiales. Le RN s’est toujours opposé à ce que, pour des raisons commerciales, l’UE abaisse ses barrières normatives, d’autant plus lorsqu’elles concernent la sécurité sanitaire et un produit interdit sur son territoire. J’ai voté pour cette objection.
Objection pursuant to Rule 112(2) and (3), and (4)(c): Maximum residue levels for certain substances, including flonicamid (B9-0222/2021)
The EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement (A9-0128/2021 - Andreas Schieder, Christophe Hansen)
Il est souhaitable de rappeler qu’un mécanisme de consultation, par l’intermédiaire du comité spécialisé chargé de la pêche, a été proposé et permettra de suivre la mise en œuvre de cet accord (sa mise sur pied immédiate est demandée). En outre, comme on sait que le secteur de la pêche de l’Union subira des pertes économiques considérables, il est devenu prioritaire que l’indemnisation devant être prévue dans la réserve d’ajustement au Brexit soit proportionnelle aux pertes subies par le secteur et par les communautés de pêcheurs. La Commission donne son accord. Le projet semble arranger les intérêts des investisseurs et exportateurs français. Le Royaume-Uni a désiré sortir de l’Union et a obtenu une grande majorité des concessions demandées. Le RN souhaite également le soutenir dans sa démarche d’autonomie. J’ai voté pour.
Multiannual management plan for bluefin tuna in the eastern Atlantic and the Mediterranean (A9-0149/2020 - Giuseppe Ferrandino)
La commission PECH a examiné la proposition sur la base du projet de rapport de Giuseppe Ferrandino (S&D, IT), et l’a adoptée le 3 septembre 2020. Ce rapport modifie la proposition de la Commission européenne pour l'aligner entièrement sur le plan de gestion original de l'ICCAT (recommandation 18-02). Compte tenu de l'impact de l'épidémie de COVID-19 sur les activités de pêche, le texte permet aux États membres de prolonger la saison de pêche jusqu'à 10 jours en cas de crise de santé publique (telle que des intempéries). En outre, le rapport soutient l'attribution d'un quota sectoriel spécifique pour les petits navires autorisés à pêcher le thon rouge, et tient particulièrement compte de la pêche traditionnelle et artisanale lors de la répartition des quotas nationaux. En conséquence, j’ai voté pour.
Soil protection (B9-0221/2021)
Malgré quelques références au Pacte vert et aux objectifs climat à l’horizon 2030 et 2050, ce texte laisse transparaître une volonté d’accroître les relations entre les États membres transfrontaliers, ce que nous avons soutenu dans nos amendements. Il prend en compte l’ensemble des problématiques en incluant les différentes échelles du territoire européen. Il promeut enfin une mise à jour des données et une méthodologie commune. Je me suis abstenue.
Digital Green Certificate - Union citizens (C9-0104/2021 - Juan Fernando López Aguilar)
En plus de possibles usages étendus de tels documents par les institutions tant UE que nationales, de nombreuses et persistantes incertitudes pèsent sur ces certificats en matière sanitaire, juridique, de protection des données, et au final en termes d’efficacité. Cela m’incite à voter contre sur cette proposition. J’ai voté contre.
Digital Green Certificate - third country nationals (C9-0100/2021 - Juan Fernando López Aguilar)
Cette proposition vise à étendre le champ des certificats aux ressortissants d’États tiers résidant ou séjournant légalement sur le territoire d’un État membre, mais des ambiguïtés possibles demeurent quant aux personnes concrètement concernées et aux possibles effets sur les contrôles aux frontières extérieures. Je me suis abtenue.
Digital taxation: OECD negotiations, tax residency of digital companies and a possible European Digital Tax (A9-0103/2021 - Andreas Schwab, Martin Hlaváček)
Je suis favorable à l’adaptation de la fiscalité à l’économie numérique. Il faut en finir avec le privilège de certaines multinationales qui échappent en grande partie à l’impôt par une optimisation fiscale agressive.Il n’est pas acceptable que les géants du numérique ne payent en moyenne que 1% d’impôts sur les sociétés quand la moyenne européenne se situe à 20 %.J'ai voté pour.
Assassination of Daphne Caruana Galizia and the rule of law in Malta (B9-0219/2021)
Même si je m'inquiète de voir le Parlement Européen s’ériger en garant de l’État de droit je peux cependant soutenir ce texte puisqu’il ne s’agit pas de simples allégations politisées mais du meurtre d’une journaliste commandité par un gouvernement socialiste. Par contraste, les accusations contre la Hongrie et la Pologne paraissent bien ridicules. J'ai voté pour.
Rail passengers' rights and obligations (A9-0045/2021 - Bogusław Liberadzki)
. – Avec ce rapport, il est question de déterminer le degré de responsabilité des compagnies ferroviaires en cas de retard et d'annulation des trains; le rapport vise également à définir quelles sont les obligations des voyageurs en matière de conditions requises pour prétendre avoir droit à des compensations, des prises en charge ou des remboursements de la part des compagnies ferroviaires. J'ai voté pour.
European Defence Fund (A9-0120/2021 - Zdzisław Krasnodębski)
Le Fonds européen de défense est la suite attendue du Programme industriel de défense auquel nos députés se sont toujours opposés.Ce fonds est le volet industriel d’une volonté politique de tendre vers une défense européenne.Constatant l’existence de 178 systèmes d’armes au sein de l’Union européenne contre 30 aux États-Unis, la Commission souhaite favoriser l’interopérabilité des armées européennes mais aussi l’innovation et limiter la dépendance aux industries de défense extérieures à l’UE.Ce texte n’a donc pour autre fonction que de donner plus de pouvoir à la Commission. J’ai voté contre.
Administrative cooperation in the field of excise duties: content of electronic registers (A9-0121/2021 - Irene Tinagli)
Parliament’s estimates of revenue and expenditure for the financial year 2022 (A9-0145/2021 - Damian Boeselager)
La présentation est certes séduisante mais par expérience, ces fonds sont mal utilisés et ne sont jamais suffisants: manque de transparence, de suivi et d’évaluation.Je m’oppose fermement à certaines lignes budgétaires, notamment concernant les dépenses liées avec la propagande («communication»), tels que l’instauration des nouveaux centres européens, les Parlamentariums, les bureaux de liaison du Parlement européen (EPLO), la promotion des «valeurs européennes», etc.Je trouve aussi que l’augmentation proposée de 2,4 % par rapport au budget 2021, n’est pas justifiée, en tenant compte du nombre réduit des députés. Le Parlement devrait être exemplaire, et montrer aux citoyens que dans cette période difficile de crise, on est capable de faire les économies – malheureusement ce n’est pas le cas, alors on je ne peux voter que contre ce projet de budget. J’ai voté contre.
Russia, the case of Alexei Navalny, military build-up on Ukraine's border and Russian attack in the Czech Republic (B9-0235/2021, RC-B9-0236/2021, B9-0236/2021, B9-0237/2021, B9-0250/2021, B9-0251/2021, B9-0252/2021)
Cette résolution continue à perpétuer une désolante nostalgie de la guerre froide. Alors que le secrétaire d’État américain, Anthony Blinken, a menacé les entreprises partenaires du projet Nord Stream II de sanctions, foulant au pied la souveraineté des nations européennes, il est inquiétant de voir l’Union incapable de défendre l’autonomie stratégique des États membres. J’ai voté contre.
5th anniversary of the Peace Agreement in Colombia (RC-B9-0227/2021, B9-0227/2021, B9-0228/2021, B9-0229/2021, B9-0230/2021, B9-0231/2021, B9-0232/2021)
La résolution se félicite d’un accord de paix qui n’est pas appliqué et ne réalise pas que la situation était particulièrement facile à anticiper. Par ailleurs, l’Union ne questionne absolument pas les explications états-uniennes sur la perturbation chronique de cette partie du monde, alors que Washington ne manque pas d’intervenir dans nos «prés carrés». Enfin, le saupoudrage humanitaire européenne semble sympathique, mais absolument déstructuré. Je me suis abstenue.
European Child Guarantee (B9-0220/2021)
Ce texte demande à ce que l’UE s’arroge des compétences sociales qui ne sont pas les siennes. C’est une manière détournée de s’immiscer dans des thèmes qui ne relèvent pas de son champ d’action, jouant ainsi sur une pauvreté qu'elle contribue elle-même à développer. À titre d’exemple, en 2011, en pleine crise de l’euro, le travail des enfants en Italie est un phénomène qui s’est amplifié. Je me suis abstenue.
The accessibility and affordability of Covid-testing (B9-0233/2021, B9-0234/2021)
Cette résolution a ses bons et ses mauvais points. Plusieurs de ces derniers (plafond tarifaire fixé par la Commission, soutien au règlement sur le certificat vert numérique, commande européenne conjointe pour les trousses de dépistage) interdisent un vote favorable. Cependant, voter contre une résolution qui promeut la généralisation et la gratuité des dépistages est politiquement inenvisageable, d’où la suggestion de s’abstenir. Pour être politiquement inattaquables, nous avons demandé un vote séparé sur ce passage du texte, sur lequel nous émettrons un avis favorable. Notre résolution alternative reprend cette proposition, mais critique la gestion européenne de la crise jusqu’ici, respecte l’indépendance des États membres et souligne l’intérêt d’une facilitation du dépistage pour relancer le secteur du tourisme. Je me suis abstenue.
EU-India relations (A9-0124/2021 - Alviina Alametsä)
Si l’ouverture de l’économie indienne est en effet une perspective politique et commerciale intéressante pour les États membres de l’Union, les provocations idéologiques du texte et la perspective d’une négociation par trop libre échangiste m’empêchent de voter pour cette recommandation. Je me suis abstenue.
Just Transition Fund (A9-0135/2020 - Manolis Kefalogiannis)
Les contraintes imposées aussi bien aux États membres qu’aux entreprises qui pourraient en bénéficier sont importantes. Elles correspondent à un cahier des charges particulièrement rigoureux. De plus, le cofinancement obligatoire entre le FTJ d’un côté, le FEDER et le FSE de l’autre risque de grever les capacités de financement de projets non éligibles au FTJ, mais éligibles au FEDER ou au FSE. De surcroît, la majeure partie des régions françaises ne seront pas éligibles au FTJ. Néanmoins, la France étant largement une économie décarbonée, l’objectif de neutralité climatique dans les États membres pourrait avoir des retombées positives pour l’économie française. Le souci supplémentaire de défendre l’écologie en France avait justifié un vote abstentionniste en septembre 2020. Je me suis abstenue.
Community plant variety rights: extension of the term for certain varieties (A9-0171/2021 - Bert-Jan Ruissen)
Les objectifs croisés de la nouvelle PAC et des stratégies environnementales qui découlent du pacte vert exposent au risque d’une chute brutale de la production agricole européenne, comme cela a été confirmé par une récente étude. Il devient donc urgent de proposer des solutions aux agriculteurs, en particulier des variétés productives et résistantes aux maladies, nécessitant moins d’eau, de produits phytosanitaires et d’engrais.Même si ce rapport n’est qu’un des cas d’espèce d’une problématique très large, il va dans le sens d’une plus grande considération de l’importance de la recherche en agriculture, ce que nous soutenons.Le point noir non relevé dans le rapport est l’absence d’étude d’impact, d’autant plus regrettable que la pratique semble se banaliser dans les travaux de la Commission. Cela ne justifie cependant pas une opposition à la prorogation, par ailleurs soutenue par les associations professionnelles.J'ai voté pour.
LGBTIQ rights in the EU (B9-0431/2021)
Ce texte constitue une grave atteinte à la souveraineté des États membres : il vise à imposer une harmonisation de la législation sur la reconnaissance du mariage homosexuel, ainsi que la reconnaissance des adoptions homoparentales faites à l’étranger. Le texte affirme la primauté du droit européen y compris sur les dispositions constitutionnelles des États membres, ce qui représente un déni de démocratie, la Constitution de chaque État étant l’expression ultime de la souveraineté populaire.J’ai voté contre.
Towards future-proof inland waterway transport in Europe (A9-0231/2021 - Caroline Nagtegaal)
Ce sujet intéresse particulièrement les Néerlandais mais, dans une moindre mesure, pourrait bénéficier au réseau français de voies navigables, long de 8 500 km, le plus long réseau de voies navigables d'Europe, dont 1 708 km de canaux à grand gabarit. Je ne suis pas contre ce rapport ni contre développer les transports fluviaux mais contre renforcer les prérogatives de la Commission européenne.Je me suis abstenue.
Towards a stronger partnership with the EU outermost regions (A9-0241/2021 - Stéphane Bijoux)
Lors de la réunion à laquelle participaient les rapporteurs au nombre desquels figurait M. André Rougé au nom du groupe ID, M. Bijoux a déclaré qu’il assumait son choix politique de ne pas vouloir examiner les amendements déposés par M. Rougé et cosignés par Mme Androuët, lesquels portaient, notamment, sur les catastrophes sanitaires majeures de l’accès à l’eau potable, de la pollution par le chlordécone et le ravage des algues Sargasses.Il est inacceptable que ce rapport ne prenne pas en considération ces trois sujets majeurs environnementaux et sanitaires que sont les algues Sargasses, le chlordécone et l’accès à l’eau courante aux Antilles et à Mayotte.En dépit de cette position tranchée du rapporteur, j’ai choisi de ne pas voter contre ce rapport dans un souci d’intérêt général, sans pour autant le cautionner par un vote favorable. Je me suis abstenue.
A new approach to the Atlantic maritime strategy (A9-0243/2021 - Younous Omarjee)
Avec son rapport d’initiative, le rapporteur propose des mesures visant à encourager l’évolution de la stratégie atlantique vers une macro-région atlantique afin, à la fois, d’améliorer la coordination entre les enjeux terre-mer, de renforcer le poids politique de la stratégie tout en assurant une gouvernance multi-niveaux, et de rationaliser les différentes sources de financement. Je considère ce rapport comme équilibré et je n’y vois pas d’objection particulière.J’ai voté pour.
Draft amending budget No 1/2021: Brexit Adjustment Reserve (A9-0263/2021 - Pierre Larrouturou)
Cette réserve qui est rapide et simple, ciblant les États membres de l’UE les plus durement touchés par le Brexit, est un instrument que je peux soutenir, d’autant que la France fait partie des premiers bénéficiaires.Bien entendu, l’adaptation structurelle à nos nouvelles relations avec le Royaume-Uni nécessitera bien plus d’ajustements à long terme.Mais il est important de soutenir à travers cette réserve les PME, les travailleurs indépendants et le secteur de la pêche artisanale, étant ici précisé que les secteurs financier et bancaire sont exclus du soutien. J’ai voté pour.
Extension of validity of safety certificates and licences of railway undertakings operating in the Channel tunnel (C9-0314/2021)
En tenant compte de la problématique de sécurité des voyageurs empruntant la liaison ferroviaire transmanche et vu l’enjeu géopolitique lié aux relations commerciales entre la France et le Royaume-Uni impliquant de façon bilatérale des parties prenantes du secteur ferroviaire, je soutiens cette modification.J’ai voté pour.
Official controls on animals and products of animal origin in order to ensure compliance with the prohibition of certain uses of antimicrobials (A9-0195/2021 - Pascal Canfin)
La législation européenne sur l’utilisation des antimicrobiens est d’autant plus sévère qu’elle lutte efficacement contre les phénomènes d’adaptation et donc d’antibiorésistance. Il est donc naturel qu’elle s’applique (particulièrement) aux exportations depuis les pays tiers. On ne peut tolérer de lacunes dans les contrôles.J'ai voté pour.
Brexit Adjustment Reserve (A9-0178/2021 - Pascal Arimont)
Selon la Cour des Comptes européenne, la proposition pèche par l’absence de précisions et de définitions claires, tels que la méthode d’échantillonnage ou la quantification et la correction des erreurs. Elle regrette également l’absence de justification d’une période d’admissibilité si courte. Cependant aucun de ces éléments n’empêchent un vote positif de ma part.J’ai voté pour.
EU Blue Card Directive (A8-0240/2017 - Javier Moreno Sánchez)
Sous couvert de faire venir une main d’œuvre hautement qualifiée, cette révision de la directive ouvre en fait la voie à une immigration de travailleurs peu qualifiés et participera davantage à la submersion migratoire de l’Europe. La Commission européenne ne s’en cache d’ailleurs pas puisque pour sa commissaire aux Affaires intérieures, Ylva Johansson, cette directive est « une composante clef du nouveau Pacte Asile et migration qui nous permettra de normaliser la politique de migration ».J’ai voté contre.
European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (A9-0253/2021 - Joanna Kopcińska)
L’ECDC a normalement pour rôle de « prévenir » et « contrôler » les maladies, rôle qu’il a difficilement rempli ces derniers mois.Là où j’aurais pu espérer qu’une révision de son mandat puisse aider à l’améliorer, il n’en est rien : cette institution déjà sous-staffée et débordée se voit confier de nouvelles missions, entre autre surveiller l’effet des maladies transmissibles sur celles non-transmissibles ou encore la santé mentale des européens. De plus, le Centre se voit désormais autoriser à envoyer des « missions » pour inspecter les capacités de santé des états membres et vérifier que ses recommandations sont en place, au mépris total de la subsidiarité (on ne le rappellera jamais assez, la santé est une compétence des états membres).J’ai voté contre.
Serious cross-border threats to health (A9-0247/2021 - Véronique Trillet-Lenoir)
Ce texte permet à l’UE de tout s’arroger, du droit de décider s’il y crise ou pas, à celui de décider des mesures à prendre ou des « voies » par lesquelles faire circuler les médicaments, sans que les états membres ne puissent agir. C’est l’UE qui décidera d’éventuelles restrictions aux voyages, de la liste des médicaments autorisés, des vaccins à acheter, et des sanctions sont d’ores et déjà prévues pour les états qui oseraient agir sans le consentement de Bruxelles.J’ai voté contre.
Visa Facilitation Agreement between the EU and Cabo Verde (A9-0264/2021 - Juan Fernando López Aguilar)
S’il est sûr que cet accord facilitera la délivrance de visas de court séjour dans l’UE pour les Capverdiens, il est malheureusement peu réaliste de croire à sa suspension en cas de coopération insuffisante du Cap-Vert en matière de réadmission de ses ressortissants, compte tenu du peu d’efficacité des accords de réadmission déjà conclus par l’UE.Je me suis abstenue.
Amending Council Framework Decision 2002/465/JHA, as regards its alignment with EU rules on the protection of personal data (A9-0236/2021 - Jeroen Lenaers)
EU-Korea agreement: certain aspects of air services (A9-0251/2021 - Dominique Riquet)
L’accord est bénéfique pour les deux parties en cela qu’il apporte une sécurité juridique aux opérations commerciales et garantit une approche non discriminatoire aux compagnies aériennes qui assurent des vols entre les deux territoires. Ce type d'accord devrait améliorer encore la connectivité entre l’Union européenne et l’Asie, et offrir une sécurité juridique aux compagnies aériennes.J’ai voté pour.
Objection pursuant to Rule 111(3): Criteria for the designation of antimicrobials to be reserved for the treatment of certain infections in humans (B9-0424/2021)
A new EU-China strategy (A9-0252/2021 - Hilde Vautmans)
Je suis opposée à l’accord général d’investissement avec la Chine, annoncé à la fin de l’année 2020. Cet accord sera au strict bénéfice de l’Allemagne et conduire à un nouvel affaissement de la politique commerciale française.Or, le rapport établit une analyse transeuropéenne des conséquences de l’accord sans différencier les risques encourus par les États membres de l’UE.Par ailleurs, si le rapport énonce certaines préoccupations et nécessités évidentes en matière de droit du travail et de normes environnementales par exemple, il fait reposer le principal de sa réflexion sur deux piliers que nous ne partageons pas : le triomphe des droits de l’homme sur les souverainetés et la volonté d’établir la Commission européenne comme ordonnatrice et dirigeante de la politique extérieure des Nations.Ainsi, ce rapport, au lieu d’aborder de manière pragmatique nos relations avec la Chine, se distingue par un atlantisme forcené et une défiance vis à vis de la souveraineté des États. C’est tout l’inverse d’une politique de puissance face à la Chine et je ne peux donc soutenir cela.J’ai voté contre.
Direction of EU-Russia political relations (A9-0259/2021 - Andrius Kubilius)
Ce texte démontre la réticence de l’UE à changer sa ligne politique vis-à-vis de la Russie et sa volonté de raviver les tensions avec le Kremlin. Le rapporteur estime que le renforcement des relations entre l’UE et les pays du partenariat oriental servira de «source d’inspiration pour le peuple russe». L’UE devrait donc en échange «offrir» aux pays du partenariat «un accord d’association» avec une perspective d’un nouvel élan à l’intégration européenne.De plus, le rapport est encore une fois un témoignage de la politique «deux points, deux mesures» de l’UE : la Russie est très souvent accusée d’ingérence dans les processus démocratiques européennes, pourtant le rapporteur considère acceptable d’inciter les États-membres à reconnaître les élections législatives de 2021 en Russie comme frauduleuses.Je condamne la volonté de l’UE de s’ingérer dans le processus démocratique d’un État souverain et conteste l’idée d’un potentiel élargissement européen, ainsi que l’alignement des États-membres sur la politique des États-Unis.J’ai voté contre.
Guidelines for the employment policies of the Member States (A9-0262/2021 - Lucia Ďuriš Nicholsonová)
Dans ce rapport, le concept de «non-discrimination» sur le marché du travail, est un outil juridique européen qui s’oppose directement à notre projet politique d’établir une priorité nationale à l’emploi pour les français. On pousse même plus loin l’idéologie «woke» puisque la ligne directrice numéro 8 intitulée «Promouvoir l’égalité des chances pour tous, favoriser l’inclusion sociale et combattre la pauvreté» propose de mettre en place «des mesures efficaces pour combattre toutes les formes de discrimination et promouvoir l’égalité des chances au bénéfice de tous, et en particulier des groupes qui sont sous-représentés sur le marché du travail» ce qui, sous cette formulation, laisse ouverte la voix à des quota que nous refusons.J’ai voté contre.
Fair working conditions, rights and social protection for platform workers - New forms of employment linked to digital development (A9-0257/2021 - Sylvie Brunet)
Depuis le début des travaux de la Commission EMPL, notre position a toujours été la même: dès lors que les tribunaux nationaux requalifient peu à peu les statuts d’«autoentrepreneurs» indûment accordés par les entreprises à leurs travailleurs, redéfinissant ceux-ci comme «salariés» en vertu du principe de subordination, et créant une jurisprudence laissant préfigurer le principe de présomption de salariat censée protéger les travailleurs, le projet d’une directive européenne en la matière perd ici tout son sens. En effet, le Royaume-Uni et la Suisse hors UE, l’Espagne France pour l’UE agissent: les tribunaux compétents au niveau national le font d’ailleurs indistinctement de la Commission européenne, en attestent les pays cités.Les discussions et le texte final laissent imaginer une immixtion dans le domaine du Code du travail.Je me suis abstenue.
Fishers for the future (A9-0230/2021 - Manuel Pizarro)
Si je peux regretter que le texte ne condamne pas l’impact qu’ont les parcs éoliens offshore sur la pêche et notamment la pêche artisanale (il se plait même à imaginer au paragraphe 25 que «le développement de la production d’énergie en mer, la concrétisation des zones marines protégées et la pleine application de l’obligation de débarquement, peuvent influencer l’attrait des jeunes générations vers ce secteur»). Néanmoins le contenu général du rapport est positif pour les pêcheurs.J’ai voté pour.
Plans and actions to accelerate a transition to innovation without the use of animals in research, regulatory testing and education (RC-B9-0425/2021, B9-0425/2021, B9-0426/2021, B9-0427/2021, B9-0428/2021, B9-0429/2021, B9-0432/2021)
La résolution commune est en fait un compromis entre les résolutions des groupes de gauche (Verts, The Left, S&D) qui reprenaient généralement les propositions protectrices de l’intergroupe sur le bien-être animal et les résolutions des groupes de droite (PPE, Renew et ECR) qui insistaient sur la nécessité de continuer certaines expériences qui ne peuvent pas encore être remplacées.J’ai voté pour.
Identifying gender-based violence as a new area of crime listed in Article 83(1) TFEU (A9-0249/2021 - Malin Björk, Diana Riba i Giner)
Ce texte défend également la théorie du genre dans l’éducation, l’éducation sexuelle dite complète, et tend à présenter les hommes comme des oppresseurs en puissance. Il porte atteinte à la souveraineté des États membres en termes de droits sexuels et génésiques. La politique souveraine de la Pologne est explicitement dénoncée et le recours à l’article 7 demandé. Les pays n’ayant pas ratifié la convention d’Istanbul sont également ciblés. De plus la lutte contre les violences domestiques incombe aux États membres.J’ai voté contre.
Implementation of EU requirements for exchange of tax information (A9-0193/2021 - Sven Giegold)
La Commission a mis à la disposition des États membres divers outils pour renforcer l’échange de renseignements et des meilleures pratiques, ainsi qu’une assistance informatique, principalement au moyen du programme Fiscalis 2020, que nous avions approuvé.Malgré le caractère perfectible de ce dispositif, un vote en faveur se justifie en raison de l’objectif nécessaire de la lutte contre la fraude fiscale.J’ai voté pour.
Situation in Afghanistan (RC-B9-0455/2021, B9-0433/2021, B9-0453/2021, B9-0455/2021, B9-0458/2021, B9-0459/2021, B9-0460/2021, B9-0462/2021)
La résolution souligne avec raison le sort dramatique de l’Afghanistan et l’échec cuisant des États-Unis et de l’OTAN dans ce pays. Je regrette cependant que, contrairement à ce qui existait sous Donald Trump, aucune allusion à l’échec de la politique de Joe Biden ne soit lisible.Si je partage évidemment le constat des risques terribles que la charia fait peser sur la population civile, nous ne pouvons pas être dupes d’un fait: si les Talibans se sont emparés du pouvoir, c’est bien qu’une large partie de la population afghane est prête à composer avec eux. Or, l’aveuglement occidental n’est jamais mis en cause dans le texte. Pire, il sert de justification à des revendications politiques comme l’établissement d’une Union européenne comme force diplomatique de grande envergure et le renforcement de l’OTAN.C’est pourtant bien les traditions diplomatiques nationales, libérées de la tutelle de l’OTAN, qui pourraient être efficaces pour adopter une politique extérieure réaliste, seule à même de prévenir les catastrophes géopolitiques comme celle qui se déroule à Kaboul.Cette résolution est un appel à l’élargissement des voies migratoires pour les Afghans et un appel à l’intégration des politiques étrangères européennes.J’ai voté contre.
Situation in Lebanon (RC-B9-0465/2021, B9-0464/2021, B9-0465/2021, B9-0466/2021, B9-0467/2021, B9-0468/2021, B9-0469/2021, B9-0470/2021)
Si la résolution souligne régulièrement des éléments essentiels de la résolution de la crise au Liban, comme la lutte contre la corruption et la nécessité d’une refondation du pacte civique libanais, elle tombe dans plusieurs écueils. D’abord elle s’accroche à l’idée que la menace de sanctions est un outil efficace de politique étrangère. C’est tout l’inverse qui est vrai et qui est en plus à contre temps, puisque les États-Unis viennent par exemple de s’asseoir sur une partie des sanctions contre la Syrie pour relancer l’approvisionnement en gaz du pays du Cèdre. Ensuite, la résolution est absolument mensongère quant au fardeau des réfugiés syriens présents au Liban, et prétend que leur présence serait due à l’attitude de Damas quand c’est bien la communauté internationale qui est responsable de cette situation.Derrière une générosité de façade, la résolution embrasse en réalité une situation complexe avec des idées simplistes, extrêmement partisanes et parvient à l’exploit de parler du Liban sans mentionner une seule fois le terme chrétien.J’ai voté contre.
Media freedom and further deterioration of the Rule of law in Poland (B9-0461/2021, B9-0463/2021)
Environment: The Aarhus Regulation (A9-0152/2021 - Christian Doleschal)
Proposal on the setting-up of a delegation to the EU-UK Parliamentary Assembly, and defining its numerical strength (B9-0479/2021)
L’accord de commerce et de coopération UE-Royaume-Uni prévoit en son article 11 l’établissement d’une assemblée parlementaire du partenariat UE-Royaume-Uni composée de membres des parlements européen et britannique. Étant favorable à cette accord je suis également favorable à cette disposition. J’ai voté pour.
Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Agreement EU/Greenland and Denmark (A9-0233/2021 - Pierre Karleskind)
Le nouvel accord et son protocole accordent des possibilités de pêche à 12 chaluts (dont des navires français) de l’Union européenne dans les eaux groenlandaises en échange d'une contrepartie financière annuelle d'environ 16,5 millions d'euros. Dans cette somme, 3 millions sont dévolus au développement du secteur de la pêche au Groenland. On notera qu’il s’agit du troisième accord de l'Union le plus important sur le plan financier. Ce nouvel accord est d’ailleurs plus cher que le précédent (16,1 millions d’euros) pour des possibilités de pêche qui ont baissé de 5 % depuis. La part dédiée à l’appui sectoriel reste identique mais les prix de référence pour les autorisations de pêche des armateurs sont plus élevés. Le rapporteur justifie ce calcul peu avantageux pour les Européens comme la conséquence néfaste du Brexit sur les relations de l’UE avec les pays de l’Atlantique Nord, mais sur lequel l’UE doit être en mesure de faire des concessions dans une volonté d’apaisement. Je me suis abstenue.
Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Agreement EU/Greenland and Denmark (resolution) (A9-0235/2021 - Pierre Karleskind)
Le rapport souligne les points défavorables de l’Accord du point de vue de l’UE : la compensation financière européenne plus élevée que dans le protocole précédent, un manque de visibilité lié à l’incertitude de la reconduction du protocole après 4 ans, une mauvaise évaluation scientifique du « surplus » des ressources des eaux groenlandaises et donc une mauvaise estimation de ce que les navires européens ont droit de pêcher. Il est aussi question de demander le transfert, en tout ou en partie, des quotas non utilisés en raison du retard de l’application provisoire de l’Accord à 2022, afin de récupérer les quatre mois perdus à cause de la mise en œuvre provisoire tardive de l’Accord et de son protocole. Cette résolution met en avant des arguments permettant de mieux défendre les intérêts des États membres (dont la France) présents dans les eaux groenlandaises. J’ai voté pour.
Temporarily suspending autonomous Common Customs Tariff duties on imports of certain industrial products into the Canary Islands (A9-0267/2021 - Younous Omarjee)
Il s’agit dans ce dossier non seulement de prolonger de 10 ans des mesures déjà existantes visant à soutenir l’économie des Iles Canaries dans un contexte économique aggravé par la crise sanitaire mais encore, de renforcer ce soutien en incluant de nouveaux produits bénéficiant de cette suspension des droits de douane. Par ailleurs, les pertes de recettes pour l’UE sont minimes (2,5 millions par an sur une ligne budgétaire de 17 milliards pour 2021) et resteront quasiment inchangés. J’ai voté pour.
The role of development policy in the response to biodiversity loss in developing countries, in the context of the achievement of the 2030 Agenda (A9-0258/2021 - Michèle Rivasi)
Si l’on rejoint le rapporteur sur de nombreux constats, son rapport comporte toutefois l’inconvénient de solliciter trop d’actes législatifs, européens et internationaux. Comme l’inscription du droit à un environnement sain dans la Charte des droits fondamentaux de l'Union européenne, de « l’écocide » et le droit des futures générations dans le droit international de l’environnement ainsi qu’une mention du trafic d’espèces sauvages au titre de la Convention des Nations Unies contre la criminalité transnationale organisée - le rapporteur propose une compétence de la Cour pénale internationale s’agissant des crimes environnementaux. Ainsi qu’une législation européenne en matière de devoir de vigilance des entreprises, des nouvelles mesures pour interdire le commerce d’ivoire (déjà en cours d’élaboration) , un cadre européen contre la déforestation et sur les industries extractives. Par ailleurs, la défense des peuples indigènes et pastoraux confine à l’ingérence. Je me suis abstenue.
Artificial intelligence in criminal law and its use by the police and judicial authorities in criminal matters (A9-0232/2021 - Petar Vitanov)
Si des précautions sont évidemment nécessaires pour encadrer l’utilisation de l’intelligence artificielle en matières policière et judiciaire, le but de ce rapport n’est pas celui-ci mais bien de diviser la société en catégories et de s’attaquer à nos forces de police. Il met par ailleurs en danger nos concitoyens par sa vision laxiste. Ce texte est par conséquent contraire à l’état de droit. J’ai voté contre.
The impact of intimate partner violence and custody rights on women and children (A9-0254/2021 - Elena Kountoura, Luisa Regimenti)
Il faut rappeler qu’il s’agit d’un texte d’initiative, non normatif, qui fait avant tout des recommandations. Il a pour but de protéger les enfants victimes ou témoins en préconisant l’application d’un principe de précaution, principe auquel il semble difficile de s’opposer. La présence de passages auxquels je suis hostile et le refus, au nom de notre souveraineté nationale, de voir l’Union Européenne s’immiscer dans les politiques familiales et juridiques (régalien) des États membres m’empêchent de voter en faveur de ce texte. Je me suis abstenue.
EU Road Safety Policy Framework 2021-2030 – Recommendations on next steps towards "Vision Zero" (A9-0211/2021 - Elena Kountoura)
Ce rapport est fondé sur le constat que l’objectif de réduire de moitié le nombre de décès sur les routes de l'UE entre 2010 et 2020 n’a pas été atteint ; par conséquent, introduite en 2018 dans le train de mesures «L’Europe en mouvement», la Commission européenne a adopté une nouvelle stratégie de l’UE en matière de sécurité routière pour la décennie 2021 2030, affichant une vision plus ambitieuse à long terme et fixant des objectifs de réduction de 50 % du nombre de décès et du nombre de blessures graves d’ici à 2030. Je me suis abstenue.
Rebuilding fish stocks in the Mediterranean (A9-0225/2021 - Raffaele Stancanelli)
Si je regrette que le rapport soit muet sur les conséquences du plan « West Med », qui prévoit de réduire à 160 le nombre maximal de jours de mer pour les chalutiers en Méditerranée, soit en dessous de leur seuil de rentabilité (177 jours), je note néanmoins l’appel du rapporteur à lutter contre la concurrence déloyale des pays tiers et contre l’insécurité physique que certains de leurs ressortissants font peser sur les pêcheurs européens. J'ai voté pour.
Objection pursuant to Rule 112(2) and (3): Active substances, including chlorotoluron and difenoconazole (B9-0481/2021)
Les objections formulées au titre du principe de précaution car la portée sanitaire dépassent le champ strictement partisan/politique. Tant que n’est pas donnée la garantie de l’innocuité de telle ou telle substance, il est selon moi nécessaire de soutenir ces objections salutaires pour la santé de l’homme. J’ai voté pour.
Objection pursuant to Rule 111(3): Technical screening criteria for determining the conditions under which an economic activity qualifies as contributing substantially to climate change mitigation or climate change adaptation and for determining whether that economic activity causes no significant harm to any of the other environmental objectives (B9-0476/2021, B9-0477/2021)
L’enjeu pour la France est majeur. Notre filière nucléaire est une des plus performantes au monde, fruit de choix vieux de 60 ans. Elle implique près de 220 000 emplois, un savoir-faire, une chaine de 3 200 sous-traitants, elle est un gage de notre indépendance énergétique et a des connexions avec notre statut de puissance militaire atomique. Je ne rejette pas les critiques sur les risques du nucléaire ni sur l’obligation de poursuivre la recherche pour le traitement des déchets, par exemple. Mais je souhaite préserver, conformément aux traités, notre liberté dans la définition de notre mix énergétique et ne pas céder aux intérêts allemands notamment, qui privilégient le secteur des renouvelables comme énergie décarbonée. La crise du prix de l’énergie ces dernières semaines montre à nouveau qu’il est essentiel que nous puissions continuer à disposer d’une énergie fiable, peu chère et décarbonée. J’ai voté pour.
The future of EU-US relations (A9-0250/2021 - Tonino Picula)
Le rapport, sans le dire, est un acte de plus de l’Union européenne vers l’assujettissement aux États-Unis. Pour se donner bonne conscience, il exprime des requêtes par ailleurs inaudibles sur la politique intérieure américaine (port d’armes, peine de mort, Guantanamo).Rompant avec tout principe de neutralité politique et diplomatique, le rapporteur, dont le parti d’appartenance provient de la Ligue communiste de Croatie, célèbre l’élection de Joe Biden. Le rapport appelle à la concertation permanente et préalable entre Washington et Bruxelles, notamment pour se positionner à l’égard de Moscou et Pékin. Ce qui signifie faire entrer les pays membres dans une logique de suivisme total des intérêts américains.Il omet totalement les réalités d’aujourd’hui, et arrive à un moment qui démontre la naïveté européenne, et notamment française, suite à la crise des sous-marins. Il pose l’Union européenne comme une entité homogène, ne mentionnant que très rarement les États membres, sinon pour les exhorter à se plier à telle ou telle limite. J'ai voté contre.
Implementation report on the EU Trust Funds and the Facility for Refugees in Turkey (A9-0255/2021 - Öilan Zver, György Hölvényi, Janusz Lewandowski)
Une majorité de ces fonds est utilisée pour des opérations d’influence politique constituant un outil de propagande de l’Union. En outre, il est demandé dans le texte des fonds supplémentaires pour l’aide au développement à un moment où les États membres doivent réduire leurs dépenses pour assurer la relance après la COVID-19. Aucune réaction appropriée n’est proposée à l’encontre de la Turquie, qui menace d’une immigration de masse, ni pour souligner qu’il faut immédiatement mettre fin à toute aide à la Turquie octroyée par la Commission. Des amendements en plénière sont déposés proposant, d’une part, que l’aide au développement accordée aux pays tiers soit subordonnée à la coopération avec l’Union en matière de migration et de sécurité ainsi qu’à la mise en œuvre réussie des accords de réadmission et exigeant, d’autre part, l’arrêt immédiat de tout financement et de toute négociation d’adhésion avec la Turquie en suspendant l’accord d’union douanière. Le constat est simple: pour des raisons géographiques, culturelles et historiques, la Turquie ne pourra jamais faire partie de l’Union européenne. J’ai voté contre.
State of EU cyber defence capabilities (A9-0234/2021 - Urmas Paet)
The Arctic: opportunities, concerns and security challenges (A9-0239/2021 - Anna Fotyga)
L’Union tente de cacher ses intérêts géopolitiques dans la région derrière «de bonnes intentions» qui reposent sur la préservation de la région contre le changement climatique et ses incidences sur la sécurité et l’environnement. Ce texte démontre une nouvelle fois l’intention de l’Union de bâtir une alliance solide avec les États-Unis et l’OTAN pour peser sur l’arène géopolitique. La volonté mal cachée de Bruxelles de raviver les tensions avec la Russie continue à dominer la politique étrangère de l’Union. Le Parlement européen entend construire sa «coopération» avec la Russie en maintenant la politique de sanctions.J’ai voté contre.
The protection of persons with disabilities through petitions: lessons learnt (A9-0261/2021 - Alex Agius Saliba)
Le texte encourage une approche qui passe par la coopération entre les États (« promouvoir une coopération fructueuse et l’échange de bonnes pratiques entre les États membres ») et un meilleur contrôle par les États membres de l’application des engagements pris dans la convention des Nations unies relative aux droits des personnes handicapées (CDPH), à laquelle les États souverains ont librement pris part. Il prie les États qui n’ont pas ratifié le protocole facultatif de cette convention de le faire. Cette exigence ne concerne pas la France, qui a déjà ratifié le protocole facultatif en 2010. Les constats justes dressés par le rapport, et la démarche qui s’appuie sur le respect des engagements librement contractés dans le cadre d’une convention internationale plutôt que sur la politique coercitive des institutions européennes, nous incitent à recommander un vote en faveur du texte. J’ai voté pour.
Banking Union - annual report 2020 (A9-0256/2021 - Danuta Maria Hübner)
Ce rapport rappelle certes utilement les enjeux de ce dossier, dont les commissaires font souvent un élément central de la cohésion de l’UE. Il n’apporte cependant que peu d’éléments nouveaux. Nos élus ont souvent reporté leur hostilité à la philosophie de ces textes sur les rapports périodiques, qui, il est vrai, se félicitent beaucoup et critiquent peu. J’ai voté contre.
Reforming the EU policy on harmful tax practices (including the reform of the Code of Conduct Group) (A9-0245/2021 - Aurore Lalucq)
Le rapport identifie clairement les points de blocage et les lacunes passées, en raison desquelles la concurrence fiscale déloyale a pu prospérer dans l’UE, au détriment de la France notamment.Cependant, sur certains points, les recommandations constituent une fois encore un déplacement du pouvoir de décision en matière fiscale vers des acteurs non étatiques ou vers l’UE. La Commission et le Conseil pourraient notamment imposer à un État le gel voire le démantèlement d’une législation dommageable.Même si le rapport insiste sur l’aspect technique et la prise de décision consensuelle, cela s’oppose à ma doctrine sur la souveraineté fiscale, malgré la pertinence de certains moyens et la juste définition des objectifs.Je me suis abstenue.
The situation in Belarus after one year of protests and their violent repression (RC-B9-0482/2021, B9-0482/2021, B9-0483/2021, B9-0485/2021, B9-0488/2021, B9-0494/2021, B9-0496/2021)
La présente résolution est juste sur plusieurs points : la répression au Bélarus n’est en effet pas acceptable et il convient de la condamner. Il en va de même pour la pression migratoire faite sur les pays transfrontaliers avec le Bélarus, et les conclusions que le texte en tire, notamment sur le rôle de Frontex et sur l’attitude à avoir vis-à-vis des pays d’où viennent les migrants. Néanmoins, le texte pose problème par sa condamnation systématique de la Russie et les conclusions qu’il en tire : une défense européenne sous l’égide de l’OTAN ; par la place qu’il donne à l’Union européenne en politique étrangère, sous l’égide du SEAE notamment ; par sa volonté de financer directement l’opposition bélarusse, ingérence inacceptable ; par la volonté d’imposer des sanctions, dont on sait qu’elles sont inefficaces. Je me suis abstenue.
Draft amending budget 4/2021: Update of revenue, revised forecast of own resources and other revenue (A9-0268/2021 - Pierre Larrouturou)
Si la délégation a voté en faveur de la taxe carbone, de la taxe plastique et de la taxe numérique, il est important de ne pas donner un blanc-seing à la Commission sur ce sujet.D’autant que pour ce nouveau panier de nouvelles ressources propres, beaucoup de précisions sont attendues notamment sur la taxe numérique et la taxe carbone.Même si ce projet de budget rectificatif constitue un ajustement technique, un vote contre se justifie à mes yeux car la question du panier de ressources propres devant servir à rembourser un emprunt commun constitue un saut fédéraliste important.J’ai voté contre.
2019 Discharge: EU general budget - Council and European Council (A9-0276/2021 - Pascal Durand)
Credit servicers and credit purchasers (A9-0003/2021 - Esther de Lange, Irene Tinagli)
Ce texte respecte les spécificités et les règlementations nationales et a donc plutôt tendance à partir des tats, et à ne fournir qu’un cadre minimal pour ceux ayant une législation inexistante dans ce domaine.Elle ne prévoit cependant pas tous les cas de figure qui pourraient contourner ces obligations, comme la question d’une éventuelle titrisation ultérieure qui ne semble pas clairement exclue.Il faut noter enfin que, depuis plusieurs mois, et avant même donc l’entrée en vigueur de ces dispositifs, le taux de prêts non performants au bilan des banques de la zone euro sont en baisse sensible. Les aides massives liées aux plans d’aides post Covid ont en partie faussé l’image que l’on peut avoir de la solvabilité de nombreuses entreprises et ménages, dont la situation a pu artificiellement être favorablement maintenue en dépit de la crise sanitaire.Je me suis abstenue.
Farm to Fork Strategy (A9-0271/2021 - Anja Hazekamp, Herbert Dorfmann)
Cette stratégie comporte nombre d’injonctions à modifier profondément les pratiques agricoles et culturelles de l’Europe («criminalisation» de l’élevage, obligation de diminuer la production de protéines animales – viande, lait, œufs –, stigmatisation et condamnation de certains produits – trop gras, trop salés, trop sucrés – pouvant mettre à mal la spécificité de certains régimes alimentaires en Europe.). Elle impose également des caractères discriminants pour les TPE et les PME agricoles, alors que ces baromètres sont surtout le cache-sexe des industriels de l’agroalimentaire dans leur exercice de «greenwashing». Bien que porteuse d’intentions de bon sens, son application proposée me semble néfaste.J’ai voté contre.
Employment and social policies of the euro area 2021 (A9-0274/2021 - Lina Gálvez Muñoz)
Si ce texte déplore la gestion catastrophique de la crise de la zone euro, avec son lot de mesures antisociales, nous nous en sommes tenus à avaliser ce constat lors des votes en commission EMPL en votant en faveur de très nombreux récitals négociés par l’ensemble des groupes. En effet, ceux-ci dénoncent pour la première fois, et ce alors que nous le martelons depuis le début, le paradoxe qui consiste à autoriser la Commission à proposer des textes dont les conditions objectives de réalisation ne seront jamais rencontrées dans le cadre des traités actuels.J’ai voté contre.
Protecting workers from asbestos (A9-0275/2021 - Nikolaj Villumsen)
Si la nécessité de protéger les travailleurs contre l’amiante a naturellement fait consensus en commission, la proposition d’une nouvelle valeur limite d’exposition professionnelle exceptionnellement basse a en revanche fait débat. Les groupes PPE et ECR y ont opposé en commission un amendement de compromis (soutenu par le groupe ID) qui demandait avec plus de pragmatisme «d’actualiser en priorité ces limites d’exposition, qui devraient être fixées au niveau le plus bas techniquement réalisable». Cet amendement de compromis n’a pas été retenu. Il devrait revenir pour le texte présenté en plénière sous une forme ou une autre.Tel est aussi le vœu de la Commission européenne qui, dans une lettre adressée à la commission EMPL le 14 septembre dernier, a indiqué qu’il serait contreproductif que la version finale du rapport du Parlement sur l’amiante appelle à une valeur limite concrète, car cela porterait atteinte à l’autonomie des partenaires sociaux.Au-delà de ces considérations techniques, que la nouvelle valeur limite d’exposition professionnelle soit adoptée ou non, voter en faveur de la protection des travailleurs de l’amiante me semble être une obligation politique.J’ai voté pour.
Europe’s Media in the Digital Decade (A9-0278/2021 - Dace Melbārde)
En plus de l’objet même du texte, qui est positif, les amendements adoptés sont étonnamment pro-européens (en opposition à la mondialisation) et souhaitent le rayonnement des œuvres du continent dans le monde. Le texte rappelle ainsi la nécessité d’avoir 30 % d’œuvres européennes minimum sur les plateformes étrangères, ce qui est une très bonne chose (art. 41). Le pluralisme et l’indépendance des médias sont primordiaux.J’ai voté pour.
The effectiveness of Member States' use of EU Solidarity Fund money in cases of natural disasters (A9-0273/2021 - Corina Crețu)
Le FSUE peut être considéré comme une expression de solidarité et joue aussi, aujourd’hui, un rôle important dans la lutte contre le COVID-19. De 2002 à 2019, la France a reçu 252,6 millions d’euros du FSUE, ce qui en fait la troisième bénéficiaire après l’Italie et l’Allemagne. De plus, le Fonds n’est accessible qu’aux États membres ou aux pays en voie d’adhésion.J’ai voté pour.
The situation of artists and the cultural recovery in the EU (A9-0283/2021 - Monica Semedo)
Même si je regrette les simples déclarations d’intérêt sur la «mobilité transfrontalière durable et inclusive avec les pays tiers» (ou encore la reconnaissance des diplômes, problématique quand elle est automatique), tout le reste du texte m’apparaît non seulement soutenable mais nécessaire: il est urgent d’aider le secteur culturel.J’ai voté pour.
EU-Taiwan political relations and cooperation (A9-0265/2021 - Charlie Weimers)
Je ne peux soutenir ce rapport, car il omet :- que Taiwan bénéficie beaucoup plus des investissements européens que nous ne bénéficierions des siens et qu’à cet égard la proposition d’un accord bilatéral d’investissement ne nous serait pas favorable- que l’Union européenne n’a pas à encourager les États qui établissent les premiers symboles de la reconnaissance diplomatique de Taiwan- que l’importance de la zone Asie Pacifique est en effet insigne, mais que la trahison australo-américaine de la France dans l’affaire des sous-marins de Naval Group nous impose d’aborder autrement notre stratégie diplomatique dans la région.Je me suis abstenue.
General budget of the European Union for the financial year 2022 - all sections (A9-0281/2021 - Karlo Ressler, Damian Boeselager)
La position de notre groupe est toujours la même sur le budget : nous sommes contre. Même si cette année l’augmentation du budget est symbolique, notamment à cause de l’introduction du programme NextGenerationEU, le budget annuel finance toujours plusieurs lignes budgétaires auxquelles nous ne sommes pas d’accord, comme la migration, la défense, le financement de la Turquie, les programmes d’accession, et l’aide extérieure ou le programme Erasmus+.J’ai voté contre.
Joint Undertakings under Horizon Europe (A9-0246/2021 - Maria da Graça Carvalho)
Ce texte va dans le bon sens et contient des propositions positives.Ces initiatives visent notamment à renforcer la compétitivité de nos entreprises et la mise en place du leadership européen dans de nombreux domaines clés, y compris l’aviation, l’hydrogène et le rail. Elles seront également bénéfiques pour nos PME qui participeront aux écosystèmes industriels liées aux activités des entreprises communes.J’ai voté pour.
An EU strategy to reduce methane emissions (A9-0277/2021 - Maria Spyraki)
Ce rapport d’initiative, qui n’a pas valeur normative, est plutôt positif, même s’il ne se présage en rien des propositions de la Commission. Environ 80 % des Français estiment que le réchauffement climatique est une réalité, aussi ce texte apparaît-il en phase avec eux lorsqu’il demande à la Commission de préparer des mesures contre les émissions de méthane, dès lors que le texte évoque lui-même la nécessité de ne pas prendre de mesures qui favoriseraient les importations.J’ai voté pour.
UN Climate Change Conference in Glasgow, the UK (COP26) (B9-0521/2021)
Je ne souhaite pas soutenir un énième texte qui reprend toutes les lubies contemporaines d’une idéologie verte dont le caractère scientifique s’est en réalité souvent révélé être politique. La seule mention des questions de genre suffit au discrédit. La responsabilité morale d’un Occident presque christique en est la dimension spirituelle.Cela se traduit par des transferts de richesses massifs vers le reste du monde sur fond de culpabilité climatique, une transformation radicale de nos économies réelles dans le sillage du pacte vert, un mondialisme triomphant car constituant prétendument la seule échelle à laquelle on peut régler les problèmes, et un bond dans l’inconnu pour des millions de gens paralysés par un catastrophisme ambiant servant les intérêts d’idéologues habilement reconvertis en défenseurs du climat, en attendant les migrations climatiques.J’ai voté contre.
Pandora Papers: implications on the efforts to combat money laundering, tax evasion and avoidance (B9-0527/2021, RC B9-0530/2021, B9-0530/2021, B9-0531/202)
Une fois de plus, les Pandora papers montrent que les fraudeurs ont un coup d’avance sur les régulateurs et les États. A fortiori quand ils sont ceux qui dirigent ces mêmes États...La proportion de politiques de premier plan dans les Pandora Papers est frappante. Et le fait que certaines personnes citées (le 1er ministre tchèque ou le ministre des finances néerlandais) soient aussi ceux qui décident au niveau de l’UE des mesures à prendre montre que le système est vicié. Cette résolution est donc bienvenue.J’ai voté pour.
The Rule of law crisis in Poland and the primacy of EU law (B9-0532/2021, B9-0533/2021, B9-0539/2021)
La résolution déposée au nom des groupes PPE, S&D, Renew, Verts/ALE et The Left déplore la décision du Tribunal constitutionnel qu’ils considèrent illégitime, et qui, à leurs yeux, constitue «une attaque contre la communauté européenne de valeurs et de lois dans son ensemble, sapant la primauté du droit de l’Union européenne comme l’un de ses principes fondamentaux, conformément à la jurisprudence bien établie de la CJUE». Ils expriment leur inquiétude quant au fait que cette décision pourrait créer un dangereux précédent et condamnent l’utilisation du système judiciaire à des fins politiques. Je suis opposée à ces tentatives de créer un super-État de l’Union par la voie judiciaire ou par toute autre voie détournée qui sont profondément antidémocratiques et auront des conséquences négatives potentiellement graves, tout en mettant en danger l’amitié et la coopération durables entre les nations européennes. Il n’existe pas de soutien démocratique à un super-État de l’Union et les électeurs de certains États membres ont rejeté en 2005 le traité constitutionnel de l’Union.J’ai voté contre.
Situation in Tunisia (RC-B9-0523/2021, B9-0523/2021, B9-0524/2021, B9-0525/2021, B9-0526/2021, B9-0528/2021, B9-0529/2021)
La résolution commune refuse de laisser sa chance au Président Saïed, dont le profil et le soutien populaire pourraient pourtant laisser présager un renforcement de la Tunisie. Cette nouvelle serait pourtant particulièrement bénéfique pour la France et l’Europe en termes migratoires et sécuritaires. Préférant une vision procédurale de la démocratie à une compréhension historique et réaliste de ces progrès, le Parlement reprend les antiennes du Printemps arabe, qui avait conduit à l’arrivée des islamistes d’Ennahda au pouvoir. Par ailleurs, il n’aborde aucun sujet important dans le dossier de manière explicite: instrumentalisation turque, soutien du Qatar aux forces islamistes, jeu trouble de l’Algérie.J’ai voté contre.
Climate, Energy and Environmental State aid guidelines (CEEAG) (B9-0534/2021, RC-B9-0535/2021, B9-0535/2021, B9-0536/2021, B9-0537/2021, B9-0538/2021)
L’objectif de ces propositions de résolution est de savoir si les aides d’État seront désormais conditionnées aux différents accords (Paris, paquet «Ajustement à l’objectif 55», pacte vert, etc.) et élargies aux nouvelles technologies tout en accélérant la disparition des énergies fossiles. Ce coup d’arrêt est certes vendu comme étant «progressif», mais cache le fait que l’UE prendra in fine du retard face à la concurrence chinoise et américaine.J’ai voté contre.
2019 Discharge: European Border and Coast Guard Agency (A9-0270/2021 - Ryszard Czarnecki)
La décharge a été refusée à Frontex en avril 2021 pour des raisons politiques. Il convient de soutenir l’agence, visée par une véritable cabale. Je suis donc pour la décharge et contre la résolution. Des amendements, des demandes de votes séparés et des demandes de votes par division ont été déposés par le groupe ID pour dénoncer les conditions demandées par la résolution.J’ai voté pour.
Disclosure of income tax information by certain undertakings and branches (A9-0305/2021 - Evelyn Regner, Ibán García Del Blanco)
Alors que nombre de citoyens contestent à juste titre l’impunité de certaines multinationales et que la demande de lutte contre les inégalités se fait plus pressante, il me semble indispensable d’exiger la plus grande transparence possible. Il faut rappeler que la France, dont l’attractivité fiscale est une des plus basses de l’UE (taux, versatilité de la législation, complexité) a plus à y gagner face ses partenaires qui bénéficiaient de l’opacité dans ce domaine (Pays Bas, Luxembourg, Irlande en premier lieu).J’ai voté pour.
European Partnership on Metrology (A9-0242/2021 - Maria da Graça Carvalho)
Le partenariat européen dans le domaine de la métrologie a pour ambition d’assurer la compétitivité des solutions métrologiques en Europe et de les mettre au niveau de celles des acteurs les plus performants au niveau mondial (les États-Unis, la Chine et l’Inde).Le partenariat entend contribuer à la réduction d’un déficit de compétences spécifiques au sein de l’Union et prévoit la participation des PME, des universités et des organismes de recherche.J’ai voté pour.
European Union Agency for Asylum (A8-0392/2016 - Elena Yoncheva)
La création de cette agence est un énième moyen pour les institutions européennes, sous couvert d’efficacité et de meilleure collaboration entre États membres en matière d’asile, de placer ces derniers sous une forme de tutelle politique, aux sens organique et philosophique du terme, qui concrètement aura surtout pour effet de restreindre un peu plus encore un champ d’action qui leur est déjà de plus en plus limité. Ainsi, la mention des « droits fondamentaux » revient 70 fois dans le texte, ceux-ci faisant l’objet d’un « officier » spécialement dédié à leur respect ‘à tous les étages’ et d’un mécanisme spécifique de plainte dans le cas contraire. Ceci est un ‘cheval de Troie’ supplémentaire dans l’action des États membres en matière d’asile.J’ai voté contre.
Serious cross-border threats to health (A9-0247/2021 - Véronique Trillet-Lenoir)
La Commission européenne a publié son plan pour la création d’une « Autorité européenne de préparation et de réaction en cas d'urgence sanitaire (HERA) », institution qui est donc en lien direct avec ce texte. Je suis opposée à la création de l’agence HERA, agence qui se rêve en équivalent de la BARDA américaine et qui ne sera qu’une usine à gaz de plus dans le maelström bruxellois.J’ai voté contre.
EU/Australia Agreement: modification of concessions on all the tariff-rate quotas included in the EU Schedule CLXXV (A9-0306/2021 - Daniel Caspary)
L’article 2 du règlement 2019/216 habilite la Commission à négocier, à modifier la répartition pour tenir compte du contexte ou en fonction de toute information susceptible de lui parvenir.Elle a notamment augmenté considérablement les quotas de viande de bœuf, alors que la filière bovine en Europe subit un fort affaiblissement. En 2010, la France, l’Allemagne et le Royaume-Uni sont leaders en Europe, mais les concurrents mondiaux s’activent, notamment du côté du Brésil où l’on observe de forte hausses d’importation de ce pays vers l’UE. Aussi, depuis la crise de 2008, une forte baisse de la consommation de viande s’opère sur le Vieux continent. Le secteur ovin en France est très largement écrasé par les marchés australiens et néo-zélandais. Voter pour une augmentation des quotas de viande, même bovine serait tout bonnement incompréhensible. Enfin, l’actualité relative aux sous-marins français et à la trahison australienne au profit d’une alliance avec le Royaume-Uni et les États-Unis devrait donner l’occasion à l’UE de défendre la France et d’hausser le ton vis-à-vis de nos partenaires.J’ai voté contre.
Strengthening democracy, media freedom and pluralism in the EU (A9-0292/2021 - Tiemo Wölken, Roberta Metsola)
Ce rapport prend le prétexte de dénoncer des procédures-bâillons pour tout mélanger : outils de censure, lutte contre les discours de haine sans définition juridique, rééducation idéologique politiquement correcte des jeunes et des personnes qui ne penseraient pas selon la doxa de Madame von der Leyen, intrusions dans les systèmes judiciaires des États-membres et leurs procédures pénales et civiles et enfin, chantage financier aux pays qui refuseraient d’appliquer les décisions de l’UE et ses valeurs progressistes. En conséquence, j'ai voté contre.
The European Education Area: a shared holistic approach (A9-0291/2021 - Michaela Šojdrová)
Tout d’abord, la prise de décisions dans le domaine de l’éducation relève de la compétence des États membres. Ce texte très partisan reflète une totale incohérence dans ses propositions. Certaines sont très mauvaises comme l’«inclusion sociale des migrants» contre le «populisme», mais d’autres vont dans le bon sens, comme l’aide aux apprenants et la revalorisation des professeurs.Je me suis abstenue.
An intellectual property action plan to support the EU’s recovery and resilience (A9-0284/2021 - Marion Walsmann)
Même si certains points de ce rapport me laissent dubitative, car trop de sujets sont traités sans approfondissement, il me semble important de soutenir toutes les initiatives visant à défendre nos entreprises innovantes, nos inventions, tout comme notre patrimoine local, notre agriculture et nos artisans. J'ai voté pour.
Statute and funding of European political parties and foundations (A9-0294/2021 - Charles Goerens, Rainer Wieland)
Le règlement sur les partis et fondations européens date de 2014, a été mis en œuvre en 2017 et a été modifié en 2018 et 2019 à chaque fois à l’instigation des partis majoritaires. Le rapport d’évaluation présenté ici propose donc une énième modification visant essentiellement à simplifier une fois de plus le financement, à renforcer le rôle des partis dans la vie politique des États membres mais aussi à utiliser les « valeurs européennes » comme moyen de pression sur les formations politiques dont on jugerait qu’elles s’en écartent.Si le groupe ID (et la délégation RN avec lui) a toujours soutenu la transparence en matière de financement lors des modifications du règlement, il entend en revanche lutter contre toute modification des règles concernant les « valeurs européennes » qui ne constituent qu’un moyen de censure politique. Par deux amendement, le groupe ID appelle donc à ce que ces « valeurs européennes » ne soient pas un outil de sanction contre les formations politiques nationales et européennes et que celles-ci conservent une totale liberté dans la définition de leurs programmes et priorités politiques. Ceux-ci ayant été refusés, j’ai donc voté contre.
The first anniversary of the de facto abortion ban in Poland (B9-0543/2021, B9-0544/2021)
Cette proposition de résolution prétendant défendre les droits des femmes est en réalité une charge contre le gouvernement polonais et sa souveraineté. Je rappelle que la santé est une prérogative des États membres et l’UE n’a aucune légitimité pour intervenir dans ce domaine. Ce texte est donc inacceptable et constitue surtout une attaque politique des forces progressistes contre les gouvernements conservateurs.J’ai voté contre.
Common agricultural policy - support for strategic plans to be drawn up by Member States and financed by the EAGF and by the EAFRD (A8-0200/2019 - Peter Jahr)
Ce règlement est incontestablement une avancée vers davantage de subsidiarité dans la gestion des politiques agricoles nationales. Il appartient donc désormais au gouvernement du président Macron d’établir un plan stratégique solide, qui tienne compte des intérêts de nos agriculteurs. Ce nouveau système, pour autant qu’il soit utilisé correctement, donne enfin le pouvoir aux États membres d’améliorer les conditions de vie de travail des agriculteurs français.J’ai voté pour.
Common agricultural policy: financing, management and monitoring (A8-0199/2019 - Ulrike Müller)
Ce texte donne à la Commission un pouvoir de contrôle étendu et il est légitime de craindre une hausse des exigences administratives pour l’agriculteur du bout de la chaîne, qui devra justifier de la réalisation des objectifs de performance, au risque de se voir sanctionné par la réduction de ses aides. Cependant soutenir ce texte pourra permettre la réforme de la réserve de crise. De plus il permettra le soutien à de futurs plans stratégiques nationaux.J’ai voté pour.
Common agricultural policy – amendment of the CMO and other Regulations (A8-0198/2019 - Eric Andrieu)
Concernant la protection des indications géographiques je ne peux que souscrire à la demande de protection accrue de nos produits et de notre savoir-faire, d’autant plus dans le contexte malheureux du libre-échange mondialisé. Ce règlement est attendu depuis longtemps par le secteur. Le cadre juridique applicable aux organisations de producteurs est clairement établi et permettra d’encourager les agriculteurs à s’organiser. Tous les outils d’organisation des marchés doivent être soutenus car la volatilité et la concurrence féroce sur les marchés agricoles ne permettent pas aujourd’hui aux agriculteurs français d’envisager un avenir économique viable.J’ai voté pour.
Insolvency proceedings: replacing Annexes A and B to the Regulation (A9-0293/2021 - Adrián Vázquez Lázara)
Integrated farm statistics: Union contribution under the MFF for the years 2021 to 2027 (A9-0310/2021 - Riho Terras)
Packaged retail and insurance-based investment products (PRIIPs): key information documents. Extension of the transitional arrangement (A9-0297/2021 - Jonás Fernández)
Je considère que considère que ce règlement devrait rendre obligatoire le signalement des performances passées ainsi que des scenariii de performance afin de donner une vue globale des produits d’investissements proposés par les conseils des investisseurs.Ce « Key Information Document » est loin d’être parfait. Or, ce régime transitoire l’a rendu optionnel pour les sociétés qui vendent des OPCVM dans le cadre de la crise pandémique, ce qui est tout à fait néfaste pour les particuliers qui sont potentiellement sans aucune information même hypothétique sur les produits financiers dans lesquels ils peuvent investir leur épargne. L’excuse des modifications techniques envisagées pour permettre sa future adaptation ne me semble pas non plus une raison suffisante pour rendre un tel document optionnel.J’ai voté contre
Undertakings for collective investment in transferable securities (UCITS): the use of key information documents (A9-0301/2021 - Jonás Fernández)
Il s’agit d’un rapport essentiellement technique qui permet d’éviter pour les sociétés de gestion d’avoir deux documents relevant de deux régimes juridiques en théorie différents mais semblables dans leur finalité. Cependant, la proposition de modification s’aligne sur le règlement PRIIP que la Commission souhaite modifier dans un sens qui suscite de ma part plusieurs réserves.Par conséquent, si l’idée de vouloir réduire les doublons juridiques et administratifs est bienvenue, il ne m’est pas possible de soutenir pleinement cette proposition.Je me suis asbtenue
EU sports policy: assessment and possible ways forward (A9-0318/2021 - Tomasz Frankowski)
Si d’un côté ce texte est globalement positif en étant en faveur du sport, contre le dopage, contre les abus dont les enfants sont les victimes, il est de l’autre franchement négatif avec toujours plus d’approfondissement de l’Union européenne (création d’un coordinateur européen du sport, alignement du sport sur les principes du "Green Deal", etc.) et une sempiternelle soumission aux lobbies LBGTIQ+, aux minorités ethniques, à la « diversité », etc.Je me suis abstenue.
Digitalisation of the European reporting, monitoring and audit (A9-0311/2021 - Maria Grapini)
Il est aujourd'hui difficile de vérifier où va l'argent des contribuables européens. Les cas de double financement, de fraude et de conflits d'intérêts sont éloquents. Comme d'habitude, la solution à ce problème est la poursuite de la fédéralisation de l'Union européenne avec de nouvelles compétences pour la Commission européenne, l'OLAF et le parquet européen afin de faire pression sur certains États membres qui ne sont pas prêts à se plier entièrement à la volonté de la Commission européenne.J’ai voté contre
2022 budgetary procedure: joint text (A9-0326/2021 - Karlo Ressler, Damian Boeselager)
Je rejoins évidemment la position de notre groupe sur le budget qui est toujours la même: nous sommes contre. Même si cette année l’augmentation du budget est symbolique, notamment à cause de l’introduction du programme NextGenerationEU, le budget annuel finance toujours plusieurs lignes budgétaires auxquelles je suis hostile, comme la migration, la défense, le financement de la Turquie, les programmes d’accession, et l’aide extérieure ou le programme Erasmus+, etc. Le projet commun renforce encore les programmes tels que NDICI-Global Europe, Erasmus+, le Bureau du Procureur européen, le Fonds pour l'asile, la migration et l'intégration, etc. Dans le même temps, d’après le projet, les fonds pour le FRONTEX vont être réduits par 65 000 000 d’euros.J’ai voté contre
Draft amending budget No 5/2021: Humanitarian support to refugees in Turkey (A9-0327/2021 - Pierre Larrouturou)
Le filet de sécurité sociale d'urgence a été mis en place en 2016, à la suite du pacte signé entre Ankara et Bruxelles à la suite de la crise migratoire de 2015, et a été financé à hauteur de 1,725 milliard d'euros par l'Union européenne et ses États membres, au titre de la facilité en faveur des réfugiés en Turquie. Des amendements ont été déposé en Commission mettant en garde la Commission sur l’absence de traçabilité des transferts en espèces ainsi que sur notre opposition au relèvement du plafond de la rubrique 6 afin de soutenir l’aide aux réfugiés.Une contribution supplémentaire des États membres semble se profiler pour l’avenir car la poursuite de l'aide aux réfugiés en Turquie n'a pas été prise en compte dans les négociations de l'actuel CFP et le rapporteur indique lui-même que le budget de l'Union ne peut être la seule source de financement de la poursuite de l'aide aux réfugiés. Par ailleurs, la Commission LIBE, a souligné la nécessité de financer les instruments tels que la réinstallation et les corridors humanitaires, permettant ainsi aux réfugiés d’entrer massivement et légalement au sein de l’UE.J’ai voté contre.
Draft amending budget No 6/2021: Additional vaccines doses to low and lower-middle income countries, UCPM reinforcement and other adjustments to expenditure and revenue (A9-0329/2021 - Pierre Larrouturou)
Ces 200 millions de doses supplémentaires de vaccin Covid-19 ont été promises par la présidente de la Commission dans son discours sur l'état de l'Union au mois de septembre dernier, s'ajoutant aux 250 millions de doses déjà promises.Même si la vaccination mondiale est une question à étudier dans sa globalité, l’UE ne peut pas à elle seule être le premier exportateur de vaccins à travers le monde. Un aspect de la soi-disant solidarité de la Commission est choquant car les 200 millions de doses supplémentaires à livrer dépendent uniquement du laboratoire Astrazeneca. Or, ce vaccin est réservé en France aux plus de 55 ans et en parallèle, il sera livré à des pays dont les populations sont généralement jeunes.La prudence des autorités sanitaires en France sur le vaccin Astrazeneca, dont la balance bénéfices/risques fait débat, serait donc oubliée dès que le vaccin s’exporte hors de l’UE.En raison de toutes ces incohérences je me suis abstenue.
A European strategy for critical raw materials (A9-0280/2021 - Hildegard Bentele)
Les objectifs de l’accord de Paris et ceux définit par le Pacte vert engagent l’UE dans une transition certaine et rendent notre continent dépendant aux importations de matières premières (minerais, terres rares, métaux rares, ...). Cependant, cette stratégie propose des pistes pour s’affranchir, ou -en tout cas- sécuriser et diversifier nos sources d’approvisionnement. Si celles-ci passent à côté de la nécessité de relancer une production domestique et stratégique (en ouvrant des mines en Europe par exemple), l’ensemble des propositions sont autant de moyens supplémentaires qui permettront de desserrer l’étau chinois (fournisseur principal de l’UE en matières première critiques). Cette proposition est donc bienvenue.J’ai voté pour.
The revision of the Financial Regulation in view of the entry into force of the 2021-2027 multiannual financial framework (A9-0295/2021 - Nils Ušakovs, Monika Hohlmeier)
Même s’il ne s’agit ici que d’un rapport technique, qui met à jour les règles financières, je ne peux que m’y opposer, notamment à cause de l’introduction de la notion de la conditionnalité liée avec l’état de droit, la budgétisation sur la base de gendre, et les points sur les dépenses liées avec le climat (minimum 30%).J’ai voté contre
A Pharmaceutical Strategy for Europe (A9-0317/2021 - Dolors Montserrat)
La dépendance européenne aux produits venant de pays tiers est une réalité que l’on ne peut nier. En effet, il n’y a pratiquement plus de filière pharmaceutique en Europe, la recherche tarde ou s’expatrie vers des pays plus accueillants. Pour autant, ce texte va à mes yeux beaucoup trop loin : là où l’UE devrait se contenter d’un rôle de facilitateur, en permettant aux États membres de rapatrier la filière selon leur propre tissu industriel et en les aidant par un cadre juridique et économique stable, c’est finalement tout un marché unique du médicament que le texte met en place, alors même que cette approche a fait la preuve de ses limites durant la récente crise sanitaire.J’ai voté contre.
Mobilisation of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund: application EGF/2021/001 ES/País Vasco metal – Spain (A9-0319/2021 - Eider Gardiazabal Rubial)
L’utilisation du Fonds européen d’ajustement à la mondialisation (FEM) est actionnée à la suite d’une crise sanitaire majeure dont les répercussions affectent le secteur des métaux en général, en faisant porter l'accent non plus sur les causes d’une restructuration mais sur les répercussions d’une crise sanitaire. Au titre de la nouvelle réglementation, tout motif de restructuration, y compris les effets économiques de la crise de la Covid-19 ou les grandes tendances économiques telles que l'automatisation, pourront justifier un soutien de ma part.Les conditions étant remplies, un vote favorable se justifie pleinement afin de permettre à ces travailleurs licenciés de se reconvertir ou de créer leur propre entreprise.J’ai voté pour
Legal migration policy and law (A9-0314/2021 - Abir Al-Sahlani)
Sous prétexte de lutter contre le vieillissement de la population et l’immigration illégale, cette proposition de résolution vise à développer de nouvelles voies légales pour la migration de travail dans l’UE, même si celle-ci est peu qualifiée.En voulant ainsi légaliser tout ce qui devrait rester illégal alors qu’elle refuse dans le même temps d’aider les États confrontés aux multiples tentatives d’invasion de leurs territoires, l’UE s’apprête donc à ouvrir en grand les vannes d’une immigration massive bien que l’Europe soit déjà confrontée à une crise économique, identitaire, sociale, sécuritaire, sanitaire et culturelle majeure.J’ai voté contre.
Introduction of a European Social Security pass for improving the digital enforcement of social security rights and fair mobility (B9-0551/2021)
La Commission européenne admet elle-même qu’il n’y a aucun entrain pour la mise en œuvre du projet pilote du passeport chez les États membres. Seule l’Italie s’y serait vraiment investie. Sans engagement des États membres toute proposition législative ne peut exister et c’est un bienfait car il ne s’agit ici rien de moins que de faciliter encore plus le détachement des travailleurs et faire de la mobilité de travailleurs la norme et non pas l’exception.J’ai voté contre.
Multilateral negotiations in view of the 12th WTO Ministerial Conference in Geneva, 30 November to 3 December 2021 (B9-0550/2021)
Malgré la nécessité de débloquer une situation floue en matière de commerce international et de définir un cadre commun, la résolution présentée pose un certain nombre de problèmes.Le premier d'entre eux est relatif à l'agriculture et aux subventions étatiques. La peur d'un retour de bâton sur la PAC pourra être considéré comme une ingérence dans nos affaires européennes.Plus largement, il s'agit bien de la question des subventions étatiques qui doit être traitée. Le rapport cite ces subventions « faussant » le marché afin de trouver une règle commune à tous.Ce point est très sensible car il peut remettre en cause la souveraineté des états et leur indépendance stratégique. Enfin, la question de la pêche illégale doit être traitée. Le point de la résolution sensé lutter contre la pêche illicite reste très floue et le concept mal défini. En définitive nombre de points cruciaux ne sont pas abordés d’une manière souhaitable.Je me suis abstenue.
Hague Convention (1980) on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction: accession of Philippines (A9-0300/2021 - Gilles Lebreton)
Hague Convention (1980) on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction: accession of Jamaica (A9-0299/2021 - Heidi Hautala)
Hague Convention (1980) on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction: accession of Bolivia (A9-0307/2021 - Heidi Hautala)
Hague Convention (1980) on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction: accession of Pakistan (A9-0308/2021 - Heidi Hautala)
Hague Convention (1980) on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction: accession of Tunisia (A9-0309/2021 - Heidi Hautala)
The safety of truck parking lots in the EU (B9-0552/2021)
Bien que je déplore que cette proposition de résolution occulte un point essentiel mis en avant par les pétitionnaires, à savoir les agressions brutales commises par des migrants, notamment sur les camions allant au Royaume-Uni je note que le texte de la proposition de résolution est assez équilibré et considère le problème à l’échelle européenne, sans cibler un État en particulier. Je ne peux qu’approuver le constat dressé par la résolution, ainsi que les demandes en faveur d’un plus grand nombre de places de stationnement sécurisées et d’une intensification de la lutte contre le vol de marchandises.J’ai voté pour
Union tariff rate quota for high quality beef from Paraguay (A9-0333/2021 - Jordi Cañas)
J’ai voté contre ce rapport car il augmente le quota d’importation de viande de bœuf paraguayenne au sein de l’UE. Nos éleveurs bovins subissent une concurrence déjà insoutenable de la part de la viande à bas coût produite dans les pays tiers, il serait catastrophique de leur ajouter des difficultés.
European Year of Youth 2022 (A9-0322/2021 - Sabine Verheyen)
Combating gender-based violence: cyberviolence (A9-0338/2021 - Elissavet Vozemberg-Vrionidi, Sylwia Spurek)
Je me suis abstenue sur ce rapport. Certes je soutiens sa condamnation des cyberviolences, de plus en plus répandues, comme nous l’a montré l’affaire Mila. Mais la solution principale qu’il propose est inadaptée et reprend l’idéologie habituelle de l’UE: censure de tout discours «antiféministe» ou remettant en cause l’extension des revendications LGBTQIA+.
Mobilisation of the European Union Solidarity Fund to provide assistance to Croatia (A9-0343/2021 - Karlo Ressler)
Mobilisation of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund: application EGF/2021/003 IT/Porto Canale - Italy (A9-0345/2021 - Janusz Lewandowski)
Mobilisation of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund: application EGF/2021/002 IT/Air Italy - Italy (A9-0346/2021 - Janusz Lewandowski)
Mobilisation of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund: application EGF/2021/004 ES/Aragón automotive - Spain (A9-0344/2021- Esteban González Pons)
Predictability for Member States and procedures for dispute resolution when making available the traditional, VAT and GNI based own resources (A9-0347/2021 - José Manuel Fernandes, Valérie Hayer)
J’ai voté contre ce rapport, car il refuse le mécanisme de réexamen destiné à garantir les droits de contestation des États membres dans la gestion des ressources propres de l’UE.Les rédacteurs estiment qu’il est nécessaire de discipliner financièrement les États membres, ce que je conteste fermement.
EU-US air transport agreement (A9-0335/2021 - Maria Grapini)
EC/Gabon Fisheries Partnership Agreement: Implementing Protocol (A9-0316/2021 - Izaskun Bilbao Barandica)
International procurement instrument (A9-0337/2021 - Daniel Caspary)
J’ai voté pour ce rapport car il appelle les partenaires commerciaux de l’UE à faire davantage d’efforts pour ouvrir leurs marchés publics aux entreprises européennes. Je ne pense pas que l’UE soit suffisamment courageuse pour mettre en place une telle proposition, mais je soutiens la proposition dans son principe car elle est favorable à nos entreprises.
Transitional provisions for certain in vitro diagnostic medical devices and deferred application of requirements for in-house devices (C9-0381/2021)
Digital Markets Act (A9-0332/2021 - Andreas Schwab)
Equality between women and men in the European Union in 2018-2020 (A9-0315/2021 - Sandra Pereira)
J’ai voté contre ce rapport car il reprend les lubies idéologiques habituelles de l’UE: théorie du genre, condamnation des discriminations «intersectionnelles», éducation sexuelle obligatoire… Le texte revendique une compétence étendue de l’Union sur ces sujets qui relèvent pourtant uniquement de la compétence des États membres.
The impact of organised crime on own resources of the EU and on the misuse of EU funds (A9-0330/2021 - Tomáš Zdechovský)
Je me suis abstenue sur ce texte. Je soutiens son objectif de lutte contre le détournement du budget de l’UE par les réseaux de criminalité organisée. Cependant, la Commission en profite pour accélérer la fédéralisation de l’UE, sans jamais remettre en question la gestion de ses propres institutions, coupables pour certaines de mauvaise gestion financière.
Avoiding corruption, irregular spending and misuse of EU and national funds in case of emergency funds and crisis related spending areas (A9-0320/2021 - Michèle Rivasi)
J’ai voté contre ce rapport car il prend prétexte de la lutte contre la corruption pour augmenter les crédits aux organismes fédéralistes comme le Parquet européen. Il instrumentalise en outre la notion d’état de droit afin de sanctionner les États membres qui ne se soumettent pas aux diktats idéologiques de l’UE.
Implementation of the Energy Performance of Buildings Directive (A9-0321/2021 - Seán Kelly)
J’ai voté contre ce rapport car il impose des objectifs irréalistes quant à la rénovation des bâtiments. Il est nécessaire d’améliorer la performance énergétique des bâtiments en Europe, mais cela ne pourra se faire que selon le calendrier initié par les États membres et non selon le rythme et les méthodes directives de Bruxelles.
Challenges and prospects for multilateral weapons of mass destruction arms control and disarmament regimes (A9-0324/2021 - Sven Mikser)
New orientations for the EU’s humanitarian action (A9-0328/2021 - Norbert Neuser)
Cooperation on the fight against organised crime in the Western Balkans (A9-0298/2021 - Lukas Mandl)
Deliberations of the Committee on Petitions in 2020 (A9-0323/2021 - Gheorghe Falcă)
J’ai voté pour ce rapport car il décrit objectivement l’activité de la commission des pétitions du Parlement européen. Il reprend les principales préoccupations exprimées par les citoyens des États membres, tout en demandant davantage de transparence au sein des institutions européennes ainsi que davantage de subsidiarité lors du processus décisionnel.
European framework for employees' participation rights and the revision of the European Works Council Directive (A9-0331/2021 - Gabriele Bischoff)
Fundamental rights and Rule of Law in Slovenia, in particular the delayed nomination of EPPO prosecutors (B9-0588/2021)
J’ai voté contre ce rapport car il critique la Slovénie en matière d’indépendance de la Justice et de liberté des médias, tout en rappelant au pays la nécessité de respecter le droit de l’Union, notamment s’agissant des migrants. C’est une attaque contre un gouvernement qui refuse de se plier aux diktats politiques et moraux de Bruxelles.
The situation in Nicaragua (RC-B9-0581/2021, B9-0581/2021, B9-0582/2021, B9-0583/2021, B9-0584/2021, B9-0585/2021, B9-0586/2021)
Je me suis abstenue sur cette résolution. Il est certes évident que la politique du président Ortega est contraire aux droits de ses citoyens. Mais le rapport s’immisce dans les processus politiques internes au Nicaragua et appelle la communauté internationale à accroître la pression sur le régime, ce que je ne peux soutenir.
MeToo and harassment – the consequences for the EU institutions (B9-0587/2021)
J’ai voté contre cette résolution, car elle vise à obliger les députés européens à effectuer une formation contre le harcèlement, au risque de se voir limités dans leur capacité à recruter du personnel. C’est une atteinte inacceptable aux droits des parlementaires, dictée par les lubies « progressistes » de Bruxelles.
Situation at the Ukrainian border and in Russian-occupied territories of Ukraine (B9-0593/2021, B9-0594/2021, B9-0595/2021, B9-0596/2021, B9-0597/2021, B9-0598/2021)
J’ai voté contre cette résolution, car elle est une caricature russophobe accumulant les provocations inutiles contre la Russie. Rien n’est dit sur les mafias et la pauvreté qui minent l’Ukraine, alors que le récent rapport de la Cour des comptes européenne pointe la corruption généralisée dans le pays.
Written questions (186)
EUR 3.6 billion to Bosnia and Herzegovina to repay a Chinese loan
Mobile payment services and Islamic terrorism
Smart protectionism and protecting the European way of life
European Way of Life incompatible with slitting animals' throats
Respect for multilingualism in the European institutions
E-commerce fraud
Ban on hunting endangered species
Reconstruction in Syria
Islamist radicalisation in Sri Lanka and violence against women
EU trade preferences and the fight against terrorism
Revised import quotas for US beef and animal welfare
EU funds at risk in France’s Grand Est region after Brexit
The European Parliament’s single seat is in Strasbourg
Violence against women on the rise in Pakistan
Delivery of 27 million masks to Europe blocked by Turkey
Crisis Management Commissioner’s visit to Ethiopia on 26-29 February 2020 during the coronavirus outbreak
Distribution of masks to healthcare workers in the context of the coronavirus pandemic in the Grand Est region and exemption from the General Data Protection Regulation
Exceptional derogation to allow imports of protective masks without the CE label
Legal basis for geo-tracking and the sharing of personal data during the coronavirus outbreak
Commission tender procedures
BlackRock’s conflicts of interest affecting pensions and consumers in France and elsewhere in Europe
Giving priority to transports of live animals at borders – an ethical duty
The need to bring pharmaceutical production back to Europe
Domestic violence during the coronavirus pandemic
Research in Europe into a vaccine against coronavirus poorly funded
Brussels paying children in Turkey who agree to go to school
Brussels financing a Turkish pipeline and combatting of infectious diseases in Turkey
Short-time working obligatory for cross-border workers from Alsace and Lorraine employed in Germany
Does terrorist financing still constitute an ‘exceptional case’ triggering exclusion from the GSP+ scheme?
Abuses in collection of users’ personal data for coronavirus tracing in France
Erection of a statue glorifying communism
Statement by the Prime Minister of Pakistan, Imran Khan, according to which Osama bin Laden is a ‘martyr’
How will the sale of Alstom’s factory in Alsace reshore jobs back to Europe?
The Commission and its translation service into Turkish, Russian or Chinese
More young French and fewer young British recruits at Rothschild & Co. following Brexit
France is financing the post-coronavirus recovery plan for the other European countries and receiving a third as much in grants as Poland.
Second homes in Europe
European public procurement procedures open to all comers
Exclusion of France from European supercomputer projects it finances
Protecting consumers, especially elderly customers, from the maze of digital passwords
Ten firefighters assaulted in France every day
A nurse beaten up, a bus driver murdered, a young woman and her dog run over: a nightmarish vision of France
Defending ‘European sovereignty’ while relinquishing control of Photonis, the jewel in the crown of the French military sector
German public procurement closed to EU competitors
Suspending the export of live animals to third countries with cruel slaughtering practices
Controlling the transport of live animals to third countries by boat
In 2009 Smart Mercedes received EUR 400 million in EU lending to build a factory in Hungary. In 2019 Smart closed down its car plants in France.
Inteva Products closes its automotive plants in France but receives EU aid in Eastern Europe
Issuing of virginity certificates, a practice still authorised in the European Union
Tighter controls for trade in puppies within the European Union
Navalny case: additional sanctions against Russia
Commission’s position on the restructuring of EDF
Remdesivir (COVID-19): investigating conflicts of interest concerning remdesivir in the EMA and in Europe
Remdesivir: the EUR 1 billion scandal of the fake treatment for COVID-19 purchased by the Commission
French customs duties paid over to Brussels have doubled since 2000
Food safety risks of imported meat from stolen and unidentified horses from Argentina
French tobacco sellers on France’s borders subjected to unfair competition
Reducing micro-pollutants discharged into our watercourses
Abuse of dominant position on social media with regard to the Parler app
COVID-19 vaccines: questions regarding the lack of transparency over contracts
Preventing WhatsApp from once more abusing its users' personal data
Commission response to the ECJ ruling on stunning animals prior to slaughter
Huge influx of Tunisian migrants arriving on the Italian coast
Time spent transporting animals by sea should no longer be considered a rest period
The future EU animal welfare label must cover farming, transport and slaughter
Combating international trafficking in wild meat
Researcher dismissals and failure of Sanofi’s COVID ‘vaccine’ despite company receiving billions in public subsidies
COVID ‘vaccines’: the Commission is concealing the name of the person who signed the contracts
Future Polish law to prevent arbitrary censorship of social media
Arbitrary censorship carried out by Facebook
Intensive farming of fur animals — a vector for COVID-19
TikTok’s impact on children’s innocence
Unaccompanied minors entering the European Union
Towards a performance audit of the Commission’s Directorate-General for Competition
Koreans cashing in on French Telethon money
Access to European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control 2019 audit report
NGOs accused of colluding with human traffickers in the Mediterranean
Half a billion Facebook accounts leaked – Facebook has knowingly withheld this information from authorities for years
After the citizens’ committee on vaccines, the Brussels citizens’ committee for Africa
What of the 1.5 million doses of COVID-19 vaccines exported to Saudi Arabia?
European report on Islamophobia written by Turkish lobby
European report on Islamophobia drafted by a Turkish research centre closely linked to the Muslim Brotherhood
Commission funding for Islamist association
The rulers of Abu Dhabi benefit from the CAP and EUR 10 million from Brussels via Romania
More than 100 000 Turks take part in Erasmus
Mr and Mrs Mittal receive EUR 101 million from Brussels
Saving our heritage and the Saint-Louis crystal
StocaMine - protecting Europe’s largest water table from the risk of pollution
Breast cancer and diagnosis delays due to COVID-19
Helping beekeepers protect themselves against beehive thefts
Fight against the proliferation of illegal ritual slaughter
Acceptance of Sputnik V for the purposes of the EU vaccination passport
Towards obligatory COVID-19 vaccination in Europe
Lack of response from Brussels to Australia breaking EUR 56 billion contract with French group
No right of reply and consent on Wikipedia
Grindadráp in the Faroe Islands
COVID ‘vaccine’ and children’s health
Future of Europe: EUR 700 000 to find 400 participants
Alcohol content labelling and beverages for pregnant women
Long-awaited compliance with the Three Rs principle in animal testing
Commission interpreters and their trip to China
‘Revolving doors’: 250 cases of EU officials moving to the non-European digital sector (the Big Five, etc.)
Council of Europe and COVID-19 vaccine
Islamism and the Muslim Brotherhood infiltrating the European Parliament
Lai Đại Hàn
IKEA’s 15 years of tax evasion and fraud via the Netherlands
Proportionality of the COVID‑19 restrictions in Austria and Latvia
Urgent need for deterrence campaigns to combat illegal migration and people smuggling
French Presidency of the Council of the EU and the need for ‘democratic neutrality’ during the French presidential election
Pfizer CEO getting the Distinguished Business Leadership Award
Ban on the use and import of hormones produced by pregnant mares on blood farms
The Commission’s ban on Christmas celebrations
Impact on health and the environment of the use of pesticides in soya monocultures
Brussels giving Microsoft the green light
Joan of Arc: a woman and an example for Europe
Anti-Christian hatred: the Commission ignores burning churches
COVID-19: made in China, financed by the US
Latvian Parliament votes to suspend unvaccinated Members of Parliament
Extension of the EU Digital COVID Certificate Regulation
Commission acquisition strategy for vaccine doses
Presidency of the Council and important elections in the Member State holding the Presidency
Belgian and French data protection authorities sanction EU DisinfoLab for its failure to comply with EU directives
Are laboratories that handle dangerous viruses completely secure
War in Ukraine: have European troops been deployed to Ukraine?
Online public consultation on the extension of the EU Digital COVID Certificate
Liability for COVID-19 vaccines
McKinsey being awarded 2.7-million-euro contract
British Telecom chosen to handle secret communications between Member States in a contract worth EUR 1.2 billion
McKinsey's management of the COVID-19 crisis in Europe
115 000 health-care workers suspended in France, how many across Europe?
385 191 people against the extension of the EU Digital COVID Certificate (QR code)
Full transparency with regard to future food vaccines
Question for the ECDC on the risk-benefit balance of COVID-19 vaccinations for children
Action must be taken when equine traffickers break EU animal welfare rules
Publication of texts exchanged between Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla
GDPR enforcement in the light of new revelations about Google-led mass data breach for online advertising
Improving and enforcing the EU Air Passengers Rights Regulation
European Ombudsman: von der Leyen not providing insight into Pfizer text messages is a ‘wake-up call’ and amounts to maladministration
New EU regulation – digital COVID certificate issued to clinical trial subjects – what is at stake with regard to EU citizens’ safety?
The European Investment Bank (EIB) is investing EUR 2.5 billion in China: how much in Eastern France?
Question for the European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA): Have the multiple side effects of vaccines affected pilots and aviation safety?
Excess mortality following COVID ‘vaccines’: the opinion of insurers and the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA)
Commission in Brussels is paying foreigners for protection
Amazon hosting the Commission’s official journal
The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation has reportedly used Haiti to create a market for cholera vaccine
Text message case: will the Commission give von der Leyen a phone?
S-metolachlor: the corn herbicide that contaminates water
COVID-19: Does Commission authorisation mean that vaccine manufacturers are liable for compensating victims of toxic side effects?
Have Commission delays in the procurement of COVID-19 vaccines resulted in over 100 000 European deaths?
Refusal to vaccinate refugees against COVID-19 following manufacturers’ rejection of liability
COVID-19: does the position of Ursula von der Leyen’s husband create a conflict of interest with some of the Commission’s activities?
Potential conflict of interest of the Commission President
Promoting the ‘retirement’ of laboratory animals
Disinformation on Twitter revealed by Elon Musk: has the Commission established a ministry of truth?
Funding of human rights NGOs
COVID-19: the Commission orders half a billion doses of the Pfizer COVID vaccine in 2023
After the Christmas log and before the Twelfth Night cake, Brussels authorised powdered crickets in mashed potato, pizza and beer
COVID-19: revelations by Dr Jordon Walker and Project Veritas about Pfizer, genome editing and toxic effects of the ‘vaccine’ on women
Aid for earthquake victims in Syria
EUR 4 million for EDMO, Brussels’ ‘anti-disinformation’ consortium headed by a former social democratic minister from Portugal
Do we need the EU Digital COVID Certificate until 30 June 2023?
The Commission’s failure to consult the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control before buying COVID vaccines
Commission President Ursula von der Leyen’s attendance of a closed-door German Government meeting on combustion-engine vehicles
Compatibility with press freedom and freedom of information of the ideologically motivated boycott of Twitter and CNEWS by advertising stakeholders
How many millions of people suffer from ‘COVID vaccine’ side-effects?
How many deaths have been caused by ‘COVID vaccines’?
Number of deaths following COVID vaccines that have been investigated and confirmed by the European Medicines Agency
Have Pfizer’s huge profits worth USD 30 billion from COVID vaccines been taxed in Europe?
Toxic secondary effects and mortality: are there differences between batches of COVID-19 vaccines?
Pfizer taking advantage of state aid to buy out competitors and compatibility with EU law
Is the participation of three commissioners in the 2023 Bilderberg Meeting compatible with democracy?
How much did Brussels borrow at variable rates, and what are the risks this poses to France’s finances?
Protecting coral reefs against global warming
Policies to support families
Appointment of Ms Morton as Chief Economist of the Commission’s Directorate-General for Competition
Member State contributions used for activities outside the EU
Pressure by our neighbours to do away with Parliament in Strasbourg and striking a fresh balance in the distribution of job locations for Commission staff
Scandal surrounding the appointment of the American Fiona Scott Morton as chief economist, and status of the 500 non-EU citizens currently working in the Commission
Withdraw the marketing authorisations for the Comirnaty and Spikevax vaccines
Brussels awards contract to agency involved in electoral disinformation
Brussels to help Pfizer and an Indian pharmaceutical company build up a strategic European vaccine production reserve
Is NewsGuard, the self-proclaimed disinformation tracker, a transparent lobbyist in Brussels?
The dumping of illegal immigrants in Italy by German non-governmental organisation Humanity, which is subsidised by Germany
Immunity of officials of the Commission and the European Medicines Agency in relation to the purchase and authorisation of COVID ‘vaccines’
What has happened to 4.6 billion COVID vaccines?
The EMA bans Pneumorel, a drug from the French laboratory Servier, owing to two deaths in 50 years, but fails to react to the 12 000 deaths reported following COVID vaccination
Individual motions (18)
Motion for a resolution on budgetary measures to be implemented to cushion the economic impact of the spread of COVID-19 on the public finances of the Member States
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on placing the Antifa movement on the EU terrorist list
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on farm murders in South Africa
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on the classification of the Grey Wolves as a group involved in terrorist acts and subject to restrictive measures
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on recognition of the Republic of Artsakh
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on safeguarding free democratic debate on social media
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on measures against digital platforms that may restrict the freedom of expression of political leaders in Europe
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on the confirmed murder of Khaled al-Asaad, an archaeologist at the site of Palmyra in Syria
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on the creation of a centralised system, for use by the Member States, containing the identity and biometric data of irregular unaccompanied minors, collected upon their arrival in the European Union
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on creating a European compensation fund for victims of the ‘COVID-19 vaccines’
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on the violation of rights in Italy
Motion for a resolution on the EU Digital COVID Certificate
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on creating a European compensation fund for victims of the COVID-19 vaccines: – Comirnaty (Pfizer, BioNTech) – Janssen COVID-19 vaccine – Spikevax (Moderna vaccine) – Vaxzevria (AstraZeneca vaccine)
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION Motion for a resolution on fundamental rights in the digital decade
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on defending freedom of information and the case of Julian Assange
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on Member States planning to outsource asylum centres outside the EU
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION seeking to establish a European fund for research and victim compensation, financed by the huge profits from COVID-19 vaccines
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on the threat to independent media in the Netherlands
Amendments (1882)
Amendment 6 #
2023/2139(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Considers it regrettable that for a year the European Public Prosecutor has not provided any communication on the progress of her investigation into the procurement of COVID-19 vaccines in the European Union given ‘the extremely high public interest’: requests made to the institutions and replies received; number of testimonies collected; searches carried out or exchanges with national authorities;
Amendment 2 #
2023/2113(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. WelcomNotes the Commission’s fourth Rule of Law Report (‘the Report’) and considers that the periodic review of the rule of law is an essential monitoring tool; stresses, in this context, the importance of the use of clear and objective criteria by the Commission when providing its assessment, thereby avoiding claims of unequal treatment of Member States or the use of selective data only; welcomes, in this regard, the Commission’s approach to receive Member States’ contributions, thereby fostering a common dialogue; welcomes thedeplores, however, the contemptuous and condescending new classification adopted by the Commission as regards measuring progress on past recommendations, with four categories: (a) no progress, (b) some progress, (c) significant progress, and (d) full implementation; in view of the problems involved in the gathering of statistical data by Member States, points out the usefulness of Council of Europe tools such as the Council of Europe’s European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ) reports3, thereby creating, as far as possible, convergence between the different data inputs; _________________ 3 CEPEJ evaluation cycles.
Amendment 4 #
2023/2113(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Amendment 9 #
2023/2113(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Acknowledges that a certain degree of progress can be seen in the last report in a number of different Member States as regards judicial independence; welcomes, in this regard, the withholding of EU funds, if necessary, under the conditionality mechanism6, as confirmed by the CJEU7, or under the Recovery and Resilience Facility8; points out, however, that infringements of judicial independence are still a concern in some Member States, such as ongoing disciplinary procedures against judges for the content of their decisions, problems with the composition of councils of the judiciary and with the composition of the highest national courts in view of the principle of a court established by law, etc.; _________________ 6 Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2020 on a general regime of conditionality for the protection of the Union budget (OJ L 433 I, 22.12.2020, p. 1). 7 See, judgment of the Court of Justice (Full Court) of 16 February 2022, Hungary v the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union, C- 156/21, ECLI:EU:C:2022:97 and judgment of the Court of Justice (Full Court) of 16 February 2022, Poland v the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union, C-157/21, ECLI:EU:C:2022:98. 8 Regulation (EU) 2012/241 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 February 2021 establishing the Recovery and Resilience Facility (OJ L 57, 18. 2. 2021, p. 17).points out, however, that infringements of judicial independence are still a concern in some Member States;
Amendment 43 #
2023/0323(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) Late payment constitutes a breach of contract which is financially attractive to debtors, due to low or no interest rates charged on late payment, or slow procedures for redress. A decisive shift to a culture of prompt payment, including one in which the exclusion of the right to charge interest for late payment is null and void, is necessary to reverse this trend and to discourage late payment. Consequently, contractual payment periods should be limited to 30 calendar days both in B2B transactions where the debtor is a large undertaking in the meaning of Article 3(4) of Directive (EU) 2016/34 and G2B transactions, where the public authority is the debtor, whether in the context of public procurement or otherwise.
Amendment 48 #
2023/0323(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11 a (new)
Recital 11 a (new)
(11a) However, there may be circumstances in which undertakings require longer payment periods, for example when undertakings wish to grant trade credit to their customers. It should therefore remain possible for the parties to expressly agree on longer payment periods, provided, however, that such an extension is not grossly unfair to the creditor.
Amendment 51 #
2023/0323(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11 b (new)
Recital 11 b (new)
(11b) Sector-specific derogation rules have been shown to be effective for certain highly seasonal sectors (toys outside the Christmas period, ski equipment in summer, etc.) or for products that are inherently slow to sell (jewellery, machinery, expensive electronics, etc.). Member States and sectors may therefore choose to keep or establish sector-specific derogation rules for payment periods.
Amendment 58 #
2023/0323(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) This Regulation should be without prejudice to shorter or longer periods which may be provided for in national law, and which are more favourable to the creditor.
Amendment 90 #
2023/0323(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
Recital 30
(30) Certain provisions in this Regulation are linked to the provisions in Directive (EU) 2019/633 of the European Parliament and of the Council51 and the provisions in Regulation (EU) 1308/2013. The relationship between Directives 2011/7/EU and (EU) 2019/633 is explained in recitals (17) and (18) and Article 3(1) of Directive (EU) 2019/633. As this Regulation replaces Directive 2011/7/EU, it should not affect the rules laid down in Directive (EU) 2019/633, including the provisions that are applicable to payments made in the context of the school scheme52, value-sharing agreements53 and certain payments for the sale of grapes, must and wine in bulk in the wine sector54 , except for the deadlines applicable to the maximum payment periods concerning the supply of non- perishable agricultural and food products. However, this Regulation does not prevent the Member States from introducing or maintaining national provisions applicable in the agricultural and food sector which provide for stricter payment terms, or different calculation of payment periods, dies a quo and verification and acceptance procedures for suppliers of agricultural and food products that are more favourable to the creditor. This Regulation should similarly not affect the rules established in Article 147a of Regulation (EU) 1308/2013, which allows for provisions applicable to sales of wine in bulk. __________________ 51 Directive (EU) No 2019/633 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 April 2019 on unfair trading practices in business-to-business relationships in the agricultural and food supply chain (OJ L 111, 25.4.2019, p. 59). 52 Article 23 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013, establishing a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 671). 53 Article 172a of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013, establishing a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 671). 54 Article 147a of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013, establishing a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 671).
Amendment 100 #
2023/0323(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article premier – paragraph 3 – point a a (new)
Article premier – paragraph 3 – point a a (new)
(aa) payments made for goods and services benefiting from Article 164 of Directive 2006/112/EC and exported to third countries;
Amendment 108 #
2023/0323(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article premier – paragraph 4
Article premier – paragraph 4
4. With the exception of Article 3(1), this Regulation shall not affect the provisions laid down in Directive (EU) 2019/633 or the provisions laid down in Regulation (EU) 1308/2013.
Amendment 136 #
2023/0323(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9 b (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9 b (new)
(9b) ‘means of payment’ means the instrument used to settle the invoice, which will not entail a cost to the creditor as set out in Article 3(2).
Amendment 140 #
2023/0323(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1
1. In commercial transactions, the payment period shall not exceed 360 calendar days, from the date of the receipt of the invoice or an equivalent request for payment by the debtor, provided that the debtor has received the goods or services. This period shall apply both to the transactions between undertakings and between public authorities and undertakings. The same payment periodmicro, small and medium-sized undertakings, in the meaning of Article 3(1), (2) and (3) of Directive (EU) 2013/34, and between public authorities and undertakings. If the debtor is a large undertaking in the meaning of Article 3(4) of Directive (EU) 2016/34, a public authority or public legal entity and the creditor a micro, small or medium-sized undertaking, the payment period shall not exceed 30 calendar days. The payment period of 60 days shall also apply to the supply of non- perishable agricultural and food products on a regular and non-regular basis as referred to in Articles 3(1)(a), point (i), second indent and 3(1)(a), point (ii), second indent of Directive (EU) 2019/633, unless Member States provide for a shorter payment period for such products.
Amendment 185 #
2023/0323(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. By way of derogation from paragraph 1, longer payment periods may be agreed between the parties, provided that such extension is not grossly unfair to the creditor or provided that the period is objectively justified by the specific nature of the economic activity.
Amendment 198 #
2023/0323(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. No means of payment for goods or services shall be used to unduly change the payment period.
Amendment 211 #
2023/0323(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 1
1. For public works contracts falling within the scope of Directives 2014/23/EU, 2014/24/EU, 2014/25/EU, and 2009/81/EC56 of the European Parliament and of the Council, contractors shall provide evidence to contracting authorities or contracting entities within the meaning of those Directives that, where applicable, they have paid their direct subcontractors involved in the execution of the contract within the deadlines and under the conditions set out in this Regulation. The evidence may take the form of a written declaration by the contractor and shall be provided by the contractor to the contracting authority or contracting entity prior to, or at the latest together with, any request for payment. Member States may provide for public authorities making direct payments to direct subcontractors in public procurement processes. __________________ 56 Directive 2009/81/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 July 2009 on the coordination of procedures for the award of certain works contracts, supply contracts and service contracts by contracting authorities or entities in the fields of defence and security, and amending Directives 2004/17/EC and 2004/18/EC.
Amendment 216 #
2023/0323(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Member States may make it possible for an undertaking that is a creditor in the meaning of Article 2(9) of this Regulation to be able to request that a contracting authority that has not paid the amount owed within the period established in Article 3 of this Regulation offset the amount owed to the undertaking by reducing what the undertaking owes the public authorities for other reasons by an equivalent amount.
Amendment 224 #
2023/0323(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1
1. In case of late payment, the debtor shall be liable to pay interest for late payment, except where the debtor is not responsible for the payment delay for reasons of force majeure.
Amendment 235 #
2023/0323(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Interest for late payment shall be automatically due by the debtor to the creditor, without the creditor needing to send a reminder, where the following conditions are satisfied:
Amendment 239 #
2023/0323(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3
Article 5 – paragraph 3
Amendment 250 #
2023/0323(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 7
Article 5 – paragraph 7
7. The interest for late payment shall accrue until payment of the amount due. The interest for late payment shall accrue in the event of late payment in business- to-business transactions and in transactions between businesses and public authorities or legal entities governed by public law.
Amendment 310 #
2023/0323(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Every Member State shall ensure that each designated national authority has the appropriate human, financial and material resources to effectively perform its duties.
Amendment 402 #
2023/0323(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 2
Article 20 – paragraph 2
2. It shall apply from ... [OP: Please insert the date = 1236 months from the date of entry into force of this Regulation].
Amendment 126 #
2023/0315(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 4
Article 3 – paragraph 4
4. Member States shall ensure that the name of the ECBA shall be preceded or followed by the English acronym ‘ECBA’, followed by its translation into the official language or languages of the Member State of origin.
Amendment 139 #
2023/0315(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Member States shall ensure that only natural persons who are Union citizens or who legally reside in the Union and legal entities with a non-profit purpose established in the Union, through their representatives, may be members of the decision-making body of an ECBA. The decision-making body of an ECBA is the general meeting of its members. Any member of the ECBA shall have the right to participate in the general meeting or be represented at it, and to vote either directly or through their representative.
Amendment 159 #
2023/0315(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 2
Article 16 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall ensure that an ECBA has a minimum of threewo founding members.
Amendment 175 #
2023/0315(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 19 – paragraph 2
Article 19 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall ensure that the competent authority of the home Member State notifies, without delayin a reasonable period of time, the competent authorities of all the other Member States of any new registration of an ECBA.
Amendment 176 #
2023/0315(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 19 – paragraph 5
Article 19 – paragraph 5
5. Where the competent authority decides to reject the application or has not reached a decision within 30 days of the submission of the complete application, Member States shall ensure that that decision, or the lack of such decision, iscan be subject to effective judicial review.
Amendment 204 #
2023/0315(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 30
Article 30
Amendment 133 #
2023/0156(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Citation 3 a (new)
Citation 3 a (new)
having regard to the European Parliament resolution of 25 November 2009 on origin marking,
Amendment 352 #
Amendment 353 #
2023/0156(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 147 – paragraph 1
Article 147 – paragraph 1
Amendment 354 #
2023/0156(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 147 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 147 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Manufacturers and importers shall ensure that products imported into or marketed in the Union bear an indication of the country of origin of the product or, where the size or nature of the product does not allow it, that indication is to be provided on the packaging or in a document accompanying the product.
Amendment 355 #
2023/0156(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 147 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 147 – paragraph 1 b (new)
For the purpose of determination of the country of origin within the meaning of paragraph 1 of this Article, non- preferential origin rules set out in Articles 147a to 149 of this Regulation, including delegated acts to be adopted pursuant to Article 148 of this Regulation, shall apply.
Amendment 356 #
2023/0156(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 147 – paragraph 1 c (new)
Article 147 – paragraph 1 c (new)
Where the country of origin determined is a Member State of the Union, manufacturers and importers shall make reference to the Member State.
Amendment 357 #
2023/0156(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 147 – paragraph 1 d (new)
Article 147 – paragraph 1 d (new)
Country of origin indications may, at the choice of the manufacturer, be mentioned only in English using the formula ‘Made in [country]’.
Amendment 358 #
2023/0156(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 147 a (new)
Article 147 a (new)
Article 147a Non-preferential origin The rules for the determination of the non-preferential origin of goods in Articles 148 and 149 shall be used for applying the following: (a)the Common Customs Tariff with the exception of the measures referred to in Article 145(2)(d) and (e); (b)measures, other than tariff measures, established by Union provisions governing specific fields relating to trade in goods; and (c)other Union measures relating to the origin of goods.
Amendment 359 #
2023/0156(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 149 – paragraph 1
Article 149 – paragraph 1
1. WThere the importer has indicated anorigin of the goods pursuant to the customs legislation, the customs authorities may require a proofof origin of the goods customs authorities may require a proof oforigin of the goods and may, in cases of reasonable doubt, require any additional evidence necessary to ensure that the indicationof origin complies with the rules laid down by the applicable Union legislation.
Amendment 360 #
2023/0156(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 149 – paragraph 2
Article 149 – paragraph 2
Amendment 361 #
2023/0156(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 149 – paragraph 3
Article 149 – paragraph 3
Amendment 412 #
2023/0156(COD)
Article 252 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) affixing of an indication of origin where such indication does not comply with the rules for determining non- preferential origin;
Amendment 80 #
2023/0085(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) The assessment made to substantiate explicit environmental claims needs to consider the life-cycle of the product or of the overall activities of the trader and should not omit any relevant environmental aspects or environmental impacts, such as the environmental impact of a product imported from a third country. The benefits claimed should not result in an unjustified transfer of negative impacts to other stages of the life cycle of a product or trader, or to the creation or increase of other negative environmental impacts.
Amendment 113 #
2023/0085(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 30
Recital 30
(30) While unfair commercial practices, including misleading environmental claims, are prohibited for all traders pursuant to Directive 2005/29/EC84, an administrative burden linked to substantiation and verification of environmental claims on the smallest companies could be disproportionate and should be avoided. To this end, microenterprises should be exempted from the requirements on substantiation of Article 3 and 4 unless these enterprises wish to obtain a certificatean alternative to third-party certification should be provided for micro, small and medium-sized enterprises on the basis of a declaration of conformity of explicit environmental claims that will be recognised by the competent authorities across the Union. _________________ 84 Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair business-to- consumer commercial practices in the internal market and amending Council Directive 84/450/EEC, Directives 97/7/EC, 98/27/EC and 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (Unfair Commercial Practices Directive) (OJ L 149, 11.6.2005, p. 22) as amended.
Amendment 138 #
2023/0085(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 37
Recital 37
(37) In order to avoid potential disproportionate impacts on the micro, small and medium-sized enterprises, the smallest companies should be exempted from the requirements of Article 5 linked to information on the substantiation of explicit environmental claims unless these enterprises wish to obtain a certificate of conformity of explicit environmental claim that will be recognised by the competent authorities across the Union.
Amendment 166 #
2023/0085(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 54
Recital 54
(54) Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) should be ablegiven sufficient support to benefit from the opportunities provided by the market for more sustainable products but, as they couldgenerally face proportionately higher costs and difficulties with some of the requirements on substantiation and verification of explicit environmental claims. The Member States should provide adequate information by means of easily accessible information portals or similar means and raise awareness of the ways to comply with the requirements of this Directive, ensure targeted and specialised training free of charge, and provide specific and sufficient assistance and support, including financial, so thato SMEs wishing to make explicit environmental claims on their products or as regards their activities are able to do so. Member States actions should be taken in respect of applicable State aid rules.
Amendment 332 #
2023/0085(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point g
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) identify whether improving environmental impacts, environmental aspects or environmental performance subject to the claim leads to significant harm in relation to environmental impacts on climate change, resource consumption and circularity, sustainable use and protection of water and marine resources, pollution, biodiversity, public well-being and health, animal welfare and ecosystems;
Amendment 370 #
2023/0085(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point j a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point j a (new)
(ja) provide relevant information on the environmental impact of the transport of products, in particular in the context of imports.
Amendment 381 #
2023/0085(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 3
Article 3 – paragraph 3
3. The requirements set out in paragraphs 1 and 2 shall not apply to traders that are micro, small or medium- sized enterprises within the meaning of Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC110 unless they request the verification with the aim of receiving the certificate of conformity in accordance with Article 10. _________________ 110 Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC of 6 May 2003 concerning the definition of micro, small and medium- sized enterprises (OJ L 124, 20.5.2003, p. 36).
Amendment 431 #
2023/0085(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 3
Article 4 – paragraph 3
3. The requirements laid down in this Article shall not apply to traders that are micro, small or medium-sized enterprises within the meaning of Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC111 unless they request the verification with the aim of receiving the certificate of conformity in accordance with Article 10. _________________ 111 Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC of 6 May 2003 concerning the definition of micro, small and medium- sized enterprises (OJ L 124, 20.5.2003, p. 36).
Amendment 503 #
2023/0085(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 7
Article 5 – paragraph 7
7. The requirements set out in paragraphs 2, 3 and 6 shall not apply to traders that are micro, small or medium- sized enterprises within the meaning of Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC unless they request the verification with the aim of receiving the certificate of conformity in accordance with Article 10.
Amendment 550 #
2023/0085(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 555 #
2023/0085(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 621 #
2023/0085(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 3
Article 10 – paragraph 3
3. The verification and certification requirements shall apply to traders that are micro, small or medium-sized enterprises within the meaning of Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC only if they so request.
Amendment 624 #
2023/0085(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 10 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. When they set up the procedures referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2, Member States shall encourage verifiers to take into account the complexity of the substantiation of the claim and the size and turnover of traders requesting verification and certification when calculating their pricing for the cost of verification and certification, paying particular attention to micro, small and medium-sized enterprises.
Amendment 700 #
2023/0085(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Member States shall take appropriate measures to help micro, small and medium sized enterprises apply the requirements set out in this Directive. Those measures shall at least include guidelinaccessible guidelines containing clear examples or similar mechanisms to raise awareness of ways to comply with the requirements on explicit environmental claims. In addition, wWithout prejudice to applicable state aid rules, such measures may include one or more of the following elements:
Amendment 706 #
2023/0085(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
(da) access to specialised information portals.
Amendment 732 #
2023/0085(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16
Article 16
Amendment 760 #
2023/0085(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – point g a (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – point g a (new)
(ga) the size of the company;
Amendment 761 #
2023/0085(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 3
Article 17 – paragraph 3
Amendment 812 #
2023/0085(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 25 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 25 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
They shall apply those measures from [OP please insert the date = 2436 months after the date of entry into force of this Directive].
Amendment 72 #
2023/0083(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3
Recital 3
Amendment 76 #
2023/0083(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3 a (new)
Recital 3 a (new)
(3a) In order to encourage consumers to buy products that are easier to repair, Member States should be encouraged to introduce a reparability score covering a wide range of products. This reparability score should be established according to several criteria, namely the availability and sale price of spare parts in relation to the price of new equipment, including the ordering procedure, information about the disassembly of and access to parts, the length of availability on the market of spare parts and delivery times, and the availability of a user and repair manual. The score should be affixed directly to the product or its packaging. In shops it should be displayed on or in the immediate vicinity of the product, and on websites in the presentation of the equipment and close to the price.
Amendment 84 #
2023/0083(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) The consumer’s free choice to decide by whom to have its goods repaired should be facilitated by requesting the European Repair Information Form not only from the producer, but also from the seller of the goods concerned or from independent repairers, where applicable. Repairers should provide the European Repair Information FormAlthough consumers must be informed that a European Repair Information Form exists, repairers should provide it only where the consumer requests that form and the repairer intends to provide the repair service or it is obliged to repair. A consumer may also choose not to request the European Repair Information Form and to conclude a contract for the provision of repair services with a repairer pursuant to pre-contractual information provided by other means in accordance with Directive 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and the Council.15 __________________ 15 Directive 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2011 on consumer rights, amending Council Directive 93/13/EEC and Directive 1999/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directive 85/577/EEC and Directive 97/7/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (Text with EEA relevance) (OJ L 304, 22.11.2011, p. 64–88).
Amendment 88 #
2023/0083(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) TIn order to encourage consumers to consider repairing the product concerned, the pre-repair assessment should be free of charge. However, there are situations in which a repairer incurs costs necessary for providing the information on repair and price included in the European Repair Information Form. For instance, the repairer may need to inspect the goods to be able to determine the defect or type of repair that is necessary, including the need for spare parts, and to estimate the repair price. In these cases, a repairer may only request a consumer to pay the costs that are necessary for providing the information included in the European Repair Information Form. In line with the pre- contractual information and other requirements set out in Directive 2011/83/EU, the repairer should inform the consumer about such costs before the consumer requests the provision of the European Repair Information Form. Consumers may refrain from requesting the European Repair Information Form where they consider that the costs for obtaining that form are too high.
Amendment 96 #
2023/0083(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) Since the obligation to repair imposed on producers under this Directive covers defects that are not due to the non- conformity of the goods with a sales contract, producers may provide repair against a price paid by the consumer, against another kind of consideration, or for free. THowever, to enable the consumer to decide whether or not to have the goods repaired, the pre-repair assessment should be carried out free of charge. Where it involves a cost, this should be added to the final payment. Furthermore, if the product cannot be repaired, the repairer may offer the consumer credit equivalent to the repair cost. In general, the charging of a price should encourage producers to develop sustainable business models, including the provision of repair services so that they can offer these services to consumers. Such a price may take into account, for instance, labour costs, costs for spare parts, costs for operating the repair facility and a customary margin. The price for and the conditions of repair should be agreed in a contract between the consumer and the producer and the consumer should remain free to decide whether that price and those conditions are acceptable. The need for such a contract and the competitive pressure from other repairers should encourage producers who are obliged to repair to keep the price acceptable for the consumer. The repair obligation may also be performed for free, especially the pre-repair assessment, when the defect is covered by a commercial guarantee, for instance, in relation to guaranteed durability of goods.
Amendment 102 #
2023/0083(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) Producers may fulfil their obligation to repair by sub-contracting repair, for instance, if the producer does not have the repair infrastructure or if repair can be carried out by a repairer located closer to the consumer, among othersparticularly where the producer is established outside the Union. To this end, they should provide the consumer with a list of verified repairers.
Amendment 108 #
2023/0083(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) The requirements laid down in delegated acts adopted pursuant to Regulation [on the Ecodesign for Sustainable Products] or implementing measures adopted pursuant to Directive 2009/125/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council16 , according to which producers should provide access to spare parts, repair and maintenance information or any repair related software tools, firmware or similar auxiliary means, apply. Those requirements ensure the technical feasibility of repair, not only by the producer, but also by other repairers. As a consequence, the consumer can select a repairer of its choice. In addition to these measures, independent repairers should be granted access to spare parts and related information on a non- discriminatory basis and at a reasonable cost, for a defined period of time. __________________ 16 Directive 2009/125/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 establishing a framework for the setting of ecodesign requirements for energy-related products (recast) (Text with EEA relevance) (OJ L 285, 31.10.2009, p. 10–35).
Amendment 109 #
2023/0083(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) The requirements laid down in delegated acts adopted pursuant to Regulation [on the Ecodesign for Sustainable Products] or implementing measures adopted pursuant to Directive 2009/125/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council16, according to which producers should provide access, at a reasonable cost and in a non- discriminatory manner for a period equivalent to at least the expected lifespan of the product, to spare parts, repair and maintenance information or any repair related software tools, firmware or similar auxiliary means, apply. Those requirements ensure the technical feasibility of repair, not only by the producer, but also by other repairers. As a consequence, the consumer can select a repairer of its choice. __________________ 16 Directive 2009/125/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 establishing a framework for the setting of ecodesign requirements for energy-related products (recast) (Text with EEA relevance) (OJ L 285, 31.10.2009, p. 10–35).
Amendment 116 #
2023/0083(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 16
Recital 16
Amendment 121 #
2023/0083(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) To ensure legal certainty, this Directive lists in Annex II relevant product groups covered by such reparability requirements under Union legal acts. In order to ensure coherence with future reparability requirements under Union legal acfor the repair obligation under this Directive. In order to be able to adapt Annex II to market developments, 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 in particular adding new product groups to Annex II when new reparability requirements are adopted. 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 of 13 April 2016 on Better Law-Making18. In particular, to ensure equal participation in the preparation of delegated acts, the European Parliament and the Council should receive all documents at the same time as Member States' experts, and their experts systematically should have access to meetings of Commission expert groups dealing with the preparation of delegated acts. __________________ 18 Interinstitutional Agreement between the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission on Better Law-Making (OJ L 213,12.5.2016, p. 1).
Amendment 129 #
2023/0083(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) In order to increase the consumer awareness on the availability of repair and thus its likelihood, producers or sellers should inform consumers of the existence of that obligation. They should also provide information on the availability and sale price of spare parts in relation to the price of new equipment, including the ordering procedure, information about the disassembly of and access to parts, the length of availability on the market of spare parts and delivery times, and the availability of a user and repair manual. The information should mention the relevant goods covered by that obligation, together with an explanation that and to what extent repair is provided for those goods, for instance through sub- contractors. That information should be easily accessible to the consumer and provided in a clear and comprehensible manner, without the need for the consumer to request it, and in line with the accessibility requirements of Directive 2019/882. The producer is free to determine the means through which it informs the consumer.
Amendment 136 #
2023/0083(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) Member States should ensure that all economic operators that may provide repair services in the Union have easy access to the online platform. Member States should be free to decide which repairers can register on the online platform as long as access to that platform is reasonable and non-discriminatory for all repairers in accordance with Union law. Enabling repairers from one Member State to register on the online platform in another Member State in order to provide repair services in areas that the consumer searched for should support the cross- border provision of repair services. It should be left to Member States’ discretion how to populate the online platform, for instance by self-registration or extraction from existing databases with the consent of the repairers, or if registrants should pay a registration fee covering the costs for operating the platform. To guarantee a wide choice of repair services on the online platform, Member States should ensure that access to the online platform is not limited to a specific category of repairers. While national requirements, for instance, on the necessary professional qualifications, continue to apply, Member States should ensure that the online platform is open to all repairers that fulfil those requirements. Member States should also be free to decide whether and to what extentconsider including community-led repair initiatives, such as repair cafés, may register on the online platform, taking account of safety considerations where relevant. Registration on the online platform should always be possible upon repairers’ request, provided they fulfil the applicable requirements to access the online platform.
Amendment 140 #
2023/0083(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) Member States should ensure that consumers have easy access to the online platform allowing them to find suitable repair services for their defective goods. The online platform should also be accessible to vulnerable consumers, including persons with disabilities, in accordance with applicable Union law relating to accessibility. To this end, Member States should take steps to inform consumers of the existence of the online platform, for example through communication campaigns. The economic operators concerned should also take measures to inform consumers of the existence of the online platform, for example by displaying a link to the platform on their websites or in shops in general and when purchasing in particular.
Amendment 142 #
2023/0083(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) The search function based on products may refer to the product type or brand. Since repairers cannot know the specific defect before a request to repair has been made, it is sufficient that they provide on the online platform generic information on key elements of repair services to enable consumers to decide whether to repair the good in question, in particular the average time to complete repair, the availability of temporary replacement goods, the place where the consumer hands over the goods for repair, the possibility of replacing the product under repair during the repair period and the availability of ancillary services. Repairers should be encouraged to regularly update their information on the online platform. In order to build consumer confidence in the repair services available on the online platform, repairers should be able to demonstrate their adherence to certain repair standards.
Amendment 152 #
2023/0083(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 27
Recital 27
(27) The Commission should enable the development of a voluntary European quality standard for repair services, for instance by encouraging and facilitating voluntary cooperation on a standard between businesses, public authorities and other stakeholders or by issuing a standardisation request to the European standardisation organisations, including organisations representing SMEs and their standardisation organisations. A European standard for repair services could boost consumer trust in repair services across the Union. Such standard could include aspects influencing consumer decisions on repair, such as the time to complete repair, the availability of temporary replacement goods, quality assurances such as a commercial guarantee on repair, and the availability of ancillary services such as removal, installation and transportation offered by repairers.
Amendment 164 #
2023/0083(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 28 a (new)
Recital 28 a (new)
(28a) In order to promote repair in the context of the liability of the seller as established by Directive (EU) 2019/771, given that many defects occur after the minimum period of 2 years, this legal guarantee period should be extended for categories of products that are expected to have a longer lifespan. In order to meet consumers’ legitimate expectations, a guarantee period of 5 or 10 years should be established for certain categories of products.
Amendment 167 #
2023/0083(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 28 b (new)
Recital 28 b (new)
(28b) In order to encourage repair and compensate for the absence of the product during the repair period, the economic operator performing, or delegating, a repair service, should offer the consumer a new or refurbished replacement free of charge, where possible.
Amendment 185 #
2023/0083(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Amendment 191 #
2023/0083(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1
Member States shall not maintain or introduce in their national law provisions diverging from those laid down in this Directive. They remain free to maintain or introduce more ambitious provisions aimed at ensuring enhanced reparability of goods.
Amendment 200 #
2023/0083(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Producers shall provide to the repairers all available information necessary to complete the European Repair Information Form.
Amendment 222 #
2023/0083(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 4 – point i a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 4 – point i a (new)
(ia) the travel and repair assessment costs for at-home repairs, where applicable;
Amendment 237 #
2023/0083(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that upon the consumer’s request, the producer shall repair, for free or against a price or another kind of consideration, goods for which and to the extent that reparability requirements are provided for by Union legal acts as listed in Annex II. The producer shall not be obliged to repair such goods where repair is objectively impossible. The producer may sub-contract repair in order to fulfil its obligation to repair.
Amendment 242 #
2023/0083(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)
If the product under repair cannot be repaired, the repairer may offer the consumer credit equivalent to the repair cost.
Amendment 250 #
2023/0083(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 2
2. Where the producer obliged to repair pursuant to paragraph 1 is established outside the Union, its authorised representative in the Union shall perform the obligation of the producer. Where the producer has no authorised representative in the Union, the importer of the good concerned shall perform the obligation of the producer. Where there is no importer, the distributor of the good concerned shall perform the obligation of the producer.
Amendment 258 #
2023/0083(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 3
Article 5 – paragraph 3
3. Producers shall ensure that independent repairers have access to spare parts andfor a minimum of 5 years from the placing on the market of the last unit of product, at a reasonable price, on a non- discriminatory basis and with short notice, as well as to repair-related information and tools in accordance with the Union legal acts listed in Annex II.
Amendment 259 #
2023/0083(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 3
Article 5 – paragraph 3
3. Producers shall ensure that independent repairers have access to spare parts and repair-related information and tools in accordance with the Union legal acts listed in Annex II, at a reasonable cost and in a non- discriminatory manner for a period equivalent to at least the expected lifespan of the product, to spare parts, repair-related information and tools.
Amendment 267 #
2023/0083(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Where possible, the operator carrying out the repair shall offer the consumer a replacement product free of charge for the duration of the repair.
Amendment 276 #
2023/0083(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 4
Article 5 – paragraph 4
4. The Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 15 to amend Annex II by updating the lisght of Union legal acts laying down reparability requirements in the light of legislative or market developments.
Amendment 302 #
2023/0083(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 3
Article 7 – paragraph 3
3. Registration on the online platform for repairers, as well as for sellers of goods subject to refurbishment and for purchasers of defective goods for refurbishment, shall be voluntary. Member States shall determine the access to the platform in accordance with Union law. The use of the online platform shall be free of charge for consumers and for independent repairers legally framed as SMEs in accordance to Recommendation 2003/361/EC.
Amendment 315 #
2023/0083(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 a (new)
Article 8 a (new)
Article 8a Micro and small and medium enterprises Member States shall take the appropriate measures to support micro and small and medium-sized enterprises within the meaning of Recommendation 2003/361/EC in applying the requirements laid down by this Directive. Such measures shall include at least: (a) guidelines to comply with requirements laid down in this Directive; (b) tailor-made training courses for entrepreneurs and their staff.
Amendment 320 #
2023/0083(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 a (new)
Article 9 a (new)
Article 9a National measures to promote repair In compliance with State aid rules, Member States shall take the appropriate measures, including those of fiscal nature, to promote the competitiveness of repair services.
Amendment 354 #
2023/0083(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 1 a (new)
In Article 10(1) of Directive (EU) 2019/771 the following sentence is amended as follows: ‘The seller shall be liable to the consumer for any lack of conformity which exists at the time when the goods were delivered and which becomes apparent within 2 to 10 years of that time. Without prejudice to Article 7(3), this paragraph shall also apply to goods with digital elements.’
Amendment 379 #
2023/0083(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex II – subheading 1
Annex II – subheading 1
LIST OF UNION LEGAL ACTREPARABLE GOODS
Amendment 381 #
2023/0083(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex II – subheading 2
Annex II – subheading 2
Amendment 382 #
2023/0083(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex II – point 1
Annex II – point 1
1. Household washing machines and household washer-dryers according to Commission Regulation (EU) 2019/202321 __________________ 21 Commission Regulation (EU) 2019/2023 of 1 October 2019 laying down ecodesign requirements for household washing machines and household washer-dryers pursuant to Directive 2009/125/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, amending Commission Regulation (EC) No 1275/2008 and repealing Commission Regulation (EU) No 1015/2010 (OJ 315, 5.12.2019, p. 285).
Amendment 384 #
2023/0083(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex II – point 2
Annex II – point 2
2. Household dishwashers according to Commission Regulation (EU) 2019/202222 __________________ 22 Commission Regulation (EU) 2019/2022 of 1 October 2019 laying down ecodesign requirements for household dishwashers pursuant to Directive 2009/125/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Commission Regulation (EC) No 1275/2008 and repealing Commission Regulation (EU) No 1016/2010 (OJ 315, 5.12.2019, p. 267).
Amendment 387 #
2023/0083(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex II – point 3
Annex II – point 3
3. Refrigerating appliances with a direct sales function according to Commission Regulation (EU) 2019/202423 __________________ 23 Commission Regulation (EU) 2019/2024 of 1 October 2019 laying down ecodesign requirements for refrigerating appliances with a direct sales function pursuant to Directive 2009/125/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ 315, 5.12.2019, p. 313).
Amendment 389 #
2023/0083(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex II – point 4
Annex II – point 4
4. Refrigerating appliances according to Commission Regulation (EU) 2019/201924 __________________ 24 Commission Regulation (EU) 2019/2019 of 1 October 2019 laying down ecodesign requirements for refrigerating appliances pursuant to Directive 2009/125/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Commission Regulation (EC) No 643/2009 (OJ 315, 5.12.2019, p. 187).
Amendment 391 #
2023/0083(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex II – point 5
Annex II – point 5
5. Electronic displays according to Commission Regulation (EU) 2019/202125 __________________ 25 Commission Regulation (EU) 2019/2021 of 1 October 2019 laying down ecodesign requirements for electronic displays pursuant to Directive 2009/125/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, amending Commission Regulation (EC) No 1275/2008 and repealing Commission Regulation (EC) No 642/2009 (OJ 315, 5.12.2019, p.241).
Amendment 393 #
2023/0083(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex II – point 6
Annex II – point 6
6. Welding equipment according to Commission Regulation (EU) 2019/178426 __________________ 26 Commission Regulation (EU) 2019/1784 of 1 October 2019 laying down ecodesign requirements for welding equipment pursuant to Directive 2009/125/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ 272, 25.10.2019, p. 121).
Amendment 395 #
2023/0083(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex II – point 7
Annex II – point 7
7. Vacuum cleaners according to Commission Regulation (EU) 666/201327 __________________ 27 Commission Regulation (EU) 666/2013 of 8 July 2013 implementing Directive 2009/125/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to ecodesign requirements for vacuum cleaners (OJ 192, 13.07.2013, p. 24).
Amendment 396 #
2023/0083(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex II – point 7 a (new)
Annex II – point 7 a (new)
7a. Household appliances and kitchen appliances
Amendment 398 #
2023/0083(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex II – point 8
Annex II – point 8
8. Servers and data storage products according to Commission Regulation (EU) 2019/42428 __________________ 28 Commission Regulation (EU) 2019/424 of 15 March 2019 laying down ecodesign requirements for servers and data storage products pursuant to Directive 2009/125/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and amending Commission Regulation (EU) No 617/2013 (OJ 74, 18.03.2019, p. 46).
Amendment 400 #
2023/0083(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex II – point 9
Annex II – point 9
9. [Mobile phones, cordless phones and tablets according to Commission Regulation (EU) .../…29 ] __________________ 29 …, computers, monitors, printers and scanners, game consoles
Amendment 401 #
2023/0083(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex II – point 9 a (new)
Annex II – point 9 a (new)
9a. Televisions, video projectors, television receivers and peripherals, hi-fi equipment, home cinemas
Amendment 402 #
2023/0083(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex II – point 9 c (new)
Annex II – point 9 c (new)
9c. Audio headphones, portable speakers, radios, digital music players
Amendment 403 #
2023/0083(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex II – point 9 e (new)
Annex II – point 9 e (new)
9e. Cameras, camcorders, camera equipment
Amendment 1 #
2023/0081(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Citation 4 a (new)
Citation 4 a (new)
having regard to Directive 2014/25/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on procurement by entities operating in the water, energy, transport and postal services sectors and repealing Directive 2004/17/EC, and in particular Article 85 thereof,
Amendment 6 #
2023/0081(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
Recital 25
(25) Directives 2014/23/EU, 2014/24/EU and 2014/25/EU already allow contracting authorities and entities awarding contracts through public procurement procedures to rely, in addition to price or cost, on additional criteria for identifying the most economically advantageous tender. Such criteria concern for instance the quality of the tender including social, environmental and innovative characteristics. When awarding contracts for net-zero technology through public procurement, contracting authorities and contracting entities should duly assess the tenders’ contribution to sustainability andor resilience in relation to a series of criteria relating to the tender’s environmental sustainability, the extent to which the economic and social externalities of a tender are into account, innovation, system integration and to resilience.
Amendment 42 #
2023/0081(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) ‘net-zero technologies’ means renewable energy technologies66; electricity and heat storage technologies; heat pumps; grid technologies; renewable fuels of non-biological origin technologies; sustainable alternative fuels technologies67; electrolysers and fuel cells; advanced technologies to produce energy from nuclear processes with minimal waste from the fuel cycle, small modular reactors, and related best-in- class fuels; carbon capture, utilisenergy system technologies which ensure low, zero or negative greenhouse gas emissions when operationg, and storage technologies; and energy- system related energy efficiency technologies. They refer to the fins well as final technological products, specific components and specific machinery primarily used for the production of those products. They shall have reached a technology readiness level of at least 8. __________________ 66 ‘renewable energy' means ‘renewable energy’ as defined in Directive (EU) 2018/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources ‘sustainable alternative fuels’ means fuels covered by the Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on ensuring a level playing field for sustainable air transport, COM/2021/561 final and by the Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and Council on the use of renewable and low-carbon fuels in maritime transport COM/2021/562 final, machinery or assemblies installed in the Union which are available on the market and which contribute to the implementation or production of technologies enabling the overall target referred to in Article 1(1) to be achieved.
Amendment 69 #
2023/0081(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1
Article 19 – paragraph 1
1. Contracting authorities or contracting entities shall base the award of contracts for net-zero technology listed in the Annex, as defined in Article 3(1)(a) of this Regulation, and more generally all energy system technologies which ensure low, zero or negative greenhouse gas emissions when operating, in a public procurement procedure on the most economically advantageous tender, which shall include the best price-quality ratio, comprising at least the sustainability and, resilience and security of supply contribution of the tender, in compliance with Directives 2014/23/EU, 2014/24/EU, or 2014/25/EU and applicable sectoral legislation, as well as with the Union’s international commitments, including the GPA and other international agreements by which the Union is bound.
Amendment 72 #
2023/0081(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The tender’s sustainability andor resilience and security of supply contribution shall be based on at least one of the following cumulative criteria, which shall be objective, transparent and non- discriminatory:
Amendment 87 #
2023/0081(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – point d
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – point d
(d) the tender’s contribution to resilience and security of supply, taking into account the proportion of the products originating from a single source of supply, as determined in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 952/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council72, from which more than 65% of the supply for that specific net-zero technology within the Union originates in the last year for which data is available for when the tender takes place. __________________ 72 Regulation (EU) No 952/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 October 2013 laying down the Union Customs Code (OJ L 269, 10.10.2013, p. 1).
Amendment 89 #
2023/0081(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – point d a (new)
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – point d a (new)
(da) the extent to which the economic and social externalities of a tender, such as job creation or retention, tax revenue and impact on social expenditure, are taken into account.
Amendment 95 #
2023/0081(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 3
Article 19 – paragraph 3
3. Contracting authorities and contracting entities shall give the tender’s sustainability andor resilience contribution a weight between 1520% and 350% of the award criteria, without prejudice of the application of Article 41 (3) of Directive 2014/23/EU, Article 67 (5) of Directive 2014/24/EU or Article 82 (5) of Directive 2014/25/EU for giving a higher weighting to the criteria referred to in paragraph 2, points (a) and (b).
Amendment 99 #
2023/0081(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 4
Article 19 – paragraph 4
4. The contracting authority or the contracting entity shall not be obliged to apply the considerations relating to the sustainability and resilience contribution of net-zero technologies where their application would oblige that authority or entity to acquire equipment having disproportionate costs, or technical characteristics different from those of existing equipment, resulting in incompatibility, technical difficulties in operation and maintenance. Cost differences above 130% may be presumed by contracting authorities and contracting entities to be disproportionate. This provision shall be without prejudice of the possibility to exclude abnormally low tenders under Article 69 of Directive 2014/24/EU and Article 84 of Directive 2014/25/EU, and without prejudice to other contract award criteria according to the EU legislation, including social aspects according to Articles 30 (3) and 36 (1), second intent of Directive 2014/23/EU, Articles 18 (2) and 67 (2) of Directive 2014/24/EU and Articles 36 (2) and 82 (2) of Directive 2014/24/EU.
Amendment 103 #
2023/0081(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 19 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Any tender submitted for the award of a ‘net zero technologies’ contract should be rejected where the proportion of the products originating in third countries, as determined in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 952/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council, exceeds 50% of the total value of the products constituting the tender.
Amendment 106 #
2023/0081(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 4 b (new)
Article 19 – paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Where the cost differential between two or more tenders is less than 15%, or where two or more tenders are equivalent in terms of the contract award criteria, the contracting authority or the contracting entity should give preference to a tender containing no more than 50% of products originating in a third country.
Amendment 15 #
2022/2198(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas the transition to Web 4.0 and the development of virtual worlds are an indispensable part of the future of digitisation and a key building block for the completion of the digital single market; whereas the new virtual worlds should not replace but rather only complement the real world;
Amendment 25 #
2022/2198(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas virtual worlds also entail significant risks affecting citizen and consumer protection and issues related to competition law, privacy and personal data protection, and cybersecurity;
Amendment 33 #
2022/2198(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Points to the lack of a universally recognised or agreed definitions of virtual worlds and the real world and considers that further work is needed in order to rectify this;
Amendment 36 #
2022/2198(INI)
Amendment 49 #
2022/2198(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the Commission’s commitment to monitor the development of virtual worlds; invites the Commission to draft a report on this subject every two years and to transmit it to Parliament and the Council; asks the Commission to pay attention to the potential emergence of problems in the Web 4.0 that already exist in the Web 3.0, such as the proliferation of fake news, infringement of intellectual property rights, digital identity fraud, cybercrime, cyberterrorism, sexual abuse of minors and cyberbullying, among others;
Amendment 58 #
2022/2198(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Signals also the positive impact that these developments will have on employment, includ; stresses the importance of promoting the creation of new jobs in domains such as virtual world architecture or content creation; highlights the importance of promoting the development of appropriate skills to ensure the supply of talented and skilled workers fit for these jobs in the EU, as well as of creating appealing conditions to keep EU talent, attract foreign talent and promote entrepreneurship and innovation in the territory of the EU;
Amendment 64 #
2022/2198(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. RecallsCriticises the fact that most companies leading the development of virtual worlds are established outside the EU; considers that the EU should take the lead in shaping virtual worlds as ecosystems in which European strategic interests, values and principles are respected and promoted, with users at their centre; signals the importance of fostering the creation of a level playing field that promotes the expansion of European small and medium-sized enterprises, and the establishment of European companies able to compete with foreign competitors, as well as innovation and growth;
Amendment 72 #
2022/2198(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Acknowledges that multiple virtual worlds have been developed by different undertakings in the absence of open standards and interoperable platforms; considers that interoperability and open standards can contribute to the prevention of quasi-monopolies or abuses of dominant position to the detriment of consumers and European companies, notably SMEs; welcomes the Commission’s commitment to engage with existing multi-stakeholder internet governance institutions to develop common governance standards; supports the establishment of a technical multi- stakeholder forum for the development of technical standards to ensure interoperable virtual worlds;
Amendment 82 #
2022/2198(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Believes that the debate over the need for the identification of users in virtual worldmaking users in virtual worlds identifiable under predefined conditions should be a priority area in the development process of virtual worlds and that there should be a profound reflection on the possible configuration of this digital reality, bearing in mind that, in some cases, anonymity may be preferable; points out that anonymity in the digital world is always possible under a username (alias), behind which there must always be an individual identifiable only by the competent authorities in case of need;
Amendment 98 #
2022/2198(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Warns about the potential health problems that may arise from accessing virtual worlds, such as addiction, cybersickness or disturbances in sleep patterns or cognitive development, especially among minors and young people;
Amendment 102 #
2022/2198(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Recalls the potential of virtual worlds to offer unique experiences that can help minors develop their appetite for learning through, for example, learning through play, which can help them to develop skills in collaboration, communication, critical thinking, innovation and confidence; stresses, however, the risks inherent in early exposure to an excessive use of screens, which can affect well-being and proper cognitive, physical, psychological and social development; calls for information campaigns on limiting screen time, promoting the proper use of screens and the importance of digital parenting to be launched; underlines the importance of protecting minors in virtual worlds, especially against abuse, harassment and bullying;
Amendment 109 #
2022/2198(INI)
15. Notes that virtual worlds will generate high-resolution images, graphics and video to ensure immersive user experiences, further requiring high- performing infrastructure; notes that, in particular 5G and 6G networks with low latency and high bandwidth will be key, as will technologies such as edge computing; recalls the European Court of Auditors’ January 2022 report, which estimated the total cost of 5G deployment across all EU Member States until 2025, between building new 5G infrastructure and upgrading existing infrastructure, to range between EUR 281 billion and EUR 391 billion; calls, in this regard, for the establishment of a framework which would provide for a fair and equitable contribution to be made by very large content providers to Internet access providers;
Amendment 118 #
2022/2198(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Calls on the Commission to conduct an assessment of how to ensure that the infrastructure needed is delivered to consumers; highlights that a true single market for telecoms is key in this regard;
Amendment 3 #
2022/2171(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas consumers arseem to be ready to change their purchasing patterns for sustainable options but can be misled by greenwashing practicewhen duly informed about sustainability and origin of the products;
Amendment 18 #
2022/2171(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas supporting a vibrant and dynamic textile sector is strategic for the value chains and the competitiveness of the internal market;
Amendment 21 #
2022/2171(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital B b (new)
Recital B b (new)
Bb. whereas the long tradition and experience of European textile companies has a priceless value for the European historical heritage;
Amendment 33 #
2022/2171(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls for stricter customs controls to avoid the import of counterfeit and unsafe textile products or goods without the specific requirements to be sold in the internal market; calls for the implementation of a trusted-flagger alert and notification mechanism and of an appropriate European redress mechanism for consumers affected by misleading labels and textiles that do not comply with Union law;
Amendment 41 #
2022/2171(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomes the introduction of the digital product passport in the proposal for a regulation on ecodesign requirements for sustainable products; believes that in order to be relevant this passport needs to be available on the product itself and be easy to read; favours open and trustworthy data ensuring traceability down to factory level; emphasises that any action that could increase red tape for producers should be avoided and calls for stronger support for SMEs in this sector;
Amendment 54 #
2022/2171(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Encourages initiatives to help consumers switch to more sustainable consumption patterns by providing quality products at an affordable price and reducing waste, without affecting competitiveness and offering more choices to the consumers;
Amendment 59 #
2022/2171(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Believes that textile producers and brands should be drivers of sustainability by being transparent in their practices and respecting human rights and the environment; believes that these goals could be also achieved supporting the value chain, promoting reshoring in EU of delocalized productions, lowering burdens, promoting the textile value chain with incentives and creating a clear and efficient legal framework for companies and customers;
Amendment 67 #
2022/2171(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Stresses that some fast fashion companies located outside the EU contribute to puts enormous stress on suppliers and their workforce through unfair trading practices;
Amendment 83 #
2022/2171(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Calls for mandatorytransparent criteria onfor a responsible consumption to applyied to public procurement, avoiding fragmentation of the internal market;
Amendment 93 #
2022/2171(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Recalls the need to support the EU textile value chain, which actively contribute to the EU competitiveness, while at the same time defending it from external unfair practices, which are also distortive of the internal market;
Amendment 8 #
2022/2084(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Recalls, however, that in its report of 21 December 2020 on the effectiveness of the increase in the number of judges of the General Court, the Court of Justice considered that no final conclusion could yet be drawn as to the effectiveness of that increase; stresses the need to further analyse this issue in the light of recent developments;
Amendment 6 #
2022/2060(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recalls that competition policy is key to a well-functioning single market and economy and that it should aim to creates incentives for variety in products, lower prices, higherfair prices for both producers and consumers, support for European players in global competition, higher social, safety, health and environmental standards, innovation and better services for the consumer;
Amendment 14 #
2022/2060(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that the removal of State aid limits due to the COVID-19 crisis and now Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine have led to Member States providing different amounts of support to the same sectors; underlines that this has led to a playing field that is not level for the same industries within the single market; calls on the Commission to seek ways to counterbalance this problem once the disruptions that caused it have come to an end; calls on the Commission to put in place a new state aid framework to support Member States in the face of international economic tensions, including soaring inflation and the general rise in energy prices;
Amendment 35 #
2022/2060(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Believes that consolidation within the telecommunications and internet service providers sector could have a significant negative effect on competition within the Union, as it could develop into a monopolistic market, and that the Commission should be vigilant about this; notes, moreover, that mergers between internet service providers, media content broadcasters and streaming providers could create incentives to abuse a dominant position, which would have a negative effect on consumers; underlines that competition policy must support, without political or partnership preferences, net neutrality and prevent all attempts to undermine it;
Amendment 42 #
2022/2060(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Notes that competition is global by nature; encourages the Commission, therefore, to use all tools provided for in the Union’s trade agreements and the Union’s Customs Code4 to counter unfair commercial trading practices and competition from non-EU companies which could affect the single marketdopt global strategies that are territorially beyond the EU's regulatory capabilities but nevertheless cause economic and social harm to European players on the world stage, in particular by preventing the emergence of industrial and technological champions; calls on the Commission, in the event that recourse to the tools provided for by the World Trade Organization would not make it possible to resolve the problems created by third-country rules and regulations, to take all the necessary measures to respond to them, such as the introduction of a Buy European Act and the adoption of a general regulation exempting the most critical areas from European competition law; asks the Commission to look into international agreements and State aid rules in order to seek suitable solutions; _________________ 4 Regulation (EU) No 952/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 October 2013 laying down the Union Customs Code (recast) (OJ L 269, 10.10.2013, p. 1).
Amendment 52 #
2022/2060(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Notes that consumers are facing rising energy prices in general, while the number of energy producers in some markets has collapsed; asks the Commission to help ensure the availability of a choice of providers for consumersrevise the rules governing the European electricity market as soon as possible in order to ensure that cheap and environmentally friendly sources of production are maintained;
Amendment 55 #
2022/2060(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Observes that the uptake of electric vehicles will lead to higher electricity consumption in the futuredecision to ban the sale of new internal combustion engine vehicles in favour of electric vehicles will lead to huge costs for car manufacturers and will jeopardise the biofuel vehicle sector; observes further that this decision will lead to a dependence on lithium producing countries and their exporting companies; notes that it will also lead to higher electricity consumption and new ways of consumers ‘fuelling’ their vehicles; asks the Commission and Member States to ensure competition and price transparency between energy providers for electric vehicle charging stations; notes that a lack of competition may lead to consumers paying higher rates than necessary to charge their vehicles;
Amendment 68 #
2022/2060(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Recalls that services represent the largest economic sector in the European Union and have still not yet reached their competitive potential and the level of the single market for goods; beli; believes howevesr that the work to remove remaining obstacles should be accelerated andsupport Europe's industrial sectors should be accelerated before acting on the disproportionate obstacles to the establishing of a single market for services fully established;
Amendment 38 #
2022/2058(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
Amendment 54 #
2022/2058(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
Amendment 62 #
2022/2058(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. The continued use of traditional European standards on consumer products is essential to ensure that they can be understood by purchasers, for the measurement of speed (km/h), weight (kg), temperature (°C) or dates (30 January 2023), for example. It must be remembered that a number of EU partners such as the United States and the United Kingdom use other standards (°F, miles, 2023-01-30). Dates and times on computers and other items sold in Europe should be displayed in accordance with the configurations used in the Member State or European Union.
Amendment 103 #
2022/2058(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Welcomes the focus on national- level involvement of wider stakeholders in standardisation activities; notes that not all organisations listed in Annex III have national counterparts in the Member States; considers that the Commission may direct funding or technical support to those organisations to ensurcommunicate with those organisations and offer them technical support to encourage participation in national standardisation activities, including not only technical work on standards, but also the preparation of positions vis-à-vis standardisation requests at the European and international levels, thereby reinforcing the inclusivity of the process as a whole;
Amendment 130 #
2022/2058(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Emphasises that prioritising standardisation matters in cooperation with third countries in bi-, multi- and pluri- lateral settings is also important to ensure that like-minded, inclusive approaches towards standardisation can prevail at international level; encourages, in this regard, the Commission and the CSO to develop key performance indicators to monitor commitments on standardisation between the Union and third countries;
Amendment 2 #
2022/2038(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
A a. Whereas the Secretariat of the European Regulators Group for Audiovisual Media Services (ERGA) is staffed and hosted by the Commission diminishing its independence;
Amendment 3 #
2022/2038(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A b (new)
Recital A b (new)
A b. Whereas only the strict maintenance of responsibilities and competences of the Member States can guarantee the success of the European media policy;
Amendment 4 #
2022/2038(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A c (new)
Recital A c (new)
A c. Whereas media policy is not mentioned in the relevant catalogues of exclusive or shared competences assigned to the EU under primary Union law;
Amendment 7 #
2022/2038(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Underlines the importance of the proper implementation of the Directive; regrets that not all Member States have done this and encourages them to do so urgently;
Amendment 14 #
2022/2038(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Underlines that the strategy of the Commission to harmonise legislation in the field of media, a policy area where the EU clearly lacks competences, by feigning internal market considerations is unacceptable; emphasises that the concept of freedom of establishment has to be interpreted narrowly and must by no ways serve as a general authorisation to legislate in other policy areas for which there is no clear competence; notes that any regulatory approach that would limit entrepreneurial freedom in the internal market would not be compatible with the internal market concept of Article 26 TFEU, which aims at progress towards cross-border freedom of development;
Amendment 39 #
2022/2038(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Highlights the importance of a well functioning internal media market; underlines that the proposed European media freedom act aims to further enhance cooperation between the national regulators by establishing a European media board; stresses that independence and adequate resources must be guaranteed in order to fulfil these new responsibilities; insists on the importance of avoiding overlaps between the two instruments in order to preserve their effectiveness.is a political appropriation of the media by the Commission;
Amendment 23 #
2022/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Emphasises that, in order to strengthen the single market, it is necessary to carry out a digital transformation that inensure the development of an independent European single market, it is necessary to provide for a revision of European competition law and thus creaseste the availability of online public services; recalls that eGovernment facilitates relationships with citizens, businesses, employees and governments, and calls for the establishment of a European digital identityconditions conducive to the emergence of strategic European digital sectors; regrets that Member States rely on private solutions from third countries when drawing up national cloud strategies;
Amendment 25 #
2022/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Emphasises that in order to strengthen the single market, it is necessary to carry out a digital transformation that increases the availability of online public services; recalls that eGovernment facilitates relationships with citizens, businesses, employees and governments, and calls for the establishment of a European digital identity;
Amendment 31 #
2022/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Firmly bBelieves that the further development of digital public services can significantly contribute to the reduction of administrative barriers for entrepreneurs, especially micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs); calls on Member States to redouble their efforts to further digitalise public services without that meaning that citizens of Member States who so wish cannot avail themselves of those services in a traditional and non- digitalised manner; stresses the importance of not sacrificing public services that are accessible in a non- computerised manner, but, rather, of allowing easy and rapid access to such public services;
Amendment 34 #
2022/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Emphasises that the provision of digital public services implies the use of personal data, and therefore calls on the Commission and Member States to pay special attention to the protection of citizens’ personal data, including in connection with data transfer agreements with third countries; calls on the Commission not to compromise the high level of personal-data protection to which Member State citizens are entitled; calls on the Commission to foster the development of sovereign European digital infrastructure guaranteeing that the rights of European users, and the security of their data, will be protected;
Amendment 42 #
2022/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Emphasises that broadband internet coverage, especially on islands and in rural areas, is of key importance for the development of eGovernment; calls on the Commission, therefore, to complete the necessary infrastructure for broadband internet access in cooperation with the Member States; highlights the high cybersecurity risks with regard to submarine cables in particular; calls on Member States to redouble their efforts to protect them;
Amendment 46 #
2022/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Points out that without improvements to digital skills and digital literacy, as well as an awareness of Member States' extreme dependence on third countries and the means to rectify that, the European digital single market cannot be built; invites the Commission, therefore, to robustly implement the Digital Education Action Plan;
Amendment 54 #
2022/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
Amendment 85 #
2022/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Welcomes the Commission’s initiative to create a European data space for public procurement as a cornerstone of the future public procurement data strategy; regrets the lack of any European ambition to foster the emergence of world-class data centres and sovereign clouds in the Member States; considers that improved publication of procurement data above and below EU thresholds as well as better quality and aligned data sources and formats will particularly help the Commission in this task;
Amendment 100 #
2022/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Welcomes the Commission’s initiative to create European data spaces in various sectors, including health, justice and public procurement; considers it crucial for these data spaces to be interoperable so that consumers and entrepreneurs, especially SMEs, can achieve their full potential; points out that the interoperability of data spaces should be the starting point for all future digitalisation strategies; calls on the Commission to submit a legislative proposal as soon as possible that will ensure the interoperability of data spaces in the European single market;
Amendment 31 #
2022/2014(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the video games industry employed 86 953 people in 2019, of whom around 20% were women; 3a; _________________ 3a ISFE, Europe’s Video Games Industry, ISFE-EGDF Key Facts, 2021.
Amendment 40 #
2022/2014(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas online video games present, by their very nature, important levels of criticalities especially when the gaming experience is compared to most traditional physical channels;
Amendment 45 #
2022/2014(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas spending excessive amounts of time playing online video games, in the absence of appropriate safeguards, can create addictions and lead to ‘gaming disorder’, and can also lead to consumer-protection related issues as well as mechanisms that can be reminiscent of electronic forms of gambling, in particular with regard to minors;
Amendment 55 #
2022/2014(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Recital F a (new)
Fa. whereas monetized video games may have very few consumer protection guarantees, which could pose financial risks for users and, in the case of minors, parents and those legally responsible for their actions;
Amendment 56 #
2022/2014(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F b (new)
Recital F b (new)
Fb. whereas the control and verification tools set up for accessing online video games may lack efficiency, particularly when it comes to verifying with absolute certainty players’ age;
Amendment 68 #
2022/2014(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J a (new)
Recital J a (new)
Ja. whereas, with regard to the psychosocial effects of certain reward mechanisms, children are more at risk to develop habits in response to certain stimuli;
Amendment 70 #
2022/2014(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
K. whereas the European video games industry represented a market size of EUR 23.3 billion in 2020 and is still growing8a; whereas, since 2015, digital revenues have increased threefold and account for more than half of European market revenues; _________________ 8a ISFE, Europe’s Video Games Industry, ISFE-EGDF Key Facts, 2021
Amendment 73 #
2022/2014(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K a (new)
Recital K a (new)
Ka. whereas the industry has historically generated revenue from the sale of video games but has been rapidly shifting to purely digital services sold through online storefronts, leading the grounds for new and complex business models; whereas one of the currently predominant business models is represented by in-game purchases that unlock digital content in the video game environment;
Amendment 77 #
2022/2014(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K b (new)
Recital K b (new)
Kb. whereas the video games industry represents an important and rapidly growing segment of the creativity sector in Europe, which has historically lagged behind in the emergence of 'European champions' within the global digital sector;
Amendment 92 #
2022/2014(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the measures taken to better protect consumers; notes, however, the need for a single, coordinated approach between Member States in order to avoid fragmentation of the single market and to protect European consumers;
Amendment 104 #
2022/2014(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomes the development and implementation of parental-control tools that help to filter content and video games by age, monitor time spent playing games, disable or limit online spending and restrict communications with others or the viewing of content created by other players; notes, however, that parents may find it difficult to use such tools, which reduces their effectiveness; calls for mechanisms to be put in place to exercise stricter parental control over the amount of time and money children spend on games, among other thingsstresses that instructions for effective use of parental control should be made user-friendly, accessible and clear;
Amendment 108 #
2022/2014(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Points out that some video games offer their users the possibility to pay, sometimes even with real money, in order to obtain rewards through loot boxesbuy in-game currencies and to obtain randomized rewards through loot boxes; stresses that the use of in-game currencies constitutes an additional transaction layer that abstracts the real-world cost of the virtual item;
Amendment 115 #
2022/2014(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Observes that generally the ownership of in-game currencies does not guarantee the right of refund nor the right of withdrawal for consumers, notably given the complicated licensing agreements through which video games companies often grant themselves the power to unilaterally change contractual clauses;
Amendment 145 #
2022/2014(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Stresses that consumers should have all the necessary information about an online video game before starting to play it, as well as during the game, in terms of the multiple options for possible purchases while playing and other information that may be considered to be of interest; observes in particular that clear information shall be provided to consumers in advertising materials on what to expect from in-game purchases and how they affect gameplay;
Amendment 153 #
2022/2014(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Points out that in cases where algorithmic decision-making is employed in video games, particularly when it aims at influencing user behaviour, consumers shall be explicitly informed;
Amendment 171 #
2022/2014(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Stresses that, when adopting regulatory action, the Commission shall prioritize banning misleading designs, increasing minors protection and ensuring transactional transparency for in-game purchasing systems;
Amendment 193 #
2022/2014(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Recalls that children are less able to disentangle costs when presented with virtual currencies and may have problems understanding and taking probabilities into account particularly when it comes to randomized rewards;
Amendment 215 #
2022/2014(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Stresses the importance of creating enforceable accessibility standards for consumers affected by disabilities, in particular when minors;
Amendment 250 #
2022/2014(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22a. Calls on the Commission to take advantage of the fitness check to be conducted on digital fairness, as part of the New Consumer Agenda2020, to assess key concepts relevant for the protection of consumer in online video games as vulnerability, deceptive design and monetisation techniques;
Amendment 7 #
2022/2008(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recalls that the new Industrial Strategy was updated to reflect the lessons learned from COVID-19, and that this strategy will be key toshould go further in enhancing EU competitiveness and overcoming future challenges, such as Union independence for the most strategic economic sectors; recalls that a strong governance system, European preference and market surveillance are essential in order to relaunch the single market; calls on the Commission to focus on ensuring that the industrial strategy helps remove single market barriers and avoid further fragmentation;
Amendment 8 #
2022/2008(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recalls that the new Industrial Strategy was updated to reflect the lessons learned from COVID-19, and that this strategy will be key to enhancing EU competitiveness and overcoming future challenges; recalls that a strong governance system and market surveillance are essential in order to relaunch the single market; calls on the Commission to focus on ensuring that the industrial strategy helps remove single market barriers and avoid further fragmentation;
Amendment 33 #
2022/2008(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Underlines the need to strengthen the competitiveness of SMEs and industry by addressing supply risks, dependencies, disruptions and vulnerabilities, especially in the green and digital economies; stresses that effective public procurement will lead to more jobs, growth and innovative investments; recalls that the selection and award criteria should not result in an unreasonable administrative burden, particularly for European micro-, small and medium-sized enterprises;
Amendment 34 #
2022/2008(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Underlines the need to strengthen the competitiveness of SMEs and industry by addressing supply risks, dependencies, disruptions and vulnerabilities, especially in the green and digital economies; stresses that public procurement can play an active role in achieving the New Industrial Strategy objectives, such as the emergence of competitive European businesses; stresses that effective public procurement will lead to more jobs, growth and innovative investments;
Amendment 46 #
2022/2008(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Reiterates the need to enhance European strategic autonomy by investing in skills, digital infrastructures, particularly for the storage and processing of European user data, and key technologies such as AI, cybersecurity, 5G and 6G, microprocessors and semiconductors, high-performance computing and quantum technologies;
Amendment 55 #
2022/2008(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Stresses that developing these key sectors requires that a European preference system be established for local or European production in public procurement contracts in Europe;
Amendment 77 #
2022/2008(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Re-affirms the right of Member States to exclude consultancy firms such as McKinsey, which do not pay any national or European taxes, from their Industrial Strategy public procurement;
Amendment 30 #
2022/0906(COD)
Draft Regulation
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) The General Court is currently in a position to be able to deal with the increase in workload that will follow from that transfer of jurisdiction, as a result of the doubling of the number of its Judges and the measures taken in the context of the reform of the Union’s judicial framework of the Union resulting from Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2015/2422 of the European Parliament and of the Council13.Nevertheless doubled, since the workload of the General Court is closely related to developments in the Union’s activity, care should be taken to ensure that the General Court remains capable of fully exercising its powers of review in respect of the institutions, bodies, offices and agencies of the Union, if necessary by means of increasing the number of its staff 2019, the number of judges at the General Court; this decision is justified in retrospect and the General Court is therefore currently fully in a position to be able to deal with the increase in workload that will follow from this transfer of jurisdiction. _________________ 13 Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2015/2422 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2015 amending Protocol No 3 on the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union (OJ L 341, 24.12.2015, p. 14).
Amendment 63 #
2022/0906(COD)
Draft Regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1
Draft regulation amending Protocol No 3 on the Statute of the CJEU
Article 2 – paragraph 3
Article 2 – paragraph 3
3. The requests for a preliminary ruling transmitted to the General Court shall be assigned, in accordance with the detailed rules set out in its Rules of Procedure, to chambers designated for that purpose. In those cases, an Advocate General shall be designated, in accordance with the detailed rules set out in the Rules of Procedure. A Member State or an institution of the Union which is a party to a request for a preliminary ruling may request that the General Court sit in an intermediate chamber.
Amendment 168 #
2022/0269(COD)
(22) Before initiating an investigation, competent authorities should request from the economic operators under assessment information on actions taken to mitigate, prevent or bring to an end risks of forced labour in their operations and value chains with respect to the products under assessment. Carrying out such due diligence in relation to forced labour should help the economic operator to be at a lower risk of having forced labour in its operations and value chains. Appropriate due diligence means that forced labour issues in the value chain have been identified and addressed in accordance with relevant Union legislation and international standards. This Regulation should be subsidiary to Due Diligence processes and be the last resort instrument to be applied when supply chain due diligence has not been properly executed according to applicable international guidelines. That implies that where the competent authority considers that there is no substantiated concern of a violation of the prohibition, for instance due to, but not limited to the applicable legislation, guidelines, recommendations or any other due diligence in relation to forced labour being applied in a way that mitigates, prevents and brings to an end the risk of forced labour, no investigation should be initiated.
Amendment 384 #
2022/0269(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2
Article 4 – paragraph 2
2. In their assessment of the likelihood that economic operators violated Article 3, competent authorities shall focus on the economic operators involved in the steps of the value chain as close as possible to where the risk of forced labour is likely to occcausing forced labour and take into account the size and economic resources of the economic operators, the quantity of products concerned, as well as the scale of suspected forced labour.
Amendment 406 #
2022/0269(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 4
Article 4 – paragraph 4
4. Economic operators shall respond to the request of the competent authority referred to in paragraph 3 within 15 30 working days from the day they received such request. Economic operators may provide to competent authorities any other information they may deem useful for the purposes of this Article.
Amendment 430 #
2022/0269(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 7
Article 4 – paragraph 7
7. Competent authorities shall not initiate an investigation pursuant to Article 5, and shall inform the economic operators under assessment accordingly, where, on the basis of the assessment referred to in paragraph 1 and the information submitted by economic operators pursuant to paragraph 4, the competent authorities consider that there is no substantiated concern of a violation of Article 3, for instance due to, but not limited to, the applicable legislation, guidelines, recommendations or any other due diligence in relation to forced labour referred to in paragraph 3 being applied in a way that mitigates, prevents andor brings to an end the risk of forced labour.
Amendment 432 #
2022/0269(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 a (new)
Article 4 a (new)
Article 4 a Burden of evidence Competent authorities shall bear the burden of establishing that forced labour has been used at any stage of production, manufacture, harvest or extraction of a product, including working or processing related to the product on the basis of all information and evidence gathered during the investigation, including its preliminary phase.
Amendment 435 #
2022/0269(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1
1. Competent authorities that, pursuant to Article 4(5), determine that value chain due diligence has not been properly executed according to applicable international guidelines and that therefore there is a substantiated concern of a violation of Article 3, shall decide, as last resort instrument. to initiate an investigation on the products and economic operators concerned.
Amendment 471 #
2022/0269(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 4
Article 5 – paragraph 4
4. Economic operators shall submit the information within 1530 working days from the request referred to in paragraph 3 or make a justified request for an extension of that time limit.
Amendment 580 #
2022/0269(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 5
Article 8 – paragraph 5
5. Economic operators that have been affected by a decision of a competent authority pursuant to this Regulation shall have access to a court to review the procedural and substantive legality of the decision. Economic operators shall be entitled to compensation or damages for the prohibition, withdrawal or destruction of products arising from a wrongful decision by a competent authority.
Amendment 626 #
2022/0269(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission shall call upon external expertise and all relevant stakeholders to provide an indicative, non- exhaustive, verifiableed, solid and regularly updated database of forced labour risks in specific geographic areas or with respect to specific products including with regard to forced labour imposed by state authorities. The database shall be based on the guidelines referred to in Article 23, points (a), (b) and (c), and relevant reliable external sources of information from, amongst others, international organisations and third country authorities.
Amendment 643 #
2022/0269(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2
Article 11 – paragraph 2
2. The Commission shall ensure that the database is made publicly available by the external expertise at the lateleast 2410 months after the entry into force of this Regulation.
Amendment 728 #
2022/0269(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 23 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
The Commission shall issue guidelines no later than 180 months after the entry into force of this Regulation, which shall include the following:
Amendment 749 #
2022/0269(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 23 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) further information to facilitate the competent authorities’detailed guidance for competent authorities to garantee homogeneous implementation of this Regulation;
Amendment 799 #
2022/0269(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1
Article 26 – paragraph 1
1. In order to facilitate effective implementation and enforcement of this Regulation, the Commission mayshall as appropriate cooperate, engage and exchange information with, amongst others, authorities of third countries, international organisations, civil society representatives and business organisations. International cooperation with authorities of third countries shall take place in a structured way as part of the existing dialogue structures with third countries or, if necessary, specific ones that will be created on an ad hoc basis.
Amendment 16 #
2022/0219(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) Such a new instrument will contribute to reinforce common defence procurement and, through the associated Union financing, to strengthen EU Member States' defence industrial capabilities.
Amendment 19 #
2022/0219(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) This Instrument will build on and take into account the work of the Member States and the Defence Joint Procurement Task Force established by the Commission and the High Representative/Head of Agency, in line with the Joint Communication ‘Defence Investment Gaps Analysis and Way Forward”, to coordinate very short-term defence procurement needs and engage with Member States and EU defence manufacturers to support joint procurement to replenish stocks, notably in light of the support provided to Ukraine.
Amendment 21 #
2022/0219(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) As the instrument aims to enhance the competitiveness and efficiency of the Union’s defence industry, to benefit from the instrument, common procurement contracts will need to be placed with legal entities which are principally established in the Union or exceptionally in associated countries and are not subject to control by non-associated third countries or by non- associated third- country entities. In that context, control should be understood to be the ability to exercise a decisive influence on a legal entity directly, or indirectly through one or more intermediate legal entities. Additionally, in order to ensure the protection of essential security and defence interests of the Union and its Member States, the infrastructure, facilities, assets and resources of the contractors and subcontractors involved in the common procurement which are used for the purposes of the common procurement shall be located principally on the territory of a Member State or exceptionally of an associated third country.
Amendment 25 #
2022/0219(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16 a (new)
Recital 16 a (new)
(16a) Following the recent military and diplomatic posturing of Turkish President Erdogan in his dealings with European countries, Turkey, unlike other NATO member countries, can no longer be considered a reliable ally when it comes to defence and security. It can therefore not be allowed to participate in the European defence programme.
Amendment 26 #
2022/0219(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16 a (new)
Recital 16 a (new)
(16a) It is considered that too many Member States are reliant mainly on third countries to meet their defence needs;
Amendment 27 #
2022/0219(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16 b (new)
Recital 16 b (new)
(16b) Calls for tenders financed by ‘European’ funds should be reserved for European bidders.
Amendment 28 #
2022/0219(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16 c (new)
Recital 16 c (new)
16c. European internal market preference for local or European defence industries is necessary for their revival in Europe.
Amendment 29 #
2022/0219(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16 d (new)
Recital 16 d (new)
16d. It is necessary to bolster the strategic autonomy and technological sovereignty of the Member States by reducing technological and industrial dependency and ensuring better supervision of foreign subsidies and foreign direct investment in Europe, in order to fend off attempts by third countries to gain control of critical European companies;
Amendment 30 #
2022/0219(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16 d (new)
Recital 16 d (new)
Amendment 31 #
2022/0219(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
Amendment 41 #
2022/0219(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18 a (new)
Recital 18 a (new)
(18a) The purpose of the emergency instrument is to strengthen existing industries in Europe and not to disrupt the internal market by creating competitors through public subsidies.
Amendment 42 #
2022/0219(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18 b (new)
Recital 18 b (new)
(18b) European subcontractors and manufacturers of critical components or systems must be strengthened and protected from predatory tactics adopted by third country undertakings;
Amendment 44 #
2022/0219(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) To generate the incentive effect, the level of Union contribution may be differentiated based on factors such as (a) the complexity of the common procurement, for which a proportion of the anticipated size of the procurement contract, based on experience gained in similar actions, may serve as an initial proxy, (b) the characteristics of the cooperation, such as joint usage, stockpiling, ownership or maintenance, which are likely to induce stronger interoperability outcomes and long-term investment signals to industry, and (c) the number of participating Member States or associated countries or the inclusion of additional Member States or associated countries to existing cooperations and (d) the proportion of production taking place in Europe.
Amendment 48 #
2022/0219(COD)
(22) Member States should appoint a procurement agent to conduct a common procurement on their behalf. The procurement agent should be a contracting authority established in a Member State or an associated third country, including Union bodies or international organisationand designated by at least three Member States, such as the Organisation Cconjointe de Ccoopération en matière d'AR’armement (OCCAR).
Amendment 49 #
2022/0219(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22 a (new)
Recital 22 a (new)
(22a) According to a report by the European Parliament Research Service - EPRS (p.111), US foreign military sales for 2016-2018 amounted to USD 55 billion or 32% of the total defence expenditure of all the EU Member States. The latter are required to set a minimum annual quota for the production in Europe of acquisitions through this instrument. That quota may not be less than 50%, to be reassessed annually with a view to increasing the European share of procurement and strengthening the European defence industry.
Amendment 60 #
2022/0219(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) the actions shall comply with the annual minimum production quota in Europe and fulfil the additional conditions as set out in Article 8.
Amendment 121 #
2022/0219(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point 1
1. The contribution of the action to strengthening and developing the Union defence industrial base of the EU Member States to allow ithem to address in particular the most urgent and critical defence products needs as referred to in Article 3, including with respect to procurement procedure and delivery lead times, replenishment of stocks, availability and supply;
Amendment 32 #
2022/0140(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) In health systems, personal electronic health data is usually gathered in electronic health records, which typically contain a natural person’s medical history, diagnoses and treatment, medications, allergies, immunisations, as well as radiology images and laboratory results, spread between different entities from the health system (general practitioners, hospitals, pharmacies, care services). A patient’s Covid vaccination status does not need to be included in the electronic health data. In order to enable that electronic health data to be accessed, shared and changed by the natural persons or health professionals, some Member States have taken the necessary legal and technical measures and set up centralised infrastructures connecting EHR systems used by healthcare providers and natural persons. Alternatively, some Member States support public and private healthcare providers to set up personal health data spaces to enable interoperability between different healthcare providers. Several Member States have also supported or provided health data access services for patients and health professionals (for instance through patients or health professional portals). They have also taken measures to ensure that EHR systems or wellness applications are able to transmit electronic health data with the central EHR system (some Member States do this by ensuring, for instance, a system of certification). However, not all Member States have put in place such systems, and the Member States that have implemented them have done so in a fragmented manner. In order to facilitate the free movement of personal health data across the Union and avoid negative consequences for patients when receiving healthcare in cross-border context, Union action is needed in order to ensure individuals have improved access to their own personal electronic health data and are empowered to share it.
Amendment 36 #
2022/0140(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) Timely and full access of health professionals to the medical records of patients is fundamental for ensuring continuity of care and avoiding duplications and errors. However, due to a lack of interoperability, in many cases, health professionals cannot access the complete medical records of their patients and cannot make optimal medical decisions for their diagnosis and treatment, which adds considerable costs for both health systems and natural persons and may lead to worse health outcomes for natural persons. Electronic health data made available in interoperable format, which can be transmitted between healthcare providers are entirely controlled by the patient and can be shared by the patient with healthcare providers on a strictly voluntary basis, which can also reduce the administrative burden on health professionals of manually entering or copying health data between electronic systems. Therefore, health professionals should be provided with appropriate electronic means, such as health professional portals, to use personal electronic health data for the exercise of their duties. Moreover, the access to personal health records should be transparent to the natural persons and natural persons should be able to exercise full control over such access, including by limiting access to all or part of the personal electronic health data in their records. To that end, patients must be asked, in a clear and comprehensible manner, for their explicit consent whenever their personal health data could be shared. Health professionals should refrain from hindering the implementation of the rights of natural persons, such as refusing to take into account electronic health data originating from another Member State and provided in the interoperable and reliable European electronic health record exchange format.
Amendment 40 #
2022/0140(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) The level of availability of personal health and genetic data in an electronic format varies between Member States. The EHDS should make it easier for natural persons who so wish to have those data available in electronic format. This would also contribute to the achievement of the target of 100% of Union citizens having access to their electronic health records by 2030, as referred to in the Policy Programme “Path to the Digital Decade”. In order to make electronic health data accessible and transmissible, such data should be accessed and transmitted in an interoperable common European electronic health record exchange format, at least for certain categories of electronic health data, such as patient summaries, electronic prescriptions and dispensations, medical images and image reports, laboratory results and discharge reports, subject to transition periods. Electronic health records should only be processed and stored on servers in Europe, under the supervision of Member States, and by European undertakings which provide the necessary technology and employees for those purposes. Where personal electronic health data is made available to a healthcare provider or a pharmacy by a natural person, or is transmitted by another data controller in the European electronic health record exchange format, the electronic health data should be read and accepted for the provision of healthcare or for dispensation of a medicinal product, thus supporting the provision of the health care services or the dispensation of the electronic prescription. Commission Recommendation (EU) 2019/24345provides the foundations for such a common European electronic health record exchange format. The use of European electronic health record exchange format shcouldbecome moregeneralised at EU andnational level. While the eHealth Network under Article 14 of Directive 2011/24/EU 46of the European Parliament and of the Council46 recommended Member States to use the European electronic health record exchange format in procurements, in order to improve interoperability, uptake was limited in practice, resulting in fragmented landscape and uneven access to and portability of electronic health data. _________________ 45 Commission Recommendation (EU) 2019/243 of 6 February 2019 on a European Electronic Health Record exchange format (OJ L 39, 11.2.2019, p. 18). 46 Directive 2011/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2011 on the application of patients’ rights in cross-border healthcare (OJ L 88, 4.4.2011, p. 45).
Amendment 118 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) For many years, geographical indication protection has been established at Union level for wines, spirit drinks6 , aromatised wines7 , as defined at Union level, as well as agricultural products and foodstuffs8 , as protected at Union level. It is appropriate to provide Union-wide geographical indication protection in respect of products falling outside the scope of existing regulations, while ensuring convergence, and aiming at encompassing a large variety of craft and industrial products, such as natural stones, jewellery, textiles, lace, cutlery, glass and porcelain. For most of these products, the link between quality and origin is provided by the tradition of production, so it is appropriate that this regulation can protect geographical names that coincide with the names of specific places or regions where the tradition of production in question is present in a known and established way. __________________ 6 Regulation (EU) 2019/787 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 April 2019 on the definition, description, presentation and labelling of spirit drinks, the use of the names of spirit drinks in the presentation and labelling of other foodstuffs, the protection of geographical indications for spirit drinks, the use of ethyl alcohol and distillates of agricultural origin in alcoholic beverages, and repealing Regulation (EC) No 110/2008 (OJ L 130, 17.5.2019, p. 1). 7 Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 establishing a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 922/72, (EEC) No 234/79, (EC) No 1037/2001 and (EC) No 1234/2007 (OJ L 347 20.12.2013, p. 671). 8 Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 November 2012 on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (OJ L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 1).
Amendment 123 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) Member States should have the possibility to charge a registration fee to cover their costs of managing the geographical indication system for craft and industrial products. Member States should charge lower fees for micro, small or medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs). The Office should not charge a fee for the management of the Union application process. However, the Office should have the possibility to charge a fee for the direct registration. In that case, the fees charged by the Office should be laid down by an implementing act in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council14 . __________________ 14 Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member States of the Commission’s exercise of implementing powers (OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13).
Amendment 127 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) To qualify for protection in the Member States, geographical indications should be registered only at Union level. However, with effect from the date of application for such registration at Union level, Member States should be able to grant temporary protection at national level without affecting the internal market of the Union or international trade. The protection afforded by this Regulation upon registration should be equally available to geographical indications of third countries that meet the corresponding criteria and that are protected in their country of origin. The Office should carry out the corresponding procedures for geographical indications originating in third countries.
Amendment 129 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) The procedures for registration, amendments to the product specification and cancellation of the registration in respect of geographical indications originating in the Union under this Regulation should be carried out by the Member States and the Office. The Member States and the Office should be responsible for distinct stages of the procedures. Member States should be responsible for the first stage, which consists of receiving the application from the applicants, assessing it, running the national opposition procedure, and, following the positive results of the assessment, submitting the Union application to the Office. The Office should be responsible for examining the applications in the second stage of the procedure, running the worldwide opposition procedure at the European level and taking a decision on granting or refusing the protection to the geographical indication. The Office should also carry out the corresponding procedures for geographical indications originating in third countries, without prejudice to the direct registration procedure.
Amendment 132 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) It is possible for certain Member States to obtain a derogation from the Member States’ obligation to designate a national authority in respect of geographical indications for craft and industrial products to take charge of the procedures for registration, national opposition, amendments to the product specification and cancellation of the registration under certain circumstances specified in this Regulation. That derogation, that should take the form of a Commission Decision, takes into account the fact that certain Member States do not have a specific national system for the management of geographical indications for craft and industrial products and that the local interest in these countries to protect these geographical indications is minimal. Under these circumstances, it would not be justified to oblige the respective Member State to set up an infrastructure, employ the necessary personnel and purchase facilities for the management of these geographical indications. It is more effective and economical to provide an alternative procedure for the producer groups from these Member States to protect their products by a geographical indication. The “direct registration procedure” has cost advantages reaped by Member States. Pursuant to this derogation, procedures for registration, amendments to the product specification and cancellation should be managed directly by the Office. In this regard the Office should receive the effective assistance of the administrative authorities of that Member State when required by the Office, through designation of a contact point, as regards in particular aspects related to the examination of the application. In those cases, the Office should be entitled to charge a registration fee, considering that this procedure generates more work for the Office than the management of Union applications. However, the application of the “direct registration procedure” should not exempt Member States from the obligation to designate a competent authority for the controls and enforcement and to take the necessary actions to enforce the rights set out in this Regulation. The competent authority maintained or designated for the management of the geographical indications and the competent authority designated for the controls and enforcement may differ, when a Member State so decides.
Amendment 136 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
Amendment 144 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 38
Recital 38
(38) The use of Union symbols and indications on the packaging of craft and industrial products designated by a geographical indication should be recommended in order to make this category of products, and the guarantees attached to them, better known to consumers and to permit easier identification of these products on the market, thereby facilitating checks. The use of such symbols or indications should remain voluntary for third-country geographical indications.
Amendment 156 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the registration, protection, control and enforcement of certain names that identify craft and industrial products with given quality, reputation or other characteristics linked to their geographical origin and,
Amendment 159 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1
1. This Regulation applies to craft and industrialnon- agricultural and non-food products listed under the combined nomenclature set out in Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/8724 Products covered by Regulation (EU) 2019/787 of the European Parliament and of the Council, Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council are also excluded from the scope of this Regulation. __________________ 24 Council Regulation (EEC) N0 2685/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff Regulation (OJ L 256, 7.9.1987 p.1)
Amendment 163 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2
Article 2 – paragraph 2
Amendment 168 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) ‘craft products’ means products produced either totally by hand ormade by undertakings that national law defines as artisan, with the aid of manual tools or by mechanical means, whenever or digital means, including withe direct manual contribution is the mostinput during the production process which constitutes an important component of the finished product;
Amendment 176 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) ‘producer group’ means any association, irrespective of its legal form, mainly composed of producers or processors, manufacturers, processors or any other operator working with the same product;
Amendment 181 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) ‘traditional’ and 'tradition', when associated with a product originating in a geographical area, means proven historical usage by producers in a professional community for a period that allows transmission between generations;
Amendment 184 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point g
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) 'producer' means an operator engaged in anyone or more production step of a product the name of which is protected as a geographical indication, including processing activities, covered by the product specification;
Amendment 185 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point h – point i
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point h – point i
(i) the common names of products in the Union or the names of products which, although relating to the place, region or country where the product was originally produced or marketed, have become the common name of a product in the Union or do not have a given quality, reputation or other characteristics traditionally linked to their geographical origin;
Amendment 186 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point h – point ii
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point h – point ii
(ii) a common term descriptive of the type of product, or product attributes or other terms that do not refer to specific product;
Amendment 194 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
For the name of a craft andor industrial product to qualify for “geographical indication” protection, the product shall comply with the following requirements:
Amendment 201 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 2
Amendment 203 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 6 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. A single producer may be deemed to be an applicant producer group for the purposes of this Title, where both of the following conditions are fulfilled: if the person concerned is the only producer willing to submit an application for the registration of a geographical indication.
Amendment 204 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 3 – point a
Article 6 – paragraph 3 – point a
Amendment 205 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 3 – point b
Article 6 – paragraph 3 – point b
Amendment 208 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 4
Article 6 – paragraph 4
4. In the case of a geographical indication that designates a cross-border geographical area, producer groups from different Member States may lodge a joint application for the registration of a geographical indication from either Member State. When the cross-border geographical area concerns a Member State and a third country, they may lodge a joint application for registration with the national authority of the Member State concerned. When the cross-border geographical area concerns several third countries, several producer groups may lodge a joint application with the Office.
Amendment 210 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Craft and industrial products the names of which are registered as a geographical indication shall comply with a product specification, which shall include at least:
Amendment 211 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the name to be protected as geographical indication which may be either a geographical name of the place of production of a specific product, or a name used in trade or in common language to describe the specific product in the defined geographical area or both;
Amendment 227 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point a – point i a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point a – point i a (new)
(ia) the type of products;
Amendment 229 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point a – point ii a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point a – point ii a (new)
(iia) a description of the method of producing or obtaining the product, where appropriate, the traditional method and specific practices used;
Amendment 232 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2
Article 9 – paragraph 2
Amendment 233 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Amendment 236 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2
Article 10 – paragraph 2
2. Where a Member State charges a fee, for the administrative costs of filing applications the level of the fees shall be reasonable, foster the competitiveness of the producers of the geographical indications and shall take into account the situation of micro, small and medium-sized enterprises, enabling them full access to the protection of geographical indications and the safeguarding of their intellectual property rights.
Amendment 240 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 4
Article 10 – paragraph 4
Amendment 242 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 5
Article 10 – paragraph 5
Amendment 245 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 4
Article 11 – paragraph 4
4. TIn the case of geographical indication that designates a cross-border geographical area, two or more Member States may agree that the competent authority of one Member State is in charge of the national phase of the registration and other procedures, including the submission of the Union application to the Office, also on behalf of the other Member State, or Member States.
Amendment 248 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 1
The competent authority shall examine the application and shall check that the product complies with the requirements for geographical indications referred to in Article 5 and provides the necessary information for registration referred to in Articles 7, 8 and 9. The competent authority shall, where appropriate, enter into consultation with the most representative local, regional or national sector associations to obtain their opinion.
Amendment 252 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 2
Article 13 – paragraph 2
2. The competent authority shall establish the detailed arrangements of the opposition procedure. Those detailed arrangements may include criteria for the admissibility of an opposition, a period of consultation between the applicant and each national opponent, and submission of a report from the applicant on the outcome of the consultations including any changes the applicant has made to the application. When the national opposition procedure is concluded, the competent authority shall draw up and publish a report.
Amendment 269 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 3
Article 17 – paragraph 3
Amendment 272 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 4
Article 17 – paragraph 4
4. A joint application for registration referred to in Article 6(4) shall be submitted to the Office by one of the Member States concerned or by the applicant producer group in a third country, directly or by the competent authority of that third country. If the cross- border area concerns any Member State and a third country, the joint application shall be submitted by the Member State concerned.
Amendment 274 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 5
Article 17 – paragraph 5
5. The joint application referred to in Article 6(4) shall include, where relevant, the documents listed in paragraphs 1 and 2 of this Article, from the Member States or third countries, in case of a cross-border geographical area with one or more non-EU countries, from a third country concerned. The related national procedure for application, the examination and opposition procedure referred to in Articles 11, 12 and 13 shall be carried out in all the Member States and from a third countriesy concerned.
Amendment 276 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 6
Article 17 – paragraph 6
Amendment 277 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2
Article 18 – paragraph 2
Amendment 279 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 4
Article 19 – paragraph 4
4. The Office may seek supplementary information from the Member State concerned. If the application is lodged by a producer group from a third country or by the competent authority of a third country, such producer group or competent authority shall provide supplementary information where requested to do so by the Office.
Amendment 280 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 6
Article 19 – paragraph 6
6. Where, based on the examination carried out pursuant to paragraph 1, the Office finds that the application is incomplete or incorrect, the Office shall send its observations to the Member State or in case of third country applications, to the relevant producer group or competent authority that has submitted the Union application, from where that application originates and request to complete or to correct the application within 60 days. If the Member State, or in case of third country applications, the relevant producer group or competent authority, does not complete the application within the deadline, the application shall be considered to be withdrawn, or if not corrected, it shall be rejected pursuant to Article 24(2).
Amendment 289 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 2
Article 23 – paragraph 2
Amendment 292 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 6
Article 23 – paragraph 6
6. Paragraph 5 shall apply mutatis mutandis to a geographical indication referring to a cross-border geographical area swituated inh a third country, with the exception of the opposition procedure.
Amendment 295 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25
Article 25
Amendment 306 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 4
Article 28 – paragraph 4
4. Union amendments shall be approved by the Office or, where Article 25 applies, the Commission. The approval procedure shall follow mutatis mutandis the procedure and publication requirements laid down in Articles 6 to 254.
Amendment 307 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 8
Article 28 – paragraph 8
8. Standard amendments shall be approved by Member States or third countries in whose territory the geographical area of the product concerned is located. Such amendments shall be communicated to the Office. Where Article 25 applies, the Office shall approve the standard amendments. The Office shall make those amendments public in the Union register of geographical indications for craft and industrial products.
Amendment 309 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The Office may, own its own initiative or on a duly substantiated request by a Member State, a third country or any natural or legal person having a legitimate interest, decide to cancel the registration of a geographical indication in the following cases:
Amendment 314 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 4
Article 29 – paragraph 4
4. Before deciding to cancel the registration of a geographical indication, the Office shall consult the competent authority of the Member State, the competent authorities of the third country or,or where possible, the third country producer group which had applied for the registration of the geographical indication concerned, unless the cancellation is directly requested by the original applicants. Any natural person affected by the cancellation of the registration of a geographical indication may submit observations during the cancellation procedure. If the geographical indication was registered pursuant to Article 15, the Office shall consult the Advisory Board referred to in Article 33.
Amendment 326 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 35 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Geographical indications entered in the Union register of geographical indications for craft and industrial products and geographical indications protected under an international agreement within the Union shall be protected against:
Amendment 328 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 35 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) any direct or indirect commercial use of the geographical indication in respect of products not covered by the registration, where those products are identical or similar to the products registered under that geographical indication or where use of the name exploits, weakens, dilutes, or is detrimental to the reputation of, the protected geographical indication even if these products are parts or components of manufactured products;
Amendment 331 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 35 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) any misuse, counterfeiting, imitation or evocation, even if the true origin of the products or services is indicated or if the protected geographical indication is translated or accompanied by an expression such as ‘style’, ‘type’, ‘method’, ‘as produced in’, ‘imitation’, ‘flavour’, ‘like’ or similar, even if these products are parts or components of manufactured products;
Amendment 334 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 2
Article 35 – paragraph 2
2. For the purposes of paragraph 1, point (b), the evocation of a geographical indication shall be deemed to arise, in particular, where a term, sign, or other labelling or packaging device presents a direct and clear linkclear link is present with the product covered by the registered geographical indication in the mind of the reasonably circumspect consumer, thereby exploiting, weakening, diluting or being detrimental to the reputation of the registered name.
Amendment 336 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 5
Article 35 – paragraph 5
5. The producer group or any producer that is entitled to usethe holder of the protected geographical indication shall be entitled to prevent all third parties from bringing goods, in the course of trade, into the Union without being released for free circulation there, where such goods, including packaging, come from third countries and are contrary to paragraph 1.
Amendment 342 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 1
Article 37 – paragraph 1
1. Generic terms not associated with names of a specific place, region or country shall not be registered as a geographical indication.
Amendment 343 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 2
Article 37 – paragraph 2
Amendment 345 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39
Article 39
A name shall not be registered as a geographical indication where, in the light of a trade mark’s reputation and renown, registration of the name proposed as a geographical indication could mislead the consumer as to the true identity of the product.rticle 39 deleted Trade marks
Amendment 347 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 1
Article 40 – paragraph 1
1. Member States or the Office, when Article 15 applies, shall verify that the producer group operates in a transparent and democratic manner and that all producers of the product designated by the geographical indication enjoy right of membership in the group. Member States may provide that public officials, and other stakeholders such as consumer groups, retailers and suppliers, also participate in the work of the producer group.
Amendment 349 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 40 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) develop and amend the product specification and manage internal controls that ensure compliance of production steps of product designated by the geographical indication with that specification;
Amendment 352 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 40 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) take legal action to ensure the protection of the geographical indication and of the intellectual property rights that are directly connected with it and prevent and counteract any measures that are or risk being detrimental to the image of their products;
Amendment 353 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 40 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) agree sustainability undertakings, whether or not included in the product specification or as a separate initiative, including arrangements for verification of compliance with these undertakings and assuring adequate publicity for them in particular in an information system provided by the Commission;
Amendment 355 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 2 – point d – point v
Article 40 – paragraph 2 – point d – point v
(v) providing advice and training to current and future producers, including on gender mainstreaming and equality; and
Amendment 358 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 2
Article 42 – paragraph 2
2. The Office and, when applicable, the competent national authorities shall invalidate ex officio trade marks registered in breach of paragraph 1.
Amendment 360 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 4
Article 42 – paragraph 4
4. Without prejudice to paragraph 2 of this Article, a trade mark the use of which contravenes Article 35, which has been applied for, registered, or established by use in good faith within the territory of the Union, if that possibility is provided for by the legislation concerned, or protected within the territory of the Union before the date on which the application for registration of the geographical indication is submitted to the Office, may continue to be used and reneweduntil the expiry of the trade mark registration, notwithstanding the registration of a geographical indication, provided that no grounds for invalidity or revocation of the trade mark exist under Directive (EU) 2015/243632 of the European Parliament and of the Council or Regulation (EU) 2017/1001. In such cases, the use of the geographical indication and that of the relevant trade mark shall be permitted. After the expiry of the trade mark registration, products so labelled may be marketed until the stocks are exhausted. __________________ 32 Directive (EU) 2015/2436 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2015 to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks (OJ L 336, 23.12.2015, p. 1).
Amendment 361 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 1
Article 43 – paragraph 1
1. A registered geographical indication may be used by any producer marketing a product conforming to the corresponding product specification or to a single document or an equivalent to the latter.
Amendment 364 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 2
Article 44 – paragraph 2
2. In the case of craft and industrial products originating in the Union that are marketed under a geographical indication, the Union symbol referred to in paragraph 1 mayshall appear on the labelling and advertising material. The geographical indication shall be in the same field of vision as the Union symbol.
Amendment 365 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 3
Article 44 – paragraph 3
3. The abbreviation ‘PGI’ corresponding to the indication ‘protected geographical indication’ mayshall appear on the labelling of products designated by a geographical indication of craft and industrial products and, where applicable, on the advertising material.
Amendment 367 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 5
Article 44 – paragraph 5
Amendment 369 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 6
Article 44 – paragraph 6
6. The Union symbol indicating the protected geographical indication and the Union indication ‘protected geographical indication’ and the abbreviation ‘PGI’ as relevant, may appear on the labelling and, where applicable, on advertising material only after the publication of the decision on registration in accordance with Articles 24 and 25.
Amendment 370 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 7
Article 44 – paragraph 7
Amendment 371 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 8 – introductory part
Article 44 – paragraph 8 – introductory part
8. TIn order not to mislead the reasonably cautious consumer as to the origin of the products, the following mayshall also appear on the labelling:
Amendment 372 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 8 – point a
Article 44 – paragraph 8 – point a
(a) depictions of the geographical area of origin, as referred to in the product specification; and
Amendment 373 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 8 – point b
Article 44 – paragraph 8 – point b
(b) text, graphics or symbolindication of the country of origin of the product ("Made in [country of origin]") and emblems or flags referring to the Member State or the region in which that geographical area of origin is located.
Amendment 374 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 8 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Article 44 – paragraph 8 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Where the size or nature of the product does not allow for the indications in (a) and (b), such information shall be provided on the packaging or in a document accompanying the product.
Amendment 375 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 9
Article 44 – paragraph 9
Amendment 378 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 4
Article 46 – paragraph 4
Amendment 380 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 6
Article 46 – paragraph 6
6. The costs of verification of compliance with the product specification may be borne by the producers, which are subject to those controls. Member States may also contribute to those costs, in particular for micro, small, medium-sized enterprises.
Amendment 383 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 2
Article 48 – paragraph 2
2. The enforcement authority shall carry out controls, based on a risk analysis and notifications of interested producers of products designated by geographical indications, to ensure conformity with the product specification or the single document or an equivalent to the latter.
Amendment 386 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 48 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. As provided for in Article 47(c), applicant producer groups as referred to in Article 6, which obtained the registration of the geographical indication, shall be entitled to notify the authorities designated pursuant to paragraph 1 in order for them to carry out checks as provided for in this Title. In such cases, upon request by the associations, the authorities shall provide information on the progress of the process initiated by such notification.
Amendment 396 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 60 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point b
Article 60 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point b
Regulation (EU)2019/1753
Article 7 – paragraph 2
Article 7 – paragraph 2
In respect of craft and industrial geographical indications, the decision whether to grant protection shall be adopted by the Office, or, in cases referred to in Article 25 of Regulation (EU) 2022/…, by the Commission.. The related implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 15(2).
Amendment 399 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 67 – paragraph 3
Article 67 – paragraph 3
3. In accordance with the procedure laid down in Articles 17 to 254, the Office or, in cases referred to in Article 25, the Commission shall register the names referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article, which comply with Articles 2, 5, 7 and 8. Article 21 and 22 shall not apply. However, generic terms shall not be registered.
Amendment 101 #
2022/0095(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) In the absence of legislation at Union level, diverging national approaches to improving the environmental sustainability of products have already emerged, ranging from information requirements on the duration of software compatibility of electronic devices to reporting obligations on handling unsold durable goods. This is an indication that further national efforts to achieve the aimsless ambitious aims than those pursued by this Regulation will likely lead to further fragmentation of the internal market. Therefore, in order to safeguard the functioning of the internal market while ensuring a high level of environmental protection, there is a need for a regulatory framework to progressively introduce ecodesign requirements for products. This Regulation will, by making the ecodesign approach initially set out in Directive 2009/125/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council29 applicable to the broadest possible range of products, provide such a framework. _________________ 29 Directive 2009/125/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 establishing a framework for the setting of ecodesign requirements for energy-related products (Text with EEA relevance) (OJ L 285, 31.10.2009, p. 10).
Amendment 105 #
2022/0095(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) This Regulation will contribute to making products fit for a climate-neutral, more local, resource-efficient and circular economy, achieving the highest level of strategic independence for Member States, reducing waste and ensuring that the performance of frontrunners in sustainability progressively becomes the norm. It should provide for the setting of new ecodesign requirements to improve product durability, reusability, upgradability and reparability, improve possibilities for refurbishment and maintenance, address the presence of hazardous chemicals in products, increase their energy and resource efficiency, reduce their expected generation of waste materials and increase recycled content in products, while ensuring their performance and safety, enabling remanufacturing and high-quality recycling and reducing carbon and environmental footprints.
Amendment 116 #
2022/0095(COD)
(11) In order to create an effective and future-proof regulatory framework, it is necessary to allow for the setting of ecodesign requirements on all physical goods placed on the market or put into service, including components and intermediate products. This should allow the Commissions to take into account the broadest range of products possible when prioritising the establishment of ecodesign requirements and thereby maximise their effectiveness. Where needed, specific exemptions should be made when setting ecodesign requirements, for example for defence-related products or for products with a particular purpose that could not be fulfilled when complying with ecodesgign requirements. In addition, exemptions should be made at the level of the framework for those products for which it is already clear that ecodesign requirements would not be suitable or where other frameworks provide for the setting of such requirements. This should be the case for food and feed as defined in Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council44, medicinal products for human use as defined in Directive 2001/83/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council45, veterinary medicinal products as defined in Regulation (EU) 2019/6 of the European Parliament and of the Council46, living plants, animals and micro-organisms, products of human origin, and products of plants and animals relating directly to their future reproduction. _________________ 44 Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 January 2002 laying down the general principles and requirements of food law, establishing the European Food Safety Authority and laying down procedures in matters of food safety (OJ L 31, 1.2.2002, p. 1). 45 Directive 2001/83/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 November 2001 on the Community code relating to medicinal products for human use (OJ L 311, 28.11.2001, p. 67). 46 Regulation (EU) 2019/6 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018 on veterinary medicinal products and repealing Directive 2001/82/EC (OJ L 4, 7.1.2019, p. 43).
Amendment 124 #
2022/0095(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19 a (new)
Recital 19 a (new)
(19 a) To encourage the consumption of sustainable products, traders should provide, before the conclusion of the contract, for all types of goods, where applicable as a first step, the reparability score of the good as provided by the producer in accordance with national and Union law. This reparability score shall be established according to several criteria, namely the availability and sale price of spare parts in relation to the price of new equipment, including the ordering procedure, information about the disassembly of and access to parts, the length of availability on the market of spare parts and delivery times, and the availability of a user and repair manual. This reparability score should be affixed directly to the product or its packaging. In shops it should be displayed on or in the immediate vicinity of the product, and on websites in the presentation of the equipment and close to the price. Within two years of this Directive entering into force, this reparability score should be extended to a wider category of goods.
Amendment 127 #
2022/0095(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) To improve environmental sustainability of products, information requirements should relate to a selected product parameter relevant to the product aspect, such as the location of the stages of manufacture, the product’s environmental footprint or its durability. They may require manufacturer to make available information on the product’s performance in relation to a selected product parameter or other information that may influence the way the product is handled by parties other than the manufacturer in order to improve performance in relation to such a parameter. Such information requirements should be set either in addition to, or in place of, performance requirements on the same product parameter as appropriate. Where a delegated act includes information requirements, it should indicate the method for making the required information available, such as its inclusion on a free- access website, product passport or product label. Information requirements are necessary to lead to the behavioural change needed to ensure that the environmental sustainability objectives of this Regulation are achieved. By providing a solid basis for purchasers and public authorities to compare products on the basis of their environmental sustainability, information requirements are expected to drive consumers and public authorities towards more sustainable, i.e. more local and circular, choices.
Amendment 130 #
2022/0095(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26
Recital 26
(26) The information requirements set under this Regulation should include the requirement to make available a product passport. The product passport is an important tool for making information available to actors along the entire value chain, such as the location of the stages of manufacture, and the availability of a product passport should significantly enhance end- to-end traceability of a product throughout its value chain. Among other things, the product passport should help consumers make informed choices by improving their access to product information relevant to them, allow economic operators other value chain actors such as repairers or recyclers to access relevant information, and enable competent national authorities to perform their duties. To this end, the product passport should not replace but complement non-digital forms of transmitting information, such as information in the product manual or on a label. In addition, it should be possible for the product passport to be used for information on other sustainability aspects applicable to the relevant product group pursuant to other Union legislation.
Amendment 136 #
2022/0095(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
Recital 31
(31) Digitalised information about the product and its life cycle or, where applicable, its passport should be easily identifiable and accessible by scanning a data carrier, such as a watermark or a quick response (QR) code. Where possible, the data carrier should be on the product itself to ensure the information remains accessible throughout its life cycle. However, exceptions are possible depending on the nature, size or use of the products concerned.
Amendment 142 #
2022/0095(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 39
Recital 39
(39) To drive consumers towards more sustainable choices, labels should, when required by the delegated acts adopted pursuant to this Regulation, provide information allowing for the effective comparison of products, for instance by indicating classes of performance and the location of the stages of manufacture. Specifically for consumers, physical labels can be an additional source of information at the place of sale. They can provide a quick visual basis for consumers to distinguish between products based on their performance in relation to a specific product parameter or set of product parameters. They should, where appropriate, also allow for the accessing of additional information by bearing specific references like website addresses, dynamic QR codes, links to online labels or any appropriate consumer-oriented means. The Commission should set out in the relevant delegated act the most effective way of displaying such labels, including in the case of online distance selling, taking into account the implications for customers and economic operators and the characteristics of the products concerned. The Commission may also require the label to be printed on the packaging of the product.
Amendment 162 #
2022/0095(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article premier – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
Article premier – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
(a a) defence-related products as defined in the Annex to Directive 2009/43/EC
Amendment 165 #
2022/0095(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9 a (new)
(9 a) 'Reparability score' means a rating intended to be made known to consumers at the time of purchase of new equipment expressing the capacity of a good to be repaired, based on a methodology established in accordance with EU law
Amendment 269 #
2022/0095(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point b – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point b – paragraph 1 a (new)
information for consumers and other end- users on the location of the stages of their manufacture;
Amendment 337 #
2022/0095(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
(da) the information indicating the location of the manufacturing stages of the products;
Amendment 476 #
2022/0095(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – paragraph 1 a (new)
Annex III – paragraph 1 a (new)
information on the location of the various manufacturing stages;
Amendment 294 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) In order for a construction product covered by a harmonised technical specification to be placed on the market, the manufacturer is obliged to draw a declaration of performance for such product. The manufacturer assumes the responsibility for the conformity of the product with such declared performance. Certain exemptions to this obligation are provided.
Amendment 309 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18 a (new)
Recital 18 a (new)
(18 a) To provide predictability for manufacturers, public authorities and the wider construction ecosystem, the Commission should, at the latest 6 months after the entry into force of this Regulation and based on a scientific and evidence-based approach, adopt a working plan, covering at least 3 years, laying down a list of product groups for which it plans to adopt requirements and standardisation requests.
Amendment 313 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) In particular, in the case of energy- related products included in ecodesign working plans which are also construction products and for intermediary products, with the exception of cement, priority for the setting of sustainability requirements will be given to the [ESPR]. This should be the case for instance fore intermediary products concerned are heaters, boilers, heat pumps, water and space heating appliances, fans, cooling and ventilating systems and photovoltaic products, excluding building- integrated photovoltaic panels. In this respect, a detailed definition of energy- related products together with a full list of energy-related products which are also construction products shall be drafted by the European Commission within the framework of the [ESPR] with the aim to avoid unnecessary legislative overlaps and duplications of sustainability requirements which may hinder the internal market. This Regulation may still intervene in a complementary manner where needed, mainly in relation to safety aspects also taking account of other Union legislation on products such as on gas appliances, low voltage, and machinery. For other products, in order to avoid unnecessary burden for economic operators, the need may arise in future to determine the conditions under which the fulfilment of obligations under other Union law also fulfils certain obligations under this Regulation. The power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 TFEU should be delegated to the Commission to determine such conditions.
Amendment 319 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40
Recital 40
(40) To create transparency for users of construction products and to avoid inappropriate use of those products, construction products and their intended use should be precisely identified by the manufacturer. For the same reason, the manufacturer should make clear whethern the construction products are intended for professional use only, or also for use by consumers. To ensure that construction products can be traced back, manufacturers should be indicated on the product or, where this is not possible e.g. due to the product’s size or surface, on its packaging or, where that is not possible either, in a document accompanying it.
Amendment 325 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 47
Recital 47
Amendment 326 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 52
Recital 52
Amendment 338 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
This Regulation establishes harmonised rules for the making available on the market and direct installation of construction products, regardless of whether undertaken in the framework of a service or not, by establishing:
Amendment 339 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) rules on how to express the environmental, including climate, and safety performance of construction products in relation to their essential characteristics;
Amendment 343 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) environmental, including climate, functional and safety product requirements for construction products.
Amendment 345 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2
Article 1 – paragraph 2
This Regulation also establishes obligations incumbent on economic operators dealing with construction products or their components or with products that could be regarded as construction products whilst not being intended by their manufacturer to be construction products.
Amendment 351 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) 3D-datasets placed on the market to permit the 3D-printing of construction products covered by this Regulation and 3D-printed construction products and moulds;
Amendment 355 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) materials intended to be used for the 3D-printing of construction products on or close to the construction site or for the manufacturing using moulds on or close to the construction siter for the manufacturing using moulds;
Amendment 358 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Amendment 361 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point f
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point f
Amendment 364 #
2022/0094(COD)
Amendment 367 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 380 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 3 – point b
Article 2 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) boilers, pipes, tanks and ancillaries and other products intended to be in contact with water for human consumption;
Amendment 382 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 3 – point c
Article 2 – paragraph 3 – point c
Amendment 385 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 3 – point d
Article 2 – paragraph 3 – point d
Amendment 388 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 3 – point e
Article 2 – paragraph 3 – point e
Amendment 392 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 3 – point e a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 3 – point e a (new)
(e a) photovoltaic elements other than building-integrated photovoltaic (BIPV) elements;
Amendment 393 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 3 – point e b (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 3 – point e b (new)
(e b) Electrical and electronic products which are not included in products in line 1-32 of the table I of Annex IV.
Amendment 395 #
2022/0094(COD)
Amendment 403 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 1
(1) ‘construction product’ means any formed or formless physical item, including its packaging and instructions for use, or a kit or assembly combining such items, that isproduct or kit which is produced and placed on the market or produced for incorporation in a permanent manner in construction works or parts thereof within the Union, with the exception of items that are necessarily first integrated into an assembly, kit or other construction product prior to being incorporated in a permanent manner in construction worksand the performance of which has an effect on the performance of the construction works with respect to the basic requirements for construction works, including3D-printed products or other items covered by this Regulation in accordance with Article 2(1) to (3);
Amendment 405 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 2
(2) ‘permanent’ means for a duration of two years or longerinstalled or affixed in such a manner that may significantly affect the basic work requirements and that the item cannot be removed without tools or mechanical force;
Amendment 408 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Amendment 412 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Amendment 418 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 8
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 8
(8) ‘product requirements’ means a threshold level or another characteristic with which a product has to comply before it can be placed on the market or installed directly, including those requirements relating to labelling and instructions for use or other information to be provided;
Amendment 422 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 9
(9) ‘economic operator’ means the manufacturer, the authorised representative, the importer, the distributor, the fulfilment service provider, the 3D- printing service provider, manufacturer, importer or distributor of materials intended for 3D-printing of products, online seller, the broker, the supplier, the service provider, the own- brand-labeller or any other natural or legal person, other than authorities, notified bodies, technical assessment bodies and product contact points for construction who is subject to this Regulation in relation to the manufacturing, de- installation for re-use, re-manufacturing or repackaging of products, or making those products available on the market or installing those products directly in accordance with this Regulation, and economic operators as defined in Article 3, point (13) of Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 of the European Parliament and of the Council44 ; _________________ 44 Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 on market surveillance and compliance of products and amending Directive 2004/42/EC and Regulations (EC) No 765/2008 and (EU) No 305/2011 (OJ L 169, 25.6.2019, p. 1).
Amendment 424 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Amendment 427 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Amendment 430 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 13
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 13
Amendment 432 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 15
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 15
Amendment 434 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 16
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 16
(16) ‘level’ means the result of the assessment of the performance of a product in relation to its essential characteristics, expressed as a numerical valueexpression of performance without a classification of potential performances and/or a specified minimum or maximum;
Amendment 435 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 17
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 17
(17) ‘class’ means a range of levels, delimited by a minimum and a maximum value, of performance of a productn expression of performance according to a systematic division of potential performances;
Amendment 439 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 22
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 22
Amendment 440 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 25
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 25
(25) ‘intended use’ means the use intended by the manufacturer, including the conditions for usage, as laid out in technical documentation, on labels, in instructions for use, or in publicity material, whilst usages mentioned only in one of these are already part of the ‘intended use’intended use as determined by the manufacturer of the construction product as defined in the applicable harmonised technical specification;
Amendment 452 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 39
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 39
Amendment 464 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 48
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 48
Amendment 465 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 51
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 51
Amendment 467 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 57
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 57
(57) ‘broker’ means any natural or legal person providing an intermediation service for the placing on the market or direct installation of products;
Amendment 488 #
2022/0094(COD)
The Commission mayshall issue standardisation requests in accordance with Article 10 of Regulation (EU) 1025/2012 laying down the basic principles and corner stones for the establishment of these essential characteristics and their assessment methods.
Amendment 492 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3 a (new)
These standardisation requests shall be issued in accordance with the working plan established in accordance with Article 93a.
Amendment 495 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3
Article 4 – paragraph 3
Amendment 522 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Amendment 532 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
Article 4 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. IWhile priority shall be given to the elaboration of standards in order to cover the regulatory needs of Member States and to pursue the environmental, safety and harmonisation goals of Article 114 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, the Commission is empowered to supplement this Regulation, by means of delegated acts in accordance with Article 87, after consultation of the relevant European standardisation organisations and European stakeholder organisations receiving Union financing under Regulation(EU) No 1025/2012, by determining, for particular product families and categories, the following:
Amendment 539 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 5
Article 4 – paragraph 5
5. The Commission, after consultation of the relevant European stakeholder organisations, is empowered to amend Annex I Part A by means of delegated acts in accordance with Article 87 in order to adapt it to technical progress and to cover new risks and environmental aspects.
Amendment 547 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1
1. All products covered by this Regulation shall, prior to their placing on the market or direct installation, satisfy the generic, directly applicable product requirements set out in Annex I Part D and, satisfy the product requirements laid down in Annex I Part B, C and C asD when specified for the respective product family or category in accordance with paragraph 2. The product requirements laid down in Annex I Part B, C and CD are only applicable where they have been specified in accordance with paragraph 2.
Amendment 557 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 2
2. In order to specify the product requirements set out in Annex I Part B, C and D, the Commission is empowered to supplement this Regulation, by means of delegated acts in accordance with Article 87, by specifying, for particular product families and categories, these product requirements and by laying down the corresponding assessment methods. Once the Commission has specified these product requirements by delegated acts, it mayshall issue standardisation requests which aim at the elaboration of voluntary harmonised standards providing presumption of conformity with these mandatory product requirements as specified by these delegated acts.
Amendment 562 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3
Article 5 – paragraph 3
3. The Commission, after consultation with European stakeholder organisations, is empowered to amend Annex I Part B, C and D by means of delegated acts in accordance with Article 87 in order to adapt it to technical progress and in particular to cover new risks and environmental aspects.
Amendment 570 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – title
Article 6 – title
Assessment and verification systems and their product specific modalities
Amendment 573 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 3
Article 6 – paragraph 3
Amendment 578 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 1
1. The harmonised zone shall be presumed to be comprehensive, covering all potential legal requirements for products other than those covered by other Union lawconstruction products.
Amendment 582 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 7 – introductory part
Article 7 – paragraph 7 – introductory part
7. This Regulation does not hinder Member States to introduce mandatory deposit-refund systems, to oblige manufacturers to take back used or not used non-custom-made products directly or via their importers and distributors and to establish obligations regarding the collection and the treatment of products for waste, provided that all of the following is complied with:
Amendment 589 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 8
Article 7 – paragraph 8
8. Member States may ban the destruction of non-custom-made products taken back in accordance with Article 22(2), point (j) and Article 26 or make the destruction of these products dependent on their prior making available on a national brokering platform for non-commercial use of products.
Amendment 596 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3
Article 9 – paragraph 3
3. By drawing up the declaration of performance, the manufacturer assumes responsibility for the conformity of the product with such declared performance and becomes liable in accordance with Union and national laws on contractual and extra-contractual liability, and this even where it did not act negligently. In the absence of objective indications to the contrary, Member States shall presume the declaration of performance drawn up by the manufacturer to be accurate and reliable.
Amendment 597 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the product is, otherwise than by 3D-printing or already existing moulds, individually manufactured or custom-made in a non- series process in response to a specific order, and installed in a single identified construction work, by a manufacturer who is also responsible for the safe incorporation of the product into the construction work in compliance with the applicable national rules, and under the supervision of those responsible for the safe execution of the construction works designated under the applicable national rules;
Amendment 598 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the product is otherwise than by 3D-printing or already existing moulds manufactured on the construction site, in a non-series process for its incorporation in the respective construction work in compliance with the applicable national rules and under the supervision of those responsible for the safe execution of the construction works designated under the applicable national rules; or
Amendment 599 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3
Article 10 – paragraph 3
Amendment 612 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2
Article 12 – paragraph 2
2. Where there is no declaration of performance available for a used product issued by the initial manufacturer or another economic operator pursuant to this Regulation or Regulation (EU) 305/2011, an economic operator may issue a new declaration of performance without undergoing a full procedure in accordance with this Regulation where it limits the intended use to “decoration”ve purposes. Where the economic operator has used this derogation, the declaration of performance shall be labelled “declaration of performance for used product with decorative purposes”.
Amendment 619 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 3
Article 13 – paragraph 3
3. By the declaration of conformity, the manufacturer assumes responsibility for the conformity of the product with the product requirements and becomes liable in accordance with national laws on contractual and extra-contractual liability, and this even where it did not act negligently. In case of non-compliance or absence of a declaration of conformity, the product may not be made available on the market. In the absence of objective indications to the contrary, Member States shall presume the declaration of conformity drawn up by the manufacturer to be accurate and reliable.
Amendment 627 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 3
Article 15 – paragraph 3
3. Declarations may contain permalinks to unamendable environmental product declarations or other unamendable documents containing the requested information if those documents follow the order and structure of the declarations or if a correlation table linking the order of the declarations to the order of these documents is provided together with the permalinkdocuments containing the requested information.
Amendment 643 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2
Article 16 – paragraph 2
2. The CE marking shall be affixed to those products for which the manufacturer has drawn up a declaration of performance or a declaration of performance and conformity in accordance with Articles 9 and 11 to 14. The CE marking shall be affixed to key parts. The CE marking may not be affixed to parts which are not key parts.
Amendment 649 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point d
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point d
(d) the unique identification code of the product-type, the permalink to the manufacturer’s products registration(s) in Union databases and the precise location therein where the product can be found;
Amendment 651 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point g
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point g
Amendment 653 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 3
Article 17 – paragraph 3
3. The CE marking shall be affixed before the product is placed on the market or directly installed into a construction work. It may be subsequently followed by a pictogram or any other mark indicating a special risk or use.
Amendment 659 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 18 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Markings other than the CE marking, including private ones, may contain additional information that could help users to make an informed choice on which product would be best suited for the needs of their construction work
Amendment 661 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2
Article 18 – paragraph 2
Amendment 664 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 2
Article 19 – paragraph 2
Amendment 666 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Article 19 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Amendment 671 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 – point iii
Article 19 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 – point iii
(iii) email addresses, and websites and social media profiles, if any, of these operators;
Amendment 672 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 – point v
Article 19 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 – point v
Amendment 678 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1
Article 21 – paragraph 1
1. The manufacturer shall determine the product type, respecting the boundaries set up therefore by the definition provided in Article 3 point (31). The product type shall be processed in accordance with the applicable assessment and verification system set out in Annex V. The manufacturer shall draw up a declaration of performance and a declaration of conformity in accordance with Articles 9 and Articles 11 to 15 and affix the CE marking in accordance with Articles 16 and 17.
Amendment 679 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2
Article 21 – paragraph 2
Amendment 682 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 21 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
The manufacturer shall, as the basis for the declarations referred to in paragraph 1, draw up a technical documentation describing the intended use including the precise conditions for use and all the elements necessary to demonstrate performance and conformity.
Amendment 683 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 21 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
That technical documentation shall contain the mandatory or facultative calculation of environmental, including climate sustainability assessed in accordance with harmonised technical specifications adopted under this Regulation or with Commission acts adopted under this Regulation.
Amendment 684 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1
Article 21 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1
The manufacturer shall ensure that its product bear a manufacturer-specific type number and, a batch or serial number or any other element allowing their identification. If this is impossible, the required information shall be provided on the packaging, on an affixed tag or, as last resort, in a document accompanying the product.
Amendment 692 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 9
Article 21 – paragraph 9
9. Where the product presents a risk or is likely to present a risk, the manufacturer shall within two working days thereof inform, the manufacturer shall inform without undue delay the authorised representative, importers, distributors, fulfilment service providers, and online market places involved in the distribution, as well as the competent national authorities of the Member States in which the manufacturer or – to its knowledge – other economic operators made the product available. The manufacturer shall, to that effect, provide all useful details and, in particular, specify the type of the non- compliance, the frequency of accidents or incidents and the corrective measures taken or recommended. In case of risks caused by products which have already reached the final user or consumer, the manufacturer shall also alert the media andat cannot be identified or contacted directly. The manufacturer shall through media and other appropriate channels, ensuring the widest possible reach, disseminate the inform themation about appropriate measures to eliminate or, if not possible, to reduce the risks. In case of a “serious risk” in the meaning of Article 3, point (71) the manufacturer shall withdraw and recall the product at their own cost.
Amendment 695 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Article 22 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point c
(c) respect the minimum recycled content obligations and other limit values regarding aspects of environmental, including climate sustainability contained in harmonised technical specifications; sustainability as assessed per each product category. Minimum recycled content obligations should be set by the European Commission after consulting with industry stakeholder
Amendment 697 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 5
Article 22 – paragraph 5
Amendment 698 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 6
Article 22 – paragraph 6
Amendment 702 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 2
Article 23 – paragraph 2
2. Authorised representatives shall act with due care in relation to the obligations of this Regulation. They shall be liable for gross negligence or conscious infringement of this Article and of Article 19 in accordance with national law on contractual and extra-contractual liability.
Amendment 703 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Article 23 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point c
(c) terminate the contract, when deemed appropriate, where the manufacturer infringes this Regulation and inform thereof the competent national authorities of the Member States where the product is placed on the market and the national competent authority of his own place of business;
Amendment 704 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point d
Article 23 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point d
(d) when having reason to believe that a product in question is non-compliant or presents a risk, inform the manufacturer and the national competent authorities of the Member States where the product is placed on the market and the national competent authority of his own place of business thereof; and
Amendment 705 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 5
Article 23 – paragraph 5
5. Where an authorised representative considers that there iidentifies a non-compliance mentioned in the paragraph 4, the authorised representative shall ask the manufacturer to remedy the non- compliances. The manufacturer shall thereon stop the placing on the market and ask other economic operators involved in the distribution to stop their commercial activities, until the authorised representative regards the infringements as remedied. Where the non-compliances are not remedied within one month whilst products possibly continue to be made available on the market, the authorised representative shall be allowed to terminate his contract with the manufacturer and thereof inform the national competent authorities of the Member States where the products are placed on the market and the national competent authority of his own place of business. The latter shall coordinate joint actions of all competent authorities, unless the national competent authorities agree on another national competent authority to coordinatenon-compliance is remedied.
Amendment 706 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 4
Article 24 – paragraph 4
Amendment 708 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 7
Article 24 – paragraph 7
7. The importer shall investigate complaints, and, if necessary, keep a register of complaints, of non-conforming products and of product withdrawals or recalls, and shall keep manufacturers and distributors informed of any such monitoring.
Amendment 710 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 2
Article 25 – paragraph 2
2. When making a product available on the market, the distributors shall verify at a documentary level that the manufacturer and the importer have complied with the requirements set out in Article 21(1), (5) and (6) and where applicable in Article 22(2), points (f) and (i) and shall fulfil the obligations incumbent on importers in accordance with Article 24(13) to (5) whilst references to “placing on the market” shall be understood as “further making available on the market”.
Amendment 712 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 3
Article 25 – paragraph 3
Amendment 717 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1
Article 27 – paragraph 1
1. When contributing to the making available on the market or direct installation of a product, fulfilment service provider or broker shall act with due care in relation to the obligations of this Regulation. It shall be liable for infringement of this Article and of Article 19 in accordance with national law on contractual and extra-contractual liability.
Amendment 718 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28
Article 28
Amendment 719 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29
Article 29
Amendment 722 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30
Article 30
Amendment 727 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31
Article 31
Amendment 731 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33
Article 33
Amendment 734 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 35 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Following a request for a European technical assessment by a manufacturer or a group of manufacturers or on initiative of the Commission, a European assessment document may be drawn up and adopted by the organisation of technical assessment bodies (‘TABs’) in agreement with the Commission for any kind or category of products product not covered by:
Amendment 745 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 40 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) a description of the kind or category of products product covered; and
Amendment 747 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 40 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the list of essential characteristics, relevant for the intended use of the kind or category of products product as set out by the manufacturer and agreed between the manufacturer and the organisation of TABs, and the methods and criteria for assessing the performance of the product in relation to those essential characteristics.
Amendment 749 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 2
Article 40 – paragraph 2
2. Principles for the applicable factory production control to be applied shall be set out in the European assessment document, taking into account the conditions of the manufacturing process of the kind or category of products product concerned.
Amendment 750 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 3
Article 40 – paragraph 3
3. Where the performance of some of certain essential characteristics of the kind or category of products product can appropriately be assessed with methods and criteria established in harmonised technical specifications or European assessment documents, those existing methods and criteria shall be incorporated as parts of the European assessment document, unless there are good reasons to deviate from this rule.
Amendment 775 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 78 – paragraph 1
Article 78 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission is empowered to supplement this Regulation by means of delegated act according to Article 87, by setting up a voluntary Union construction products database or system where information related to showing compliance with this regulation can be stored or linked to. This initiative should that builds to the extent possible on the Digital Product Passport established by Regulation (EU) ... [Regulation on ecodesign for sustainable products] in order to avoid overlaps with other EU legislation and to ensure interoperability with already existing requirements.
Amendment 792 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 79 – paragraph 1
Article 79 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall support economic operators by product contact points for construction. Member States shall designate and maintain at least one product contact point for construction on their territory and shall ensure that their product contact points for construction have sufficient powers and adequate resources for the proper performance of their tasks and at any rate at least one full- time equivalence per Member State and one additional full-time equivalence per each ten millions of inhabitants. They shall ensure that product contact points for construction deliver their services in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2018/172449 and that they coordinate with the contact points for mutual recognition established by Article 9(1) of Regulation (EU) No 2019/51550 . _________________ 49 Regulation (EU) 2018/1724 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 2 October 2018 establishing a single digital gateway to provide access to information, to procedures and to assistance and problem-solving services and amending Regulation (EU) No 1024/2012; OJ L 295, 21.11.2018, p. 1–38. 50 Regulation (EU) 2019/515 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 March 2019 on the mutual recognition of goods lawfully marketed in another Member State and repealing Regulation (EC) No 764/2008; OJ L 91, 29.3.2019, p. 1–18.
Amendment 794 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 82 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 82 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The Commission after consultation with the Member states may cooperate, including through the exchange of information, with third countries or international organisations in the field of application of this Regulation, such as:
Amendment 797 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 83
Article 83
Amendment 804 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 84
Article 84
Amendment 833 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 88 – paragraph 1
Article 88 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission shall be assistguided by the Committee on Construction Products. This committee shall be a committee within the meaning of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011. Where reference is made to this paragraph, Article 4 of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 shall apply (advisory procedure).
Amendment 839 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 90 – paragraph 4
Article 90 – paragraph 4
Amendment 849 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 92 – paragraph 1
Article 92 – paragraph 1
Regulation (EU) 305/2011 is repealed with effect from 1 January 2045.10 years after entry into force of this Regulation
Amendment 858 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 93 a (new)
Article 93 a (new)
Article 93 a Prioritisation and planning 1. The Commission shall adopt by six months after entry into force of the Regulation and regularly update a working plan, covering a period of at least 3 years, setting out a list of product families or categories it intends to establish obligations and the necessary standardisation requests to be adopted in accordance with this Regulation. In the development of the working plan, the Commission shall consult the Member States, the European Parliament and the European Standardisation Organisations. 2. The Commission shall once a year report to the Member States and the European Parliament about the progress in implementing the working plan including the standardisation requests issued.
Amendment 861 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – Part A – point 1 – paragraph 4
Annex I – Part A – point 1 – paragraph 4
Amendment 903 #
2022/0094(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – Part D – point 1 – introductory part
Annex I – Part D – point 1 – introductory part
1. PWhere the information is not already provided with the declaration of performance, products shall be accompanied by the following information:
Amendment 63 #
2022/0092(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) In order to tackle unfair commercial practices which prevent consumers from making sustainable consumption choices, such as practices associated with the early obsolescence of goods, misleading environmental claims (“greenwashing”), non-transparent and non-credible sustainability labels or sustainability information tools, specific rules should be introduced in Union consumer law. This would enable national competent bodies to address those practices effectively. By ensuring that environmental claims are fair, consumers will be able to choose products that are genuinely better for the environment than competing products. This will encourage competition towards more environmentally sustainable products, thus reducing negative impact on the environment. To enable sustainable consumption choices, the products offered must be competitive, particularly in terms of their price compared to similar non- sustainable products.
Amendment 71 #
2022/0092(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) Comparing products based on their environmental or social aspects, including through the use of tools to provide information about their sustainability, information toolsmpact on jobs in the EU (‘social outcome’) and greenhouse gas emissions (‘carbon footprint’), is an increasingly common marketing technique. In order to ensure that such comparisons do not mislead consumers, Article 7 of Directive 2005/29/EC should be amended to require that the consumer is provided with information about the method of the comparison, the products which are the object of comparison and the suppliers of those products and their location, and the measures to keep information up to date. This should ensure that consumers make better informed transactional decisions when using such services. The comparison should be objective by, in particular, comparing products which serve the same function, using a common method and common assumptions, and comparing material and verifiable features of the products being compared.
Amendment 87 #
2022/0092(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) In order to improve the welfare of consumers, the amendments to Annex I to Directive 2005/29/EC should also address several practices associated with early obsolescence, including planned obsolescence practices, understood as a commercial policy involving deliberately planning or designing a product with a limited useful life so that it prematurely becomes obsolete or non-functional after a certain period of time. Purchasing products that are expected to last longer than they actually do causes consumer detriment. Furthermore, early obsolescence practices have an overall negative impact on the environment in the form of increased material waste. Therefore, addressing those practices are also likely to reduce the amount of waste, contributing to a more sustainable consumption. In this respect, the marketing of certain disposable consumer products that generate unnecessary waste, such as disposable electronic cigarettes, should be prohibited.
Amendment 90 #
2022/0092(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) It should be prohibited to omit to informce the consumer thato make a software update, including a security update, that will negatively impact the use of goods with digital elements or certain features of those goods, even if the update improves the functioning of other features. For example, when inviting consumers to update the operating system on their smartphone, the trader will have to inform the consumer if such an update will negatively impact the functioning of any of the features of the smartphone. Furthermore, manufacturers should be required to provide, free of charge, the updates needed to keep the good in conformity for a period corresponding to the estimated lifespan.
Amendment 94 #
2022/0092(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) It should also be prohibited to omit to inform the consumer about the existence of a feature of the good introducintroduce a feature aimed ato limit itsing the durability of a product. For example, such a feature could be software which stops or downgrades the functionality of the good after a particular period of time, or it could be a piece of hardware which is designed to fail after a particular period of time. Theis prohibition of omitting to inform consumers of such features of the goods complements and doesshall not affect the remedies available to consumers when they constitute a lack of conformity under Directive (EU) 2019/771 of the European Parliament and of the Council26. For such a commercial practice to be considered unfair, it should not be necessary to demonstrate that the purpose of the feature is to stimulate the replacement of the respective good. The use of features limiting the durability of the goods should be distinguished from manufacturing practices using materials or processes of general low quality resulting in limited durability of the goods. Lack of conformity of a good resulting from the use of low quality materials or processes should continue to be governed by the rules on the conformity of goods set out in Directive (EU) 2019/771. __________________ 26 Directive (EU) 2019/771 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2019 on certain aspects concerning contracts for the sale of goods, amending Regulation (EU) 2017/2394 and Directive 2009/22/EC, and repealing Directive 1999/44/EC (OJ L 136, 22.5.2019, p. 28).;
Amendment 101 #
2022/0092(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) Another practice associated with early obsolescence which should be prohibited and added to the list in Annex I to Directive 2005/29/EC is marketing goods that inducinge the consumer into replacing the consumables of a product earlier than would otherwise be necessary for technical reasons. Such practices mislead the consumer into believing that the goods will no longer function unless their consumables are replaced, thus leading them to purchase more consumables than necessary. For example, the practice of urging the consumer, via the settings of the printer, to replace the printer ink cartridges before they are actually empty in order to stimulate the purchase of additional ink cartridges would be prohibited. Furthermore, it should also be prohibited to fail to inform the consumer of the actual price of a product which has a component or element that needs to be replaced regularly (printer ink cartridge, battery, etc.).
Amendment 106 #
2022/0092(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) Annex I to Directive 2005/29/EC should also be amended to prohibit omitting to inform the consumer that the the marketing of a good is designed to limit its functionality when using consumables, spare parts or accessories that are not provided by the original producer. For example, the marketing of printers that are designed to limit their functionality when using ink cartridges not provided by the original producer of the printer without disclosing this information to the consumer would be prohibited. This practice could mislead consumers into purchasing an alternative ink cartridge which cannot be used for that printer, thus leading to unnecessary repair costs, waste streams or additional costs due to the obligation to use the original producer’s consumables which the consumer could not foresee at the time of purchase. Similarly, marketing smart devices designed to limit their functionality when using chargers or spare parts that are not provided by the original producer without disclosing this information to the consumer would be prohibited as well.
Amendment 121 #
2022/0092(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 26
Recital 26
(26) In view of the established minimum duration of two years of the seller’s liability for lack of conformity in accordance with Directive (EU) 2019/771 and, of the fact that many product failures occur after two years, the trader’s obligation to inform consumers about the existence and duration of the producer’s commercial guarantee of durability should apply to guarantees that are of more than two years and of the fact that Directive (EU) 2019/771 is to be reviewed by 2024, the two-year legal guarantee period should be extended to suit product categories with a longer estimated lifespan.
Amendment 129 #
2022/0092(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 31
Recital 31
(31) To allow consumers to make an informed transactional decision and choose goods that are easier to repair, traders should provide, before the conclusion of the contract, for all types of goods, where applicable as a first step, the reparability score of the good as provided by the producer in accordance with Union lawnational and Union law. This reparability score shall be established according to several criteria, namely the availability and sale price of spare parts in relation to the price of new equipment, including the ordering procedure, information about the disassembly of and access to parts, the length of availability on the market of spare parts and delivery times, and the availability of a user and repair manual. This reparability score should be affixed directly to the product or its packaging. In shops it should be displayed on or in the immediate vicinity of the product, and on websites in the presentation of the equipment and close to the price. Within two years of this Directive entering into force, this reparability score should be extended to a wider category of goods.
Amendment 134 #
2022/0092(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 32
Recital 32
(32) Pursuant to Article 5(1), point (e), and Article 6(1), point (m), of Directive 2011/83/EU traders are obliged to provide the consumer before the consumer is bound by the contract with information on the existence and the conditions of after-sales services, including repair services, where such services are provided. In addition, in order to ensure that consumers are well informed about the reparability of the goods they purchase, where a reparability score is not yet established in accordance with Union law, traders should provide, for all types of goods, other relevant repair information that is made available by the producer, such as information about the availability of spare parts, andabout the availability and sale price of spare parts in relation to the price of new equipment, including the ordering procedure, information about the disassembly of and access to parts, the length of availability on the market of spare parts and delivery times, and the availability of a user and repair manual.
Amendment 140 #
2022/0092(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 33 a (new)
Recital 33 a (new)
(33a) Given the key role played by small and medium-sized enterprises in the transition to a more local and circular economy, the Member States and the Commission shall take measures to help them face the administrative and financial burdens.
Amendment 141 #
2022/0092(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 35
Recital 35
(35) Since the objectives of this Directive, namely, enabling better informed transactional decisions by consumers to promote sustainable consumption, supporting a more local and circular economy, eliminating practices that cause damage to the sustainable economy and mislead consumers away from sustainable consumption choices, and ensuring a better and consistent application of the Union consumer legal framework, cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States individually but can rather, by reason of the Union-wide character of the problem, be better achieved at Union level, the Union may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Directive does not go beyond what is necessary to achieve those objectives.
Amendment 181 #
2022/0092(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a
Directive 2005/29/EC
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the main characteristics of the product, such as its availability, benefits, risks, execution, composition, environmental or social impact, accessories, durability, reparability, recyclability, after- sale customer assistance and complaint handling, method and date of manufacture or provision, delivery, fitness for purpose, usage, quantity, specification, geographical or commercial origin or the results to be expected from its use, or the results and material features of tests or checks carried out on the product.;
Amendment 205 #
2022/0092(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b
Directive 2011/83/EU
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 14 d
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 14 d
(14d) ‘reparability score’ means a score to be made known to the consumer when they are purchasing new equipment, expressing the capacity of a good to be repaired, based on a method established in accordance with Union law;
Amendment 216 #
2022/0092(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a
Directive 2011/83/EU
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point e a
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point e a
(ea) for all goods, where the producer makes it available, information that the goods benefit from a commercial guarantee of durability and its duration in units of time, where that guarantee covers the entire good and has a duration of more than two years;
Amendment 224 #
2022/0092(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a
Directive 2011/83/EU
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point e b
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point e b
(eb) for energy-using goods, where the producer does not make available the information referred to in point (ea), information that the producer has not provided information on the existence of a commercial guarantee of durability of more than two years. This information shall be at least as prominent as any other information about the existence and the conditions of after-sales services and commercial guarantees provided in accordance with point (e);
Amendment 239 #
2022/0092(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b
Directive 2011/83/UE
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point j
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point j
(j) when point (i) is not applicable, information made availableprovided by the producer about the availability of spare parts, including the procedure of ordering them, and about the availability of a user and repair manual.; and sale price of spare parts in relation to the price of new equipment, including the procedure of ordering them, information about the disassembly of and access to parts, the length of availability on the market of spare parts and delivery times, and about the availability of a user and repair manual: when this information is not provided by the producer, the consumer shall be informed thereof; support shall be provided to small and medium-sized enterprises to enable them to provide such information;
Amendment 253 #
2022/0092(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point a
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point a
Directive 2011/83/EU
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point m a
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point m a
(ma) for all types of goods, where the producer makes it available, information that the goods benefit from a commercial guarantee of durability and its duration in units of time, where that guarantee covers the entire good and has a duration of more than two years;
Amendment 274 #
2022/0092(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b
Directive 2011/83/EU
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point v
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point v
(v) when point (u) is not applicable, information made availableprovided by the producer about the availability of spare parts, including the procedure of ordering them, and about the availability of a user and repair manual.and sale price of spare parts in relation to the price of new equipment, including the procedure of ordering them, information about the disassembly of and access to parts, the length of availability on the market of spare parts and delivery times, and about the availability of a user and repair manual; when this information is not provided by the producer, the consumer shall be informed thereof; support shall be provided to small and medium-sized enterprises to enable them to provide such information;
Amendment 319 #
2022/0092(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex I – paragraph 1 – point 4
Annex I – paragraph 1 – point 4
Directive 2005/29/EC
Annex I – point 23 d
Annex I – point 23 d
23d. Omitting to inform the consumer thatImposing a software update that will negatively impact the use of goods with digital elements or certain feature of those goods even if the software update improves the function of other features.
Amendment 320 #
2022/0092(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex I – paragraph 1 – point 4
Annex I – paragraph 1 – point 4
Directive 2005/29/EC
Annex I – point 23d a (new)
Annex I – point 23d a (new)
23da. Failing to inform the consumer of the actual price of a product which has a component or element that needs to be replaced regularly (printer ink cartridge, battery, etc.).
Amendment 321 #
2022/0092(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex I – paragraph 1 – point 4
Annex I – paragraph 1 – point 4
Directive 2005/29/EC
Annex I – point 23d b (new)
Annex I – point 23d b (new)
23db. Manufacturers not providing, free of charge, the updates needed to keep the good in conformity for a period corresponding to the estimated lifespan.
Amendment 335 #
2022/0092(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex I – paragraph 1 – point 4
Annex I – paragraph 1 – point 4
Directive 2005/29/EC
Annex I – point 23h a
Annex I – point 23h a
23ha. The person responsible for placing a product on the market employing stratagems seeking to reduce its lifespan and encourage the consumer to buy a one.
Amendment 339 #
2022/0092(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex I – paragraph 1 – point 4
Annex I – paragraph 1 – point 4
Directive 2005/29/EC
Annex I – point 23 i
Annex I – point 23 i
23i. Omitting to inform that a goodPlacing a good on the market that is designed to limit its functionality when using consumables, spare parts or accessories that are not provided by the original producer.
Amendment 85 #
2022/0089(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 56
Recital 56
(56) In order to supplement or amend certain non-essential elements of this Regulation, 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 defining sustainability standards and laying down criteria for the recognition of existing sustainability standards; clarifying or adding items to be supplied as part of accompanying information; entrusting the EUIPO with the tasks related to scrutiny for opposition and the opposition procedure, operation of the register, publication of standard amendments to a product specification, consultation in the context of cancellation procedure, establishment and management of an alert system informing applicants about the availability of their geographical indication as a domain name, scrutiny of third country geographical indications other than geographical indications under the Geneva Act of the Lisbon Agreement on Appellations of Origin and Geographical Indications34, proposed for protection pursuant to international negotiations or international agreements; establishing appropriate criteria for monitoring performance of the EUIPO in the execution of the tasks entrusted to it; laying down additional rules on the use of geographical indications to identify ingredients in processed products; laying down additional rules for determining the generic status of terms; establishing the restrictions and derogations with regard to the sourcing of feed in the case of a designation of origin; establishing restrictions and derogations with regard to the slaughtering of live animals or with regard to the sourcing of raw materials; laying down rules for determining the use of the denomination of a plant variety or of an animal breed; laying down rules which limit the information contained in the product specification for geographical indications and traditional specialities guaranteed; laying down further details of the eligibility criteria for traditional specialities guaranteed; laying down additional rules to provide for appropriate certification and accreditation procedures to apply in respect of product certification bodies; laying down additional rules to further detail protection of traditional specialities guaranteed; laying down for traditional specialities guaranteed additional rules for determining the generic status of terms, conditions for use of plant variety and animal breed denominations, and relation to intellectual property rights; defining additional rules for joint applications concerning more than one national territory and complementing the rules of the application process for traditional specialities guaranteed guaranteed; complementing the rules for the opposition procedure for traditional specialities guaranteed to establish detailed procedures and deadlines; supplementing the rules regarding the amendment application process for traditional specialities guaranteed; supplementing the rules regarding the cancellation process for traditional specialities guaranteed; laying down detailed rules relating to the criteria for optional quality terms; reserving an additional optional quality term, laying down its conditions of use; laying down derogations to the use of the term ‘mountain product’ and establishing the methods of production, and other criteria relevant for the application of that optional quality term, in particular, laying down the conditions under which raw materials or feedstuffs are permitted to come from outside the mountain areas. 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 of 13 April 2016 on Better Law-Making35. 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. _________________ 34 https://www.wipo.int/publications/en/detai ls.jsp?id=3983 35 OJ L 123, 12.5.2016, p. 1.
Amendment 226 #
2022/0089(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 2
Article 24 – paragraph 2
2. Where a producer group has been recognised by the national authorities in accordance with Article 33 or by an authority of a third country, that group shall be identified as the representative of the rights' holders of the geographical indication in the Union register of geographical indications and in the official extract referred to in paragraph (1).
Amendment 233 #
2022/0089(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 25 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. In the absence of a recognised producer group, a producer group or, in exceptional and duly justified cases, an individual producer who alone has a legitimate interest may apply for approval of an amendment to the product specification of a registered geographical indication.
Amendment 250 #
2022/0089(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 7
Article 25 – paragraph 7
7. Applications for Union amendments submitted by a third country or bygroups of producers or, in exceptional and duly justified cases, an individual producers in a third country shall contain proof that the requested amendment complies with the laws on the protection of geographical indications in force in that third country.
Amendment 273 #
2022/0089(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 26 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. After the registration of a geographical indication is cancelled, the name of that geographical indication cannot be used or protected as an intellectual property right for at least 10 years.
Amendment 279 #
2022/0089(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 6
Article 26 – paragraph 6
Amendment 288 #
2022/0089(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) any direct or indirect commercial use of the geographical indication in respect of products not covered by the registration, where those products are comparable to the products registered under that name or where use of a name exploits, weakens, dilutes, or is detrimental to the reputation of, the protected name, including where those products are used as ingredients;
Amendment 294 #
2022/0089(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) any misuse, imitation or evocation, even if the true origin of the products or services is indicated or if the protected name is translated or accompanied by an expression such as ‘style’, ‘type’, ‘method’, ‘as produced in’, ‘imitation’, ‘flavour’, ‘like’ or similar., including where those products are used as ingredients;
Amendment 306 #
2022/0089(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 4 – point b a (new)
Article 27 – paragraph 4 – point b a (new)
(ba) goods produced in the Union that are to be exported to and marketed in third countries;
Amendment 309 #
2022/0089(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 5
Article 27 – paragraph 5
5. The recognised group of producers or any operator that is entitled to use the protected designation of origin or protected geographical indication shall be entitled to prevent all third parties from bringing goods, in the course of trade, into the Union without being released for free circulation there, where such goods, including packaging, come from third countries and are in breach of paragraph (1).
Amendment 314 #
2022/0089(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 7 a (new)
Article 27 – paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Each Member State shall take appropriate administrative and judicial steps to prevent or stop the unlawful use of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications, as provided for in paragraph 1, that are produced or marketed in that Member State. To this end, the Member States shall designate the authorities responsible for implementing these measures in accordance with the procedures laid down by each Member State. These authorities shall offer sufficient guarantees of objectivity and impartiality, and shall have at their disposal the qualified staff and resources necessary to carry out their functions.
Amendment 37 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) The concept of human rights due diligence was specified and further developed in the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises80 which extended the application of due diligence to environmental and governance topics. The OECD Guidance on Responsible Business Conduct and sectoral guidance81 are internationally recognised frameworks setting out practical due diligence steps to help companies identify, prevent, mitigate and account for how they address actual and potential impacts in their operations, value chains and other business relationships. The concept of due diligence is also embedded in the recommendations of the International Labour Organization (ILO) Tripartite Declaration of Principles concerning Multinational Enterprises and Social Policy82. _________________ 80 OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, 2011 updated edition, available at http://mneguidelines.oecd.org/guidelines/. https://mneguidelines.oecd.org/mneguidel ines. 81 OECD Guidance on Responsible Business Conduct, 2018, and sector- specific guidance, available at https://www.oecd.org/investment/due- diligence-guidance-for-responsible- business-conduct.htm.recommendations of the International Labour Organization (ILO) Tripartite Declaration of Principles concerning Multinational Enterprises and Social Policy82. It was also studied by international economic policy and research organisations, such as the OECD. _________________ 82 The “International Labour Organization’s Tripartite Declaration of Principles concerning Multinational Enterprises and Social Policy, Fifth Edition, 2017, available at: https://www.ilo.org/empent/Publications/ WCMS_094386/lang--en/index.htm.
Amendment 38 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) International agreements under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, to which the Union and the Member States are parties, such as the Paris Agreement84 and the recent Glasgow Climate Pact85, set out precisalthough non-binding, set out precise and proactive avenues to address climate change and keep global warming within 1.5 C degrees. Besides specific actions being expected from all signatory Parties, the role of the private sector, in particular its investment strategies, is considered central to achieve these objectives. _________________ 84 https://unfccc.int/files/essential_backgroun d/convention/application/pdf/english_paris _agreement.pdf. 85 Glasgow Climate Pact, adopted on 13 November 2021 at COP26 in Glasgow, https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resourc e/cma2021_L16_adv.pdf.https://unfccc.int/ sites/default/files/resource/cma2021_L16_ adv.pdf.
Amendment 39 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) This Directive is in coherence with the EU Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy 2020-202499. This Action Plan defines as a priority to strengthen the Union’s engagement to actively promote the global implementation of the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and other relevant international guidelines such as the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, including by advancing relevant due diligence standards. _________________ 99 Joint Communication to the European Parliament and the Council on the EU Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy 2020-2024 (JOIN/2020/5 final).
Amendment 65 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) Under this Directive, EU companies with more than 500 employees on average and a worldwide net turnover exceeding EUR 150 million in the financial year preceding the last financial year should be required to comply with due diligence. As regards companies which do not fulfil those criteria, but which had more than 250 employees on average and more than EUR 40 million worldwide net turnover in the financial year preceding the last financial year and which operate in one or more high-impact sectors, due diligence should apply 2 years after the end of the transposition period of this directive, in order to provide for a longer adaptation period. In order to ensure a proportionate burden, companies operating in such high- impact sectors should be required to comply with more targeted due diligence focusing on severe adverse impacts. Temporary agency workers, including those posted under Article 1(3), point (c), of Directive 96/71/EC, as amended by Directive 2018/957/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council103, should be included in the calculation of the number of employees in the user company. Posted workers under Article 1(3), points (a) and (b), of Directive 96/71/EC, as amended by Directive 2018/957/EU, should only be included in the calculation of the number of employees of the sending company. Micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), defined in accordance with the Commission Recommendation of 6 May 2003 concerning the definition of micro, small and medium-sized enterprises103 a, should be excluded from the scope of this Directive so as to reduce the administrative burdens and excessive requirements imposed upon them. _________________ 103 Directive (EU) 2018/957 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 June 2018 amending Directive 96/71/EC concerning the posting of workers in the framework of the provision of services (OJ L 173, 9.7.2018, p. 16). 103 a Commission Recommendation of 6 May 2003 concerning the definition of micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (C(2003) 1422) (OJ L 124, 20.5.2003, pp. 36–41).
Amendment 71 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) In order to reflect the priority areas of international action aimed at tackling human rights and environmental issues, the selection of high-impact sectors for the purposes of this Directive should be based on existing sectoral OECD due diligence guidance as defined by the OECD. The following sectors should be regarded as high-impact for the purposes of this Directive: the manufacture of textiles, leather and related products (including footwear), and the wholesale trade of textiles, clothing and footwear; agriculture, forestry, fisheries (including aquaculture), the manufacture of food products, and the wholesale trade of agricultural raw materials, live animals, wood, food, and beverages; the extraction of mineral resources regardless of where they are extracted from (including crude petroleum, natural gas, coal, lignite, metals and metal ores, as well as all other, non- metallic minerals and quarry products), the manufacture of basic metal products, other non-metallic mineral products and fabricated metal products (except machinery and equipment), and the wholesale trade of mineral resources, basic and intermediate mineral products (including metals and metal ores, construction materials, fuels, chemicals and other intermediate products). As regards the financial sector, due to its specificities, in particular as regards the value chain and the services offered, even if it is covered by sector-specific OECD guidance, it should not form part of the high-impact sectors covered by this Directive. At the same time, in this sector, the broader coverage of actual and potential adverse impacts should be ensured by also including very large companies in the scope that are regulated financial undertakings, even if they do not have a legal form with limited liability.
Amendment 73 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) In order to achieve fully the objectives of this Directive addressing human rights and adverse environmental impacts with respect to companies’ operations, subsidiaries and value chains, third-country companies with significant operations in the EU should also be covered. More specifically, the Directive should apply to third-country companies which generated a net turnover of at least EUR 150 million in the Union in the financial year preceding the last financial year or a net turnover of more than EUR 40 million but less than EUR 150 million in the financial year preceding the last financial year in one or more of the high- impact sectors, as of 2 years after the end of the transposition period of this Directive.
Amendment 76 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) For defining the scope of application in relation to non-EU companies the described turnover criterion should be chosen as it creates a territorial connection between the third-country companies and the Union territory. Turnover is a proxy for the effects that the activities of those companies could have on the internal market. In accordance with international law, such effectscriterion of contracts concluded with companies or individuals established in the European Union should be chosen. This connection already justifyies the application of Union law to third- country companies. To ensure identification of the relevant turnover of companies concerned, the methods for calculating net turnover for non-EU companies as laid down in Directive (EU) 2013/34 as amended by Directive (EU) 2021/2101 should be used. To ensure effective enforcement of this Directive, an employee threshold should, in turn, not be applied to determine which third-country companies fall under this Directive, as the notion of “employees” retained for the purposes of this Directive is based on Union law and could not be easily transposed outside of the Union. In the absence of a clear and consistent methodology, including in accounting frameworks, to determine the employees ofnon-EU companies in EU legal acts such as the Regulation laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence. With a view to ensuring that the supervisory authority knows which third- country companies, such employee threshold would therefore create legal uncertainty and would be difficult to apply for supervisory authorities. The definition of turnover should be based on Directive 2013/34/EU which has already established the methods for calculating net turnover for non-Union companies, as turnove conclude contracts with companies or aind revenue definitions are similar in international accounting frameworks too. With a view to ensuring that the supervisory authority knows which third country companies generateividuals established in the Union and the required turnover in the Union tofore fall under the scope of this Directive, this Directive should require that a supervisory authority in the Member State where the third country company’s authorised representative is domiciled or established and, where it is different, a supervisory authority in the Member State in which the company generated most of its net turnover in the Union in the financial year preceding the last financial year are informed that the company is a company falling under the scope of this Directive.
Amendment 195 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. This Directive shall also apply under the same conditions to companies which are formed in accordance with the legislation of a third country, and fulfil one of the following conditconclude contracts with companies or individuals established in the Unions:.
Amendment 197 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point a
Amendment 201 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point b
Amendment 506 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 1
Article 15 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that companies referred to in Article 2(1), point (a), and Article 2(2), point (a), shall adopt a plan to ensure that the business model and strategy of the company are compatible with the transition to a sustainable economy and, with the limiting of global warming to 1.5 °C in line with the Paris Agreementpolluting emissions and material pollution and with reducing climate impacts with the aim of preventing the average increase in global warming from exceeding 1.5 °C. This plan shall, in particular, identify, on the basis of information reasonably available to the company, the extent to which climate change is a risk for, or an impact of, the company’s operations.
Amendment 1487 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) as a result of this failure they caused an adverse impact that should have been identified, prevented, mitigated, brought to an end or its extent minimised through the appropriate measures laid down in Articles 7 and 8 occurred and led to damage.
Amendment 87 #
2022/0047(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) In recent years, data-driven technologies have had transformative effects on all sectors of the economy. In recent years, data-driven technologies have had transformative effects on all sectors of the economy. High quality and interoperable data from different domains increase competitiveness and innovation and ensure sustainable economic growth. In the light of those challenges, it is critical that the Commission support the Member States in their digital independence strategies, including in the development of European digital infrastructure, and ensure that European users’ privacy, data security and rights are strongly protected. The same dataset may potentially be used and reused for a variety of purposes and to an unlimited degree, without any loss in its quality or quantity.
Amendment 90 #
2022/0047(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) Barriers to data sharing prevent an optimal allocation of data to the benefit of society. These barriers include a lack of incentives for data holders to enter voluntarily into data sharing agreements, uncertainty about rights and obligations in relation to data, abuse of dominant positions by companies from third countries, the EU’s lack of ambition with regard to strategic independence vis-à-vis third countries and their companies, costs of contracting and implementing technical interfaces, the high level of fragmentation of information in data silos, poor metadata management, the absence of standards for semantic and technical interoperability, bottlenecks impeding data access, a lack of common data sharing practices and abuse of contractual imbalances with regards to data access and use.
Amendment 99 #
2022/0047(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) The fundamental right to the protection of personal data is safeguarded in particular under Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Regulation (EU) 2018/1725. Directive 2002/58/EC additionally protects private life and the confidentiality of communications, including providing conditions to any personal and non- personal data storing in and access from terminal equipment. These instruments provide the basis for sustainable and responsible data processing, including where datasets include a mix of personal and non-personal data. This Regulation complements and is without prejudice to Union law on data protection and privacy, in particular Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Directive 2002/58/EC. No provision of this Regulation should be applied or interpreted in such a way as to diminish or limit the right to the protection of personal data or the right to privacy and confidentiality of communications. In the event of a conflict between this Regulation and Union law on the protection of personal data or national law adopted in accordance with Union law of that kind, the relevant Union or national law on the protection of personal data shall prevail. This Regulation does not create a legal basis for the processing of personal data, nor does it affect any of the rights or obligations set out in Regulations (EU) 2016/679 or (EU) 2018/1725 or Directives 2002/58/EC or (EU) 2016/680.
Amendment 102 #
2022/0047(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) The principles of data minimisation and data protection by design and by default are essential when processing involves significant risks to the fundamental rights of individuals. Taking into account the state of the art, all parties to data sharing, including where within scope of this Regulation, should implement technical and organisational measures to protect these rights. Such measures include not only pseudonymisation and encryption, but also the use of increasingly available technology that permits algorithms to be brought to the data and allow valuable insights to be derived without the transmission between parties or unnecessary copying of the raw or structured data themselves. Products should, therefore, be designed in a way that makes it possible for data subjects to use products covered by this Regulation anonymously or with the least possible infringement of their privacy.
Amendment 107 #
2022/0047(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) Physical products that obtain, generate or collect, by means of their components, data concerning their performance, use or environment and that are able to communicate that data via a publicly available electronic communications service (often referred to as the Internet of Things) should be covered by this Regulation. Electronic communications services include land- based telephone networks, television cable networks, satellite-based networks and near-field communication networks. Such products may include vehicles, home equipment and consumer goods, medical and health devices or agricultural and industrial machinery. The data represent the digitalisation of user actions and events and should accordingly be accessible to the user, while information derived or inferred from this data, where lawfully held, should not be considered within scope of this Regulation. Such data are potentially valuable to the user and support innovation and the development of digital and other services protecting the environment, health and the circular economy, in particular though facilitating the maintenance and repair of the products in question. The processing, use and sharing of and access to personal and sensitive data, such as health data, by data holders, users and third parties or recipients shall be subject to all the conditions and rules laid down in the EU regulatory framework on data protection and privacy.
Amendment 115 #
2022/0047(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) In recent years, data-driven technologies have had transformative effects on all sectors of the economy. The proliferation in products connected to the Internet of Things in particular has increased the volume and potential value of data for consumers, businesses and society. High quality and interoperable data from different domains increase competitiveness and innovation and ensure sustainable economic growth. In the light of those challenges, the Commission must support the Member States in their digital independence strategies, in particular in the development of European digital infrastructures, and ensure that European citizens' data is stored and used in Europe and not in third countries. The same dataset may potentially be used and reused for a variety of purposes and to an unlimited degree, without any loss in its quality or quantity.
Amendment 116 #
2022/0047(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) Barriers to data sharing prevent an optimal allocation of data to the benefit of society. These barriers include a lack of incentives for data holders to enter voluntarily into data sharing agreements, uncertainty about rights and obligations in relation to data, abuse of dominant positions by third-country Big Tech companies, the EU's lack of ambition with regard to strategic independence from third countries and their companies, costs of contracting and implementing technical interfaces, the high level of fragmentation of information in data silos, poor metadata management, the absence of standards for semantic and technical interoperability, bottlenecks impeding data access, a lack of common data sharing practices and abuse of contractual imbalances with regards to data access and use.
Amendment 117 #
2022/0047(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) In order to respond to the needs of the digital economy and to remove barriers to a well-functioning internal market for data, it is necessary to lay down a harmonised framework specifying who, other than the manufacturer or other data holder is entitled to access the data generated by products or related services, under which conditions and on what basis. Accordingly, Member States should notmay adopt or maintain additional national requirements on those matters falling within the scope of this Regulation, unless explicitly provided for in this Regulation, since this would affect the direct and uniform applicatin addition to the express provisions of this Regulation.
Amendment 123 #
2022/0047(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) The principles of data minimisation and data protection by design and by default are essential when processing involves significant risks to the fundamental rights of individuals. Taking into account the state of the art, all parties to data sharing, including where within scope of this Regulation, should implement technical and organisational measures to protect these rights. Such measures include not only pseudonymisation and encryption, but also the use of increasingly available technology that permits algorithms to be brought to the data and allow valuable insights to be derived without the transmission between parties or unnecessary copying of the raw or structured data themselves. Products should be designed in a way that makes it possible for data subjects to use products covered by this Regulation anonymously or with the least possible infringement of their privacy.
Amendment 129 #
2022/0047(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) Physical products that obtain, generate or collect, by means of their components, data concerning their performance, use or environment and that are able to communicate that data via a publicly available electronic communications service (often referred to as the Internet of Things) should be covered by this Regulation. Electronic communications services include land- based telephone networks, television cable networks, satellite-based networks and near-field communication networks. Such products may include vehicles, home equipment and consumer goods, medical and health devices or agricultural and industrial machinery. The data represent the digitalisation of user actions and events and should accordingly be accessible to the user, while information derived or inferred from this data, where lawfully held, should not be considered within scope of this Regulation. Such data are potentially valuable to the user and support innovation and the development of digital and other services protecting the environment, health and the circular economy, in particular though facilitating the maintenance and repair of the products in question. The processing, use and sharing of and access to personal and sensitive data, such as health data, by data holders, users and third parties or recipients shall be subject to all the conditions and rules laid down in the EU regulatory framework on data protection and privacy.
Amendment 192 #
2022/0047(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new)
(1a) 'personal data' means any information relating to an identified or identifiable natural person; shall be considered an identifiable natural person is a natural person who can be identified, directly or indirectly, in particular by reference to an online identifier or to one or more factors specific to his/her physical, physiological, genetic, mental, economic, cultural or social identity;
Amendment 208 #
2022/0047(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article premier – paragraph 2 – point a
Article premier – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) manufacturers of products and suppliers of related services placed on the market in the Union, regardless of their place of establishment, and the users of such products or services;
Amendment 217 #
2022/0047(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new)
(1a) ‘personal data’ means any information relating to an identified or identifiable natural person; an identifiable natural person is a natural person who can be identified, directly or indirectly, in particular by reference to an identifier such as a name, an identification number, location data, an online identifier or to one or more factors specific to the physical, physiological, genetic, mental, economic, cultural or social identity of that natural person;
Amendment 224 #
2022/0047(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 b (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 b (new)
(1b) ‘non-personal data’ means data other than personal data as defined in point (1) of Article 4 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679;
Amendment 274 #
2022/0047(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 4
Article 4 – paragraph 4
4. The user and/or third party shall not use the data obtained pursuant to a request referred to in paragraph 1 to develop a product that competes with the product from which the data originate.
Amendment 322 #
2022/0047(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 4
Article 4 – paragraph 4
4. The user and/or third party shall not use the data obtained pursuant to a request referred to in paragraph 1 to develop a product that competes with the product from which the data originate.
Amendment 343 #
2022/0047(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) coerce, deceive or manipulate the user in any way, whether that person is the person concerned or not, by subverting or impairing the autonomy, decision-making or choices of the user, including by means of a digital interface with the user;
Amendment 359 #
2022/0047(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 1
1. Where a data holder is obliged to make data available to a data recipient under Article 5 or under other Union law or national legislation implementing Union law, it shall do so under fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory terms and in a transparent manner in accordance with the provisions of this Chapter and Chapter IV and without prejudice to Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
Amendment 364 #
2022/0047(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
An exceptional need to use data within the meaning of this Chapter shall be strictly limited in time and scope and only deemed to exist in any of the following circumstances:
Amendment 391 #
2022/0047(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – title
Article 13 – title
Unfair contractual terms unilaterally imposed on a micro, small or medium- sized enterprise
Amendment 395 #
2022/0047(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. A contractual term, concerning the access to and use of data or the liability and remedies for the breach or the termination of data related obligations which has been unilaterally imposed by an enterprise on a micro, small or medium-sizednother enterprise as defined in Article 2 of the Annex to Recommendation 2003/361/EC shall not be binding on the latter enterprise if it is unfair.
Amendment 406 #
2022/0047(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
An exceptional need to use data within the meaning of this Chapter shall be strictly limited in time and scope and only deemed to exist in any of the following circumstances:
Amendment 421 #
2022/0047(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – point c – point 2
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – point c – point 2
Amendment 427 #
2022/0047(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 23 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) terminating, after a maximum notice period of 3015 calendar days, the contractual agreement of the service;
Amendment 434 #
2022/0047(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 1
Article 25 – paragraph 1
1. From [date X+3yr + 3 months] onwards, providers of data processing services shall not impose any charges on the customer for the switching process.
Amendment 436 #
2022/0047(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 2
Article 25 – paragraph 2
2. From [date X, the date of entry into force of the Data Act] until [date X+3yr + 3 months], providers of data processing services may impose reduced charges on the customer for the switching process.
Amendment 439 #
2022/0047(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1
Article 27 – paragraph 1
1. Providers of data processing services shall take all reasonable technical, legal and organisational measures, including contractual arrangements, in order to prevent international transfer or governmental access to non-personal data held in the Union where such transfer or access would create a conflict with Union law or the national law of the relevant Member State, without prejudice to paragraph 2 or 3.
Amendment 443 #
2022/0047(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 27 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Amendment 464 #
2022/0047(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 7 a (new)
Article 31 – paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. The competent authorities shall cooperate with the competent authorities of all Member States to ensure this Regulation is implemented coherently and efficiently. Such mutual assistance shall include the exchange of all relevant information by secure electronic means without undue delay, in particular for the purpose of carrying out the tasks referred to in paragraph 3(b), (c) and (d).
Amendment 477 #
2022/0047(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 23 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) terminating, after a maximum notice period of 3015 calendar days, the contractual agreement of the service;
Amendment 545 #
2022/0047(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 2
Article 24 – paragraph 2
2. Where the mandatory transition period as defined in paragraph 1, points (a) and (c) of this Article is technically unfeasible, the provider of data processing services shall notify the customer within 7 working days after the switching request has been made, duly motivating the technical unfeasibility with a detailed report and indicating an alternative transition period, which may not exceed 63 months. In accordance with paragraph 1 of this Article, full service continuity shall be ensured throughout the alternative transition period against reduced charges, referred to in Article 25(2).
Amendment 555 #
2022/0047(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 1
Article 25 – paragraph 1
1. From [date X+3yr + 3 months] onwards, providers of data processing services shall not impose any charges on the customer for the switching process.
Amendment 564 #
2022/0047(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 2
Article 25 – paragraph 2
2. From [date X, the date of entry into force of the Data Act] until [date X+3yr + 3 months], providers of data processing services may impose reduced charges on the customer for the switching process.
Amendment 601 #
2022/0047(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1
Article 27 – paragraph 1
1. Providers of data processing services shall take all reasonablethe necessary technical, legal and organisational measures, including contractual arrangements, in order to prevent international transfer or governmental access to non-personal data held in the Union where such transfer or access would create a conflict with Union law or the national law of the relevant Member State, without prejudice to paragraph 2 or 3.
Amendment 603 #
2022/0047(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 2
Article 27 – paragraph 2
2. Any decision or judgment of a court or tribunal, in accordance with Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, and any decision of an administrative authority of a third country requiring a provider of data processing services to transfer from or give access to non-personal data within the scope of this Regulation held in the Union may only be recognised or enforceable in any manner if based on an international agreement, such as a mutual legal assistance treaty, in force between the requesting third country and the Union or any such agreement between the requesting third country and a Member State.
Amendment 606 #
2022/0047(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 27 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Amendment 607 #
2022/0047(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 27 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) the reasoned objection of the addressee is subject to a review by a competent court or tribunal in the third- country, in accordance with Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union; and
Amendment 659 #
2022/0047(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 7 a (new)
Article 31 – paragraph 7 a (new)
Amendment 660 #
2022/0047(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 7 b (new)
Article 31 – paragraph 7 b (new)
7b. Entities falling within the scope of this Regulation shall be subject to the jurisdiction of the Member State where the entity is established. In the event that the entity is established in more than one Member State, it shall be deemed to fall under the territorial jurisdiction of all Member States if the entity is a gatekeeper designated pursuant to Article 3 of Regulation (EU) 2022/1925 on fair and competitive markets in the digital sector and amending Directives (EU) 2019/1937 and (EU) 2020/1828.
Amendment 83 #
2022/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
Recital 29
(29) In light of the structural deficiencies of the semiconductor supply chain and the resulting risk of future shortages, this Regulation provides instruments for a coordinated approach to monitoring and effectively tackling possible market disruptions. The long-term objective of the monitoring exercise enshrined under this Regulation should be a shift from crisis mitigation to crisis prevention.
Amendment 84 #
2022/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
Recital 30
(30) Due to the complex, quickly evolving and interlinked semiconductor value chains with various actors, a coordinated approach to regular monitoring is necessary to increase the ability to mitigate risks that may negatively affect the supply of semiconductors. Member States, in close coordination with relevant stakeholders, should monitor the semiconductor value chain focusing on early warning indicators and the availability and integrity of the services and goods provided by key market actors,. The monitoring activity shall be targeted and purpose driven in such a way that it would not represent an excessive administrative burden for undertakings nor jeopardize confidentiality requirements .Information collected within the scope of this exercise shall be consistent, comparable at EU level and paced in line with evolving global developments. In this regard the Commission may provide guidance in order to avoid excessive defragmentation in the set-up of national monitoring mechanisms.
Amendment 92 #
2022/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35
Recital 35
(35) As part of the monitoring, national competent authorities should also do a mapping of undertakings operating in the Union along the semiconductor supply chain established in their national territory and notify this information to the Commission. Strategic mapping shall complement the monitoring activity under this Regulation and should serve the objective of understanding long-term interdependencies across the supply chain.
Amendment 97 #
2022/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37
Recital 37
(37) In order to forecast and prepare for future disruptions of the different stages of the semiconductor value chain in the Union, the Commission should, assisted by the European Semiconductor Board, identify early warning indicators in the Union risk assessment. Such indicators could include the availability of raw materials, intermediate products and human capital needed for manufacturing semiconductors, or appropriate manufacturing equipment, the forecasted demand for semiconductors on the Union and global markets, price surges exceeding normal price fluctuation, the effect of accidents, attacks, natural disasters or other serious events, the effect of trade policies, tariffs, export restrictions, trade barriers and other trade related measures, and the effect of business closures, delocalisations or acquisitions of key market actors. Member States should monitor these early warning indicators. A strong involvement of the industry in the monitoring of identified indicators should be a prerequisite for earlier qualitative assessment and simulation of potential shortages.
Amendment 110 #
2022/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 42
Recital 42
(42) The semiconductor crisis stage should be triggered as last resort in the presence of concrete, serious, and reliable evidence of such a crisis. A semiconductor crisis occurs in case of serious disruptions to the supply of semiconductors leading to significant shortages which entail significant delays and negative effects on one or more important economic sectors in the Union, either directly or through ripple effects of the shortage, given that the Union’s industrial sectors represent a strong user base of semiconductors. Alternatively or in addition, a semiconductor crisis also occurs when serious disruptions of the supply of semiconductors lead to significant shortages which prevent the supply, repair and maintenance of essential products used by critical sectors, for instance medical and diagnostic equipment.
Amendment 112 #
2022/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 43
Recital 43
(43) In order to ensure an agile and effective response to such a semiconductor crisis, the Commission should be empowered to activate the crisis stage by means of an implementing acts and for a predetermined duration period, taking into account the opinion of the European Semiconductor Board. The Commission should assess the need for prolongation and prolong the duration of the crisis stage for a predetermined period, should such a necessity be ascertained, taking into account the opinion of the European Semiconductor Board. Equally, should supply chain recovery conditions be ascertained, the Commission, in accordance with the European Semiconductor Board, should assess the possibility of ending the crisis stage and related measures in advance.
Amendment 124 #
2022/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) setting up a coordination mechanism between the Member States and, the Commission as well as key market actors and relevant end user industries for monitoring the supply of semiconductors and crisis response to semiconductor shortages.
Amendment 126 #
2022/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 16
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 16
(16) ‘critical sector’ means any sector referred to in the Annex of the Commission proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the resilience of critical entities, the defence sector and other, activities that are relevant for public safety and security as well as any other activity or sector of strategic economic importance for Member States;
Amendment 148 #
2022/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2
Article 15 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall invite the main users of semiconductors and other relevant stakeholders to provide information regarding significant fluctuations in demand and known disruptions of their supply chain. To facilitate the exchange of information, Member States shall provide for a mechanism and administrative set-up for these updates. In doing so, Member States shall consult relevant end user industries with a view to build the necessary mechanisms on existing industry best monitoring practices.
Amendment 174 #
2022/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2
Article 16 – paragraph 2
2. The Commission shall review the Union risk assessment including the early warning indicators as necessary, including upon indication of the European Semiconductor Board.
Amendment 188 #
2022/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 18 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. During the crisis stage the Commission shall, upon request from a Member State or on its own initiative, equally assess whether advance termination of crisis stage should be considered. Where the assessment concludes that earlier termination is appropriate, the Commission may conclude activation after consulting the European Semiconductor Board.
Amendment 207 #
2022/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 4
Article 19 – paragraph 4
4. The use of the measures referred to in paragraph 1 shall be proportionate and restricted to what is necessary for addressing serious disruptions of vital societal functions or strategic economic activities in the Union and must be in the best interest of the Union. The use of these measures shall avoid placing disproportionate administrative burden on SMEs.
Amendment 212 #
2022/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 6
Article 19 – paragraph 6
6. The Commission mayshall, after consulting the European Semiconductor Board, issue guidance on the implementation and the use of the emergency measures.
Amendment 215 #
2022/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1
Article 22 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission may, upon the request of two or more Member States, establish a mandate to act as a central purchasing body on behalf of the participating Member States (‘participating Member States’) for their public procurement of crisis-relevant products for certain critical sectors or strategic economic activities in the Union (‘common purchasing’).
Amendment 219 #
2022/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 2
Article 22 – paragraph 2
2. The Commission shall, in consultation with the European Semiconductor Board, assess the utility, necessity and proportionality of the request. Where the Commission intends not to follow the request, it shall inform the Member States concerned and the European Semiconductor Board without undue delay and give reasons for its refusal.
Amendment 223 #
2022/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 4
Article 22 – paragraph 4
4. Procurement under this Regulation shall be carried out by the Commission in accordance with the rules set out in the Financial Regulation for its own procurement. The Commission may have the ability and responsibility, on behalf of all participating Member States, to enter into contracts with economic operators, including individual producers of crisis- relevant products, concerning the purchase of such products or concerning the advance financing of the production or the development of such products in exchange for a priority right to the result. The Commission shall keep Member States duly informed of the progress of the procurement procedure.
Amendment 9 #
Amendment 24 #
2022/0031(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) Since the adoption of Regulation (EU) 2021/953, the epidemiological situation with regard to the COVID-19 pandemic has evolved considerabimproved substantially. On the one hand, by 31 January 2022, more than 80% of the adult population in the Union have completed their primary vaccination cycle, and more than 50% have received a booster dose, despite significant differences between Member States6. Increasing vaccine uptake remains a crucial objective in the fight against the pandemic, given the increased protection against hospitalisation and severe disease afforded by vaccination, and thus plays an important role in ensuring that restrictions to the free movement of persons can be lifted. Nine Member States do not require incoming travellers to provide any kind of COVID- 19 certificates to access their national territory. _________________ 6 https://vaccinetracker.ecdc.europa.eu/publi c/extensions/COVID-19/vaccine- tracker.html
Amendment 28 #
2022/0031(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
Amendment 36 #
2022/0031(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8 b (new)
Recital 8 b (new)
(8b) The EU Digital COVID Certificate has been conceived only as a tool to facilitate free movement within the Union during the COVID-19 pandemic, taking into account the principles of proportionality and non-discrimination. However, in contravention of the objective of Regulation (EU) 2021/953, the EU Digital COVID Certificate has been used by many national, regional and local authorities in the Member States, as well as by the Union institutions, to impose restrictions for internal and domestic purposes. Without prejudice to Member States’ competence to introduce national restrictions on grounds of public health this Regulation and the EU Digital COVID Certificate should not be intended as a tool for Member States to impose unjustified, disproportionate or discriminatory restrictions for domestic purposes.
Amendment 49 #
2022/0031(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a – point i a (new) Regulation (EU) 2021/953
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a – point i a (new) Regulation (EU) 2021/953
(ia) point (c) is replaced by the following: (c) a certificate confirming that, following a positive result of a NAAT test, or a rapid antigen test listed in the EU common list of COVID-19 antigen tests agreed by the Health Security Committee, or an antibody test listed in the EU common list of COVID-19 antibody tests agreed by the Health Security Committee, carried out by health professionals or by skilled testing personnel, the holder has recovered from a SARS-CoV-2 infection (certificate of recovery). Or. en (Regulation (EU) 2021/953)
Amendment 60 #
2022/0031(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point –a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point –a (new)
Regulation (EU) 2021/953
Article 7 – paragraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 1
(-a) In Article 7, paragraph 1 is replaced by the following: "1. Each Member State shall issue, upon request, certificates of recovery referred to in point (c) of Article 3(1) following a positive result of a NAAT test carried out by health professionals or by skilled testing personnel. A Member State may also issue, upon request, certificates of recovery referred to in point (c) of Article 3(1) following a positive result of a rapid antigen test listed in the EU common list of COVID-19 antigen tests agreed by the Health Security Committee carried out by health professionals or by skilled testing personnel. Member States may issue certificates of recovery based on rapid antigen tests carried out by health professionals or by skilled testing personnel on or after 1 October 2021, provided that the rapid antigen test used was included in the EU common list of COVID-19 antigen tests agreed by the Health Security Committee at the time the positive test result was produced. A Member State may also issue certificates of recovery referred to in point (c) of Article 3(1) following a positive result of an antibody test carried out by health professionals or by skilled testing personnel, provided that the antibody test used was included in the EU common list of COVID-19 antibody tests agreed by the Health Security Committee at the time the positive test result was produced. Certificates of recovery shall be issued at the earliest 11 days after the date on which a person was first subject to a NAAT test or rapid antigen test that produced a positive result, or the day after the date on which a person was subject to an antibody test that produced a positive result. The Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 12 to amend the number of days after which a certificate of recovery is to be issued, on the basis of guidance received from the Health Security Committee in accordance with Article 3(11) or on scientific evidence reviewed by ECDC."
Amendment 68 #
2022/0031(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 d (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 d (new)
Regulation (EU) 2021/953
Article 11 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 4 a (new)
(5d) In Article 11, the following paragraph is added: “4a. Member States shall not make use of the EU Digital COVID Certificate as a tool to implement domestic restrictions.”;
Amendment 70 #
2022/0031(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Regulation (EU) 2021/953
Article 12 – paragraph 2
Article 12 – paragraph 2
Amendment 76 #
2022/0031(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 e (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 e (new)
Regulation (EU) 2021/953
Article 16 – paragraph 3 (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 3 (new)
Amendment 77 #
2022/0031(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8
Regulation (EU) 2021/953
Article 17 – paragraph 2
Article 17 – paragraph 2
Amendment 11 #
2022/0021(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) The decision-making bodies of the European standardisation organisations are open to participation not only by national standardisation bodies, but also by national standardisation organisations of acceding countries, candidate countries and potential candidates to the Union, among oth as observers. In order to avoid excluding those organisations from participation in the work of decision- making bodies concerned, while preserving the interests and autonomy of the European Union regarding its decisions in standardisation, it is only necessary to provide that the decisions in those bodies concerning European standards and European standardisation deliverables requested under Article 10(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1025/2012 be taken exclusively by representatives of the Member States' national standardisation bodies, without imposing any other requirements on the work of the decision-making bodies of the European standardisationhile also taking into account the input of national standardisation organisations of third-party States or organisations.
Amendment 12 #
2022/0021(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) In order for the requirement for decisions in the decision-making bodies of European standardisation organisations concerning European standards and European standardisation deliverables requested by the Commission under Article 10(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1025/2012 to be taken exclusively by representatives of Member States' national standardisations bodies to be effective, it is necessary to provide that the Commission may only make such requests to a European standardisation organisation that complies with that requirement.
Amendment 13 #
2022/0021(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation (EU) No 1025/2012
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Article 10 – paragraph 1
The Commission may within the limitations of the competences laid down in the Treaties, request that one or several European standardisation organisations draft a European standard or European standardisation deliverable within a set deadline, provided that the European standardisation organisation concerned complies with paragraph 2a. European standards and European standardisation deliverables take into account the public interest and are based on consensus.;
Amendment 15 #
2022/0021(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
2a. Each European standardisation organisation shall ensure that the following decisions concerning European standards and European standardisation deliverables referred to in paragraph 1 are taken exclusively by representatives of the Member States' national standardisation bodies within the competent decision- making body of that organisation, taking into account the opinion of participating third-party States' or organisations' national standardisation organisations:
Amendment 33 #
2021/2185(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Deplores the fact that the Commission allows dominant players on the digital market to pursue aggressive external growth strategies, making it impossible for a European champion to emerge in this sector.
Amendment 65 #
2021/2185(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Calls on the Commission to take account of the impact on jobs in Europe and on prices for consumers in the procedures to assess the different options put forward by DG Competition to companies looking to merge.
Amendment 67 #
2021/2185(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8b. Calls on the Commission to adapt competition rules and ensure their enforcement in the digital sector to allow for the emergence of European giants capable of competing in global markets and offering European consumers competitive, safe and sovereign digital solutions that keep their data in Europe.
Amendment 69 #
2021/2185(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 c (new)
Paragraph 8 c (new)
8c. Calls on the Commission to amend the rules to introduce a quota for European production in the digital sector to restore competitive market structures and respond to consumer demand.
Amendment 75 #
2021/2185(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Calls for a quota or European preference to be introduced for local or European production in public procurement in the digital sector in Europe.
Amendment 28 #
2021/2161(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital W
Recital W
W. whereas the development of new technologies, such as artificial intelligence and automated decision making systems (ADMSs), can play an important role in the modernisation and improvement of the functioning of public administration provided that the technologies used have a high degree of reliability and of trustworthiness; whereas the possibility of recourse to such new technologies by public administration, including the Union’s administration, should, however, be limited by the principle of legality and the need to ensure the respect for citizens’ rights; whereas use of new technologies, such as AI and ADMSs may pose specific problems for the principle of good administration and right to legal review and therefore requires particular analysis with regard to elements such as transparency, accountability, compliance and non-discrimination, by addressing the risk of algorithmic bias; whereas in any event, decision-making in political, administrative and judicial matters must remain subject to final validation by a human;
Amendment 38 #
2021/2161(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital AA
Recital AA
AA. whereas access to digital administration services for Union citizens is affected by factors such as age, financial situation, geographical location, technical knowledge, confidence or willingness to embrace technological solutions; whereas therefore the Union’s administration should take this into consideration when developing digital solutions for services it provides in order not to lose citizens’ trust and to allow citizens to adjust to the existence of the digital service;
Amendment 43 #
2021/2161(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital AB
Recital AB
AB. whereas the following principles for digital public services and administration have already been identified: (i) human-centric and accessible digital public services at all levels, (ii) the possibility for every person to engage ixpress their views on the creation and improvement of tailored digital public services that are tailored to their needs and preferences, (iii) the ‘once only’ principle, namely that every person should submit their data or information only once when they are digitally interacting with public administrations across the Union, (iv) interoperability of digital services offered by the public sector such as digital identity solutions with data portability allowed across the Union, (v) wide-ranging engagement of and with people enabled by digital technologies and solutions and stimulation of the development of participatory initiatives at all levels, (vi) contribution of digital technologies and solutions to better levels of public security and safety;
Amendment 47 #
2021/2161(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Requests the Commission to urgently come forward with a legislative proposal, on the basis of Article 298 TFEU, for a regulation on an open, efficient and independent European Union administration to be included in its work programme for the year 2024 so that the co-legislators can start their work on it immediately at the start of new legislative term; requests that the proposal follow the recommendations set out in the Annex hereto and invites the Commission to consider the proposal for a regulation annexed to its resolution of 9 June 2016 as a point of departure basis for the preparation of the requested proposal and to take into account the advancement of digitalisation and its impact on the Union’s administration and administrative procedure;
Amendment 55 #
2021/2161(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – Recommendation 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point i
Annex I – Recommendation 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point i
(i) the ‘'once only' principle’, namely that every person should submit their data or information only once when they are digitally interacting with the Union’'s administration, drawing in that respect also from the establishment of the European Digital Identity Wallet;
Amendment 59 #
2021/2161(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – Recommendation 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point iv
Annex I – Recommendation 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point iv
(iv) establishment of procedures and clarification of the use of digital technologies in the external communication of the Union’s administration, with the objectives of taking counter-measures to deal with existing gaps, increasing legal certainty, and ensuring that the number of cases of administrative injustice that are addressed increases and breaking the cycle of mistrust;
Amendment 65 #
2021/2161(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – Recommendation 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point ii
Annex I – Recommendation 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point ii
(ii) every person should have the possibility of engaging ito express their views on the creation and improvement of tailored digital public services that are tailored to their needs and preferences;
Amendment 78 #
2021/2161(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – Recommendation 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point iv
Annex I – Recommendation 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point iv
(iv) the right to an explanation, understood as the right to be given an individual explanation for an output of the algorithm and of the decision reached-making process and the decision itself after algorithmic assessment;
Amendment 17 #
2021/2043(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas many barriers affecting the single market derive from incorrect or incomplete application of EU legislation; whereas the effective implementation of existing EU legislation and abolition of barriers depends on both the Commission and Member States;
Amendment 22 #
2021/2043(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
C a. whereas continuously evolving regulatory intervention at EU level might also adversely affect the single market, creating barriers such as high compliance costs in the business environment, especially for SMEs, and legal uncertainty for individual consumers as well;
Amendment 59 #
2021/2043(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Underlines that the single market remains the European Union’s greatest achievement; urges the Commission, therefore, to simplify the application of the current EU regulatory framework as well as refocus resources at issues plaguing the single market, in particular non-tariff barriers (NTBs), which continue to limit opportunities for consumers and businesses;
Amendment 64 #
2021/2043(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Regrets that in some cases EU regulations have increased social dumping and unfair competition within the single market instead of reducing them, thereby also discriminating against those companies and Member States that produce with very high social and environmental standards;
Amendment 108 #
2021/2043(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Regrets that some of the identified restrictions under the Services Directive come as a result of the legal uncertainty it has triggered since its entry into force with regard to its scope, in particular for SMEs in the tourism sector;
Amendment 117 #
2021/2043(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Recognises the insufficient use of the notification procedure under the Services Directive; calls on the Commission to reflect on improving this framework, possibly by means of a new initiative which would increase clarity and transparency on the measures that need to be notified, while remaining cautious in order to not undermine the Services Directive and avoiding the situation which led to the withdrawal of the previous proposal;
Amendment 125 #
2021/2043(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10 a. Underlines that provisions aimed at safeguarding consumers safety, working conditions and the environment as well as preserving the regional cultural heritage shall not be considered as barriers to the free movement of goods and services;
Amendment 189 #
2021/2043(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to consistently, speedily and rigorously assess whether EU and national rules hinder the internal market, and where they do, to assess if they are necessary, proportional and justified;
Amendment 194 #
2021/2043(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22 a. Observes that the incorrect enforcement of single market rules comes also as a result of obstacles encountered by Member States in transposing EU legislation on certain production sectors;
Amendment 36 #
2021/2007(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Stresses that patents exist to reward innovation, not to provide income for products that are not particularly innovative. Consumers consider that some software products that have been around for decades (such as Word and Excel, invented in 1981) are too expensive and that the protection afforded to them no longer corresponds to the innovation they bring.
Amendment 37 #
2021/2007(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Notes that the Commission is very active in genericizing certain innovative industries such as the pharmaceutical industry, sometimes at the expense of employment and research in Europe, while allowing other less innovative industries (consumer software, music from the 1960s...) to reap a quasi- perpetual income at the expense of consumers.
Amendment 45 #
2021/2007(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Calls on Member States and the Commission to draw up a list of foreign companies found guilty of espionage, piracy or aggravated theft of intellectual property at the expense of European companies or Member States, and to exclude companies on that list from public procurement in Europe.
Amendment 89 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) Member States should criminalise offence categories and provide for greater precision on the definitions of the offence categories, and harmonisation concerning sanction types and levelss well as uphold the ‘polluter pays’ principle, according to the character of the damage observed in the short term but also that which is to be expected in the longer term.
Amendment 112 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) Sanctions for the offences should be effective, dissuasive and proportionate. To this end, minimum levels for the maximum term of imprisonment should be set for natural persons. Minimum levels for the maximum term of imprisonment may be achieved by national law as a sanction for a single criminal offence, for an aggravated offence or for a combination of concurrent applicable criminal offences. Accessory sanctions are often seen as being more effective than financial sanctions especially for legal persons. Additional sanctions or measures should be therefore available in criminal proceedings. These should include the obligation to reinstate the environment, exclusion from access to public funding, including tender procedures, grants and concessions and withdrawal of permits and authorisations. This is without prejudice to the discretion of judges or courts in criminal proceedings to impose appropriate sanctions in the individual cases.
Amendment 115 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 14 a (new)
Recital 14 a (new)
(14a) The criminal law systems of all Member States include provisions on manslaughter, whether it is committed intentionally or by gross negligence. Member States should be able to rely on these provisions when transposing the provisions of this Directive on offences that cause the death of any person, whether committed intentionally or by gross negligence. In this context, gross negligence describes a particularly serious breach of duty of care.
Amendment 130 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) This Directive should apply without prejudice to the general rules and principles of national criminal law on the sentencing or the application and execution of sentences in accordance with the specific circumstances in each individual case, with the utmost respect for subsidiarity.
Amendment 148 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 25
Recital 25
(25) Other persons may also possess valuable information concerning potential environmental criminal offences. They may be members of the community affected or members of society at large taking an active part in protecting the environment, in a reasoned and non- extremist manner. Such persons who report environmental crimes as well as persons who cooperate with the enforcement of such offences should be provided the necessary support and assistance in the context of criminal proceedings, so that they are not disadvantaged for their cooperation but supported and assisted. These persons should also be protected from being harassed or unduly prosecuted for reporting such offences or their cooperation in the criminal proceedings.
Amendment 161 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 30
Recital 30
(30) To ensure an effective, integrated and coherent enforcement system that includes administrative, civil and criminal law measures, Member States should organise internal cooperation and communication between all actors along the administrative and criminal enforcement chains and between punitive and remedial sanctioning actors. Following the applicable rules, Member States should also cooperate through EU agencies, in particular Eurojust and Europol, as well as with EU bodies, including the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) and the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF), in their respective areas of competence.
Amendment 168 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 33
Recital 33
(33) The statistical data collected under this Directive on environmental offences should be comparable between the Member States and collected on the basis of common minimum standards. In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of this Directive, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission to define the standard format for statistical data transmission. Those powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council27. _________________ 27 Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by the Member States of the Commission's exercise of implementing powers (OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13).
Amendment 266 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point q
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point q
(q) production, placing on the market, import, export, use, emission or release of ozone depleting substances as defined in Article 3 (4) of Regulation (EC) No 1005/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council54 or of products and equipment containing or relying on such substances, which cause substantial damage to the quality of air, the quality of soil or the quality of water, or to animals or plants; _________________ 54 Regulation (EC) No 1005/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 September 2009 on substances that deplete the ozone layer (OJ L 286, 31.10.2009, p. 1–30)
Amendment 269 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point r
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point r
(r) production, placing on the market, import, export, use, emission or release of fluorinated greenhouse gases as defined in Article 2 (1) of Regulation 517/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council55 or of products and equipment containing or relying on such gases, which cause substantial damage to the quality of air, the quality of soil or the quality of water, or to animals or plants. _________________ 55 Regulation (EU) No 517/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014 on fluorinated greenhouse gases and repealing Regulation (EC) No 842/2006 (OJ L 150, 20.5.2014, p. 195– 230).
Amendment 328 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 3
Article 5 – paragraph 3
Amendment 333 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 4
Article 5 – paragraph 4
4. Member States shall take the measures necessary measures to ensure that the offences referred to in Article 3(1) points (kf), (l), (m), (o),g) and (k) to (pr) are punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of at least fourthree years.
Amendment 415 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 5
Article 7 – paragraph 5
5. Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that offences referred to in Article 3(1) points (k), (l), (m), (o), (p), (q), (r) are punishable by fines, the maximum limit of which shall be not less than 3% of the total worldwide turnover of the legal person [/undertaking] in the business year preceding the fining decision.
Amendment 417 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Where their national law does not allow the level of fines to be determined using a percentage of the total worldwide turnover of the legal person in similar cases, Member States may, as regards the criminal or non-criminal fines referred to in Article 7(4) and (5), use other methods to set a maximum limit and the level of a fine, provided that the result is proportionate to the severity of the conduct and to the individual, financial and other situation of the legal person concerned.
Amendment 489 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. A Member State shall inform the Commission where it decides tomay extend its jurisdiction to offences referred to in Articles 3 and 4 which have been committed outside its territory, where:
Amendment 514 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 1
Article 14 – paragraph 1
Member States shall ensure that, in accordance with their national legal system, members of the public concerned have appropriate rights to participate in proceedings concerning offences referred to in Articles 3 and 4, for instance as a civil party.
Amendment 567 #
2021/0422(COD)
Amendment 233 #
2021/0394(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2
Article 7 – paragraph 2
2. A request for conducting an oral hearing through videoconferencing or other distance communication technology may be refused by the competent authority where the particular circumstances of the case are not compatible with the use of such technology, especially where one of the parties would be at a disadvantage because of the ‘digital divide’ they would face.
Amendment 265 #
2021/0394(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) such technology is not used in criminal matters.
Amendment 92 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) This situation leads to the fragmentation of the internal market, decreases legal certainty for providers of political advertising services preparing, placing, publishing or disseminating political advertisements, creates barriers to the free movement of related services, distorts competition in the internal market, including between offline andbetween online service providers, and requires complex compliance efforts and additional costs for relevant service providers.
Amendment 100 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) Member States should not maintain or introduce, in their national laws, provisions diverging fromin contrast with those laid down in this Regulation, in particular more or less stringent provisions to ensure a different level of transparency in political advertising. Full. The harmonisation of the transparency requirements linked to political advertisement increases legal certainty and reduces the fragmentation of the obligations that service providers meet in the context of political advertising.
Amendment 110 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) The definition of political advertising should include advertising published or disseminated directly or indirectly by or published or disseminated directly or indirectly, upon financial remuneration, for or on behalf of a political actor. Since advertisements by, for or on behalf of a political actor cannot be detached from their activity in their role as political actor, they can be presumed to be liable to influence the political debate, except for messages of purely private or purely commercial nature.
Amendment 112 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) The publication or dissemination by other actors of a message that is liable to influence the outcome of an election or referendum, legislative or regulatory process or voting behaviour should also constitute political advertising. In order to determine whether the publication or dissemination of a message is liable to influence the outcome of an election or referendum, a legislative or regulatory process or voting behaviour, account should be taken of all relevant factors such as the content of the message, the language used to convey the message, the context in which the message is conveyed, the objective of the message and the means by which the message is published or disseminated. Messages on societal or controversial issues may, as the case may be, be liable to influence the outcome of an election or referendum, a legislative or regulatory process or voting behaviour.
Amendment 125 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) It is necessary to define political advertisement as an instance of political advertising. Advertisements include the means by which the advertising message is communicated, including in print, by broadcast media or via an online platforms service.
Amendment 141 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Title 1
Title 1
Proposal for a REGULATIONDIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on the transparency and targeting of political advertising (Text with EEA relevance) (This amendment applies throughout the text. Adopting it will necessitate corresponding changes throughout.)
Amendment 142 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
Recital 30
(30) The transparency requirements should also not apply to the sharing of information through electronic communication services such as electronic message services or telephone calls, as long as no political advertising service is involved.
Amendment 163 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) This situation leads to the fragmentation of the internal market, decreases legal certainty for providers of political advertising services preparing, placing, publishing or disseminating political advertisements, creates barriers to the free movement of related services, distorts competition in the internal market, including between offline andbetween online service providers, and requires complex compliance efforts and additional costs for relevant service providers.
Amendment 165 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) Member States should not maintain or introduce, in their national laws, provisions diverging fromin contrast with those laid down in this Regulation, in particular more or less stringent provisions to ensure a different level of transparency in political advertising. Full. The harmonisation of the transparency requirements linked to political advertisement increases legal certainty and reduces the fragmentation of the obligations that service providers meet in the context of political advertising.
Amendment 171 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 44
Recital 44
(44) Information about the amounts spent on and the value of other benefits received in part or full exchange for political advertising services can usefully contribute to the political debate. It is necessary to ensure that an appropriate overview of political advertising activity can be obtained from the annual reports prepared by relevant political advertising publishers. To support oversight and accountability, such reporting should include information about expenditure on the targeting of political advertising in the relevant period, aggregated to campaign or candidate. To avoid disproportionate burdens, those transparency reporting obligations should not apply to enterprises qualifying under Article 3(1), (2) and (3) of Directive 2013/34/EU.
Amendment 177 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 46
Recital 46
(46) In order to allow specific entities to play their role in democracies, it is appropriate to lay down rules on the transmission of information published with the political advertisement or contained in the transparency notice to interested actors such as vetted researchers, journalists, civil society organisations and accredited election observers, in order to support the performance of their respective roles in the democratic process. Providers of political advertising services should not be required to respond to requests which are manifestly unfounded or excessive. Further, the relevant service provider should be allowed to charge a reasonable fee in case of repetitive and costly requests, taking into account the administrative costs of providing the information.
Amendment 178 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) The definition of political advertising should include advertising published or disseminated directly or indirectly by or published or disseminated directly or indirectly, upon financial remuneration, for or on behalf of a political actor. Since advertisements by, for or on behalf of a political actor cannot be detached from their activity in their role as political actor, they can be presumed to be liable to influence the political debate, except for messages of purely private or purely commercial nature.
Amendment 179 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) The publication or dissemination by other actors of a message that is liable to influence the outcome of an election or referendum, legislative or regulatory process or voting behaviour should also constitute political advertising. In order to determine whether the publication or dissemination of a message is liable to influence the outcome of an election or referendum, a legislative or regulatory process or voting behaviour, account should be taken of all relevant factors such as the content of the message, the language used to convey the message, the context in which the message is conveyed, the objective of the message and the means by which the message is published or disseminated. Messages on societal or controversial issues may, as the case may be, be liable to influence the outcome of an election or referendum, a legislative or regulatory process or voting behaviour.
Amendment 193 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) It is necessary to define political advertisement as an instance of political advertising. Advertisements include the means by which the advertising message is communicated, including in print, by broadcast media or via an online platforms service.
Amendment 207 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
Recital 30
(30) The transparency requirements should also not apply to the sharing of information through electronic communication services such as electronic message services or telephone calls, as long as no political advertising service is involved.
Amendment 214 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 58
Recital 58
(58) For the oversight of those aspects of this Regulation that do not fall within the competence of the supervisory authorities under Regulation (EU) 2016/679, Regulation (EU) 2018/725 Member States shouldmay designate competent authorities. To support the upholding of fundamental rights and freedoms, the rule of law, democratic principles and public confidence in the oversight of political advertising it is necessary that such authorities are structurally independent from external intervention or political pressure and are appropriately empowered effectively monitor and take the measures necessary to ensure compliance with this Regulation, in particular the obligations laid down in Article 7. Member States may designate, in particular, the national regulatory authorities or bodies under Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council13 . _________________ 13 Directive 2010/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 March 2010 on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the provision of audiovisual media services (Audiovisual Media Services Directive (OJ L 95, 15.4.2010, p. 1).
Amendment 232 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 66
Recital 66
Amendment 239 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 44
Recital 44
(44) Information about the amounts spent on and the value of other benefits received in part or full exchange for political advertising services can usefully contribute to the political debate. It is necessary to ensure that an appropriate overview of political advertising activity can be obtained from the annual reports prepared by relevant political advertising publishers. To support oversight and accountability, such reporting should include information about expenditure on the targeting of political advertising in the relevant period, aggregated to campaign or candidate. To avoid disproportionate burdens, those transparency reporting obligations should not apply to enterprises qualifying under Article 3(1), (2) and (3) of Directive 2013/34/EU.
Amendment 248 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2
Article 1 – paragraph 2
2. This Regulation shall apply to political advertising prepared, placed, promoted, published or disseminated online in the Union, or directed to individuals in one or several Member States, irrespective of the place of establishment of the advertising services provider, and irrespective of the means used.
Amendment 256 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 58
Recital 58
(58) For the oversight of those aspects of this Regulation that do not fall within the competence of the supervisory authorities under Regulation (EU) 2016/679, Regulation (EU) 2018/725 Member States shouldmay designate competent authorities. To support the upholding of fundamental rights and freedoms, the rule of law, democratic principles and public confidence in the oversight of political advertising it is necessary that such authorities are structurally independent from external intervention or political pressure and are appropriately empowered effectively monitor and take the measures necessary to ensure compliance with this Regulation, in particular the obligations laid down in Article 7. Member States may designate, in particular, the national regulatory authorities or bodies under Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council13. _________________ 13 Directive 2010/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 March 2010 on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the provision of audiovisual media services (Audiovisual Media Services Directive) (OJ L 95, 15.4.2010, p. 1).
Amendment 261 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – introductory part
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – introductory part
2. ‘political advertising’ means the preparation, placement, promotion, publication or dissemination, by any means, of a message: upon financial remuneration, of a message by, for or on behalf of a political actor, unless it is of a purely private or a purely commercial nature, which is liable to influence the outcome of an election or referendum, a legislative or regulatory process or voting behaviour.
Amendment 264 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 66
Recital 66
Amendment 266 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a
Amendment 268 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b
Amendment 278 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2
Article 1 – paragraph 2
2. This Regulation shall apply to political advertising prepared, placed, promoted, published or disseminated online in the Union, or directed to individuals in one or several Member States, irrespective of the place of establishment of the advertising services provider, and irrespective of the means used.
Amendment 283 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point h
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point h
(h) any natural or legal person representing or acting, according to the provisions of its governing statute, on behalf of any of the persons or organisations in points (a) to (g), promoting the political objectives of any of those.
Amendment 296 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 11
11. ‘political advertising publisher’ means a natural or legal person that, upon financial remuneration, broadcasts, makes available through an interface or otherwise brings to the online public domain political advertising through any medium;
Amendment 302 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a
Amendment 302 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall not maintain or introduce, on grounds related to transparency, provisions or measures diverging fromin contrast with those laid down in this Regulation.
Amendment 303 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 a (new)
Article 3 a (new)
Article 3 a Exemption of micro-undertakings The obligations laid down in this Regulation shall not apply to micro- undertakings qualified under art. 3 (1) of Directive 2013/34/EU.
Amendment 304 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b
Amendment 322 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point h
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point h
(h) any natural or legal person representing or acting, according to the provisions of its governing statute, on behalf of any of the persons or organisations in points (a) to (g), promoting the political objectives of any of those.
Amendment 333 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3
Article 7 – paragraph 3
3. Political advertising publishers shall make reasonable efforts to ensure that the information referred to in paragraph 1 and 2 is complete, and where they find this is not the case, they shall not make available the political advertisement.
Amendment 341 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9
9. ‘electoral period’ means the period preceding or during or immediately after an election or referendum in a Member State and during which the campaign activities are subject to specific rules;
Amendment 344 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 11
11. ‘political advertising publisher’ means a natural or legal person that, upon financial remuneration, broadcasts, makes available through an interface or otherwise brings to the online public domain political advertising through any medium;
Amendment 348 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 8
Article 7 – paragraph 8
Amendment 353 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3
Article 3
Amendment 353 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2
Article 8 – paragraph 2
2. Paragraph 1 shall not apply to undertakings qualifying as micro, small and medium-sized enterprises under Article 3(3) of Directive 2013/34/EU.
Amendment 354 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall not maintain or introduce, on grounds related to transparency, provisions or measures diverging fromin contrast with those laid down in this Regulation.
Amendment 358 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 a (new)
Article 3 a (new)
Article 3 a Exemption of micro-undertakings The obligations laid down in this Regulation shall not apply to micro- undertakings qualified under art. 3 (1) of Directive 2013/34/EU.
Amendment 358 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2
Article 9 – paragraph 2
2. Information on how to notify political advertisements as referred to in paragraph 1 shall be user friendly and easy to access, including for people with disabilities, even from the transparency notice.
Amendment 378 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 11 – paragraph 2 – point b
Amendment 388 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 7 a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Any information provided under this Article shall be used only in respect of the matter for which it was requested, meaning the purpose stated in the request transmitted by the entity under paragraph 2 to the provider of political advertising services.
Amendment 401 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 6
Article 12 – paragraph 6
6. Information to be provided in accordance with this provision shall be presented in a format which is easily accessible and, where technically feasible, machine readable , clearly visible and user- friendly, including for people with disabilities, even through the use of plain language.
Amendment 405 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 8
Article 12 – paragraph 8
Amendment 414 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2
Article 15 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall designate competent authorities to monitor the compliance of providers of intermediary services within the meaning of Regulation (EU) 2021/xxx [DSA] with the obligations laid down in Articles 5 to 11 and 14 of this Regulation, where applicable. The competent authorities designated under Regulation (EU) 2021/xxx [Digital Services Act] may also be one of the competent authorities designated to monitor the compliance of online intermediaries with the obligations laid down in Articles 5 to 11 and 14 of this Regulation. The Digital Services Coordinator referred to in Article 38 of Regulation (EU) 2021/xxx in each Member State shall be responsible for ensuring coordination at national level in respect of providers of intermediary services as defined by Regulation (EU) 2021/xxx [Digital Services Act]. Article 45(1) to (4) and Article 46(1) of Regulation (EU) 2021/xxx [Digital Services Act] shall be applicable for matters related to the application of this Regulation as regards providers of intermediary services.
Amendment 415 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 3
Article 15 – paragraph 3
3. Each Member State shallmay designate one or morether competent authorities to be responsible for the application and enforcement of the aspects of this Regulation not referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2. Each competent authority designated under this paragraph shall structurally enjoy full independence both from the sector and from any external intervention or political pressure. It shall in full independence effectively monitor and take the measures necessary and proportionate to ensure compliance with this Regulation.
Amendment 416 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 4
Article 15 – paragraph 4
4. Competent authorities referred to in paragraph 3, where exercising their supervisory tasks in relation to this Regulation, shall have the power to request to access data, documents or any necessary information from providers of political advertising services for the performance of their supervisory tasks.
Amendment 417 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 5 – introductory part
Article 15 – paragraph 5 – introductory part
5. Competent authorities referred to in paragraph 3, where exercising their enforcement powers in relation to this Regulation, shall have the power to:
Amendment 422 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 8 – introductory part
Article 15 – paragraph 8 – introductory part
8. Where a provider of political advertising services is providing services in more than one Member State, or has its main establishment or a representative in a Member State but provides its main activities in another Member State, the competenteach national authority of the Member State of the main establishment or other establishmwhere the service is provided is considered to be competent or ofn the representative, and the competent asupervisory and enforcement measures. Authorities of those otherdifferent Member States shall cooperate with and assist each other aswhere necessary. Unless already regulated by Union law, that cooperation shall entail, at least, the following:a competent authority may request, via the contact point referred to in paragraph 7, in a substantiated, justified and proportionate manner, another competent authority, where it is better placed, to take the supervisory or enforcement measures referred to in paragraphs 4 and 5. The relevant competent authority so requested shall, via the contact points referred to in paragraph 7 and within a timeframe proportionate to the urgency of the request provide a response or informing that it does not consider that the conditions for requesting assistance under this Regulation have been met. Any information exchanged in the context of assistance requested and provided under this Article shall be used only in respect of the matter for which it was requested.
Amendment 423 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 8 – point a
Article 15 – paragraph 8 – point a
Amendment 424 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 8 – point b
Article 15 – paragraph 8 – point b
Amendment 425 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 8 – point c
Article 15 – paragraph 8 – point c
Amendment 428 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 9
Article 15 – paragraph 9
9. Contact points shall meetexchange information periodically at Union level in the framework of the European Cooperation Network on Elections to facilitate the swift and secured exchange of information on issues connected to the exercise of their supervisory and enforcements tasks pursuant to this Regulation.
Amendment 431 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 1
1. In relation to Articles 5 to 11, 13 and 14 Member States shall lay down rules on sanctions including administrative fines and financial penalties applicable to providers of political advertising services under their jurisdiction and the applicable legislation concerning data protection, where relevant, for infringements of the present Regulation, which shall in each individual case be effective, proportionate and dissuasive.
Amendment 437 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 6
Article 16 – paragraph 6
Amendment 439 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 7
Article 16 – paragraph 7
Amendment 441 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3
Article 7 – paragraph 3
3. Political advertising publishers shall make reasonable efforts to ensure that the information referred to in paragraph 1 and 2 is complete, and where they find this is not the case, they shall not make available the political advertisement.
Amendment 468 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 8
Article 7 – paragraph 8
Amendment 482 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2
Article 8 – paragraph 2
2. Paragraph 1 shall not apply to undertakings that qualifying under as micro, small or medium-sized enterprises within the meaning of Article 3(3) of Directive 2013/34/EU.
Amendment 494 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2
Article 9 – paragraph 2
2. Information on how to notify political advertisements as referred to in paragraph 1 shall be user friendly and easy to access, including for people with disabilities, even from the transparency notice.
Amendment 547 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 7 a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Any information provided pursuant to this article may only be used in the context for which it was requested i.e. for the purpose specified in the request made to the provider of political advertising services by the entity referred to in paragraph 2.
Amendment 564 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 6
Article 12 – paragraph 6
6. Information to be provided in accordance with this provision shall be presented in a format which is easily accessible and, where technically feasible, machine readable , clearly visible and user- friendly, including for people with disabilities, even through the use of plain language.
Amendment 584 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2
Article 15 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall designate competent authorities to monitor the compliance of providers of intermediary services within the meaning of Regulation (EU) 2021/xxx [DSA] with the obligations laid down in Articles 5 to 11 and 14 of this Regulation, where applicable. The competent authorities designated under Regulation (EU) 2021/xxx [Digital Services Act] may also be one of the competent authorities designated to monitor the compliance of online intermediaries with the obligations laid down in Articles 5 to 11 and 14 of this Regulation. The Digital Services Coordinator referred to in Article 38 of Regulation (EU) 2021/xxx in each Member State shall be responsible for ensuring coordination at national level in respect of providers of intermediary services as defined by Regulation (EU) 2021/xxx [Digital Services Act]. Article 45(1) to (4) and Article 46(1) of Regulation (EU) 2021/xxx [Digital Services Act] shall be applicable for matters related to the application of this Regulation as regards providers of intermediary services.
Amendment 592 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 3
Article 15 – paragraph 3
3. Each Member State shallmay designate one or more competentther authorities to be responsible for the application and enforcement of the aspects of this Regulation not referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2. Each competent authority designated under this paragraph shall structurally enjoy full independence both from the sector and from any external intervention or political pressure. It shall in full independence effectively monitor and take the measures necessary and proportionate to ensure compliance with this Regulation.
Amendment 598 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 4
Article 15 – paragraph 4
4. Competent authorities referred to in paragraph 3, where exercising their supervisory tasks in relation to this Regulation, shall have the power to request to access data, documents or any necessary information from providers of political advertising services for the performance of their supervisory tasks.
Amendment 600 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 5 – introductory part
Article 15 – paragraph 5 – introductory part
5. Competent authorities referred to in paragraph 3, where exercising their enforcement powers in relation to this Regulation, shall have the power to:
Amendment 617 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 8 – introductory part
Article 15 – paragraph 8 – introductory part
8. Where a provider of political advertising services is providing services in more than one Member State, or has its main establishment or a representative in a Member State but provides its main activities in another Member State, theeach competent authority of the Member State of the main establishment or other establishment or of the represenwhere the services are being provided shall be considered competent for applying supervisory or enforcement measures. The authorities of the different Member States shall cooperate and provide each other with support if necessary. Unless already provided for under EU law, a competent authority may request, via the contact point referred to in paragraph 7, in a substantive, and ated, justified and proportionate manner, that another competent authorities of those other Member States shall cooperate with and assist each other as necessary. Unless already regulated by Union law,y, where it is better placed, take the supervisory or enforcement measures referred to in paragraphs 4 and 5; The relevant competent authority so requested shall, via the contact points referred to in paragraph 7 and within a time frame proportionate to the urgency of the request, provide a response or inform that it does not consider that the conditions for requesting assistance under this Regulation have been met. Any information exchanged in thate cooperation shall entail, at least, the following: ntext of the request for assistance and provided under this article shall only be used in the context of the matter for which it was requested.
Amendment 618 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 8 – point a
Article 15 – paragraph 8 – point a
Amendment 622 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 8 – point b
Article 15 – paragraph 8 – point b
Amendment 625 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 8 – point c
Article 15 – paragraph 8 – point c
Amendment 631 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 9
Article 15 – paragraph 9
9. Contact points shall meetexchange information periodically at Union level in the framework of the European Cooperation Network on Elections to facilitate the swift and secured exchange of information on issues connected to the exercise of their supervisory and enforcements tasks pursuant to this Regulation.
Amendment 637 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 1
1. In relation to Articles 5 to 11, 13 and 14 Member States shall lay down rules on sanctions including administrative fines and financial penalties applicable to providers of political advertising services under their jurisdiction and under the applicable data protection legislation, where appropriate, for infringements of the present Regulation, which shall in each individual case be effective, proportionate and dissuasive.
Amendment 665 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 a (new)
Article 19 a (new)
Amendment 666 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 2
Article 20 – paragraph 2
Amendment 667 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 3
Article 20 – paragraph 3
Amendment 34 #
2021/0293(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) As outlined in the Commission’s Communication updating the 202032 new industrial strategy32, it is necessary for the European Union to identify systems of critical technologies and strategic sectors, to address strategic weaknesses and high- risk dependencies which could lead to supply shortages or cybersecurity risks, to promote in this sense the development of sovereign European digital infrastructures that guarantee the protection of rights and the security of European users' data, and to foster digital transition. This underlines the importance for Member States to join forces and to support industry’s efforts to address these dependencies and to develop strategic capacity needs. This , which also responds to the analysis in the 2021 Strategic Foresight Report33. In the framework of the Recovery and Resilience Facility and the preparation of national recovery and resilience plans, the Commission encouraged Member States to coordinate their efforts in favour of Multi-Country Projects in the digital area. This experience highlighted the need for the Commission to support coordination efforts by Member States, and for the Union to dispose of implementation mechanisms that facilitate joint investments, in order for Multi-Country Projects to materialise. In conjunction with other Commission’s initiatives such as the Observatory for Critical Technologies34, a governance structure implementing the Digital Compass Communication should be established and should help to identify the Union’s current and possible future digital strategic dependencies and contribute to strengthening its digital sovereignty. _________________ 32 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions updating the 2020 new industrial strategy: Building a stronger Single Market for Europe’s recovery”, 5.5.2021 COM(2021) 350 final. 33 COM(2021) 750 final of 8.9.2021 – “"2021 Strategic Foresight Report - The EU’s capacity and freedom to act”". 34 Action Plan on synergies between civil, defence and space industries, 22.02.2021, COM(2021) 70 final, Action 4.
Amendment 76 #
2021/0293(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Recital 26
Recital 26
(26) The Commission and one or more Member States may undertake joint commitments regarding coordinated actions they would like to undertake in order to achieve the targets, establish Multi-Country Projects, and agree on any other measures and actions at Union and national level with the objective to progress towards achieving the targets in alignment with the projected trajectories. The Commission should ensure that competition law as well as, for example, State aid rules take into account the need to achieve the general objectives set out in Article 2 of this decision, inter alia the development of an independent digital industry.
Amendment 109 #
2021/0293(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) ensure digital sovereignty notably by an independent, secure and accessible digital infrastructure capable to stock and process vast volumes of data, in the Union, that enables other technological developments, supporting the competitiveness of the Union's industry;
Amendment 112 #
2021/0293(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) work towards the development of an independent European digital industry that guarantees the protection of the rights and security of European users' data, as well as the protection of the strategic interests of Member States when using these services;
Amendment 152 #
2021/0293(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – introductory part
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – introductory part
(2) secure, performant and sustainable European digital infrastructures:;
Amendment 164 #
2021/0293(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 2 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 2 a (new)
(2a) the European Commission and the Member States encourage the promotion of an innovative and independent European industry in order to protect the strategic interests of the Member States, the rights of European users and the security of their data;
Amendment 172 #
2021/0293(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – introductory part
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – introductory part
(4) digitalisation of public services, without this meaning that citizens of the Member States who so wish cannot benefit from these services in a traditional, non-digitised manner:
Amendment 217 #
2021/0293(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) addressing strategic vulnerabilities and dependencies of the Union along the digital supply chains, in particular by establishing independent European digital companies governed by EU rules and regulations;
Amendment 218 #
2021/0293(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point d
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point d
(d) widening the diffusion and best use of digital solutions in areas of public interest and the private sector, while taking into account existing disparities in digital coverage and respecting the choice of citizens in Member States not to use digital solutions;
Amendment 226 #
2021/0293(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 12 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 5 a (new)
(5a) If at least three Member States request the Commission to adjust the applicable rules in order to promote the objectives pursued and foster the success of a multinational project, such as the promotion of an independent European digital industry, the Commission must respond to this request within less than three months stating its grounds. In the event that the Commission responds favourably, it must submit a legislative initiative within less than six months.
Amendment 115 #
2021/0171(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) In recent years, credit offered to consumers has evolved and diversified considerably. New credit products have appeared, in particular in the online environment, and their use continues to develop. This has raised legal uncertainty with regard to the application of the Directive 2008/48/EC to such new products. Practices such as the use of minicredits and long-term leases have experienced unprecedented growth in recent years, often leading to abuses and unfair commercial practices where consumers have been left in a precarious financial situation, or even heavily in debt, which they could have avoided if such practices were properly regulated and if contractual information were provided in a transparent, comprehensive and timely manner.
Amendment 137 #
2021/0171(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) Advertising tends to focus on one or several products in particular, while consumers should be able to make their decisions in full knowledge of the range of credit products on offer. In that respect, general information plays an important role in educating the consumer in relation to the broad range of products and services available and the key features thereof, such as the total cost of the credit and the total amount payable by the consumer. Consumers should therefore be able at all times to access general information on credit products available. This should be without prejudice to the obligation to provide consumers with personalised pre- contractual information.
Amendment 193 #
2021/0171(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 49 a (new)
Recital 49 a (new)
(49 a) Creditors, providers of crowdfunding credit services and insurers should not take into account the medical history of people who have been affected by cancer. Currently, five Member States have national provisions to help specific groups of people affected by cancer, under certain circumstances, to access financial services, including insurance, without reference to the risk associated with cancer. Such provisions should be implemented in all Member States. To this end, Member States should define, with the support of medical, scientific and statistical experts, the conditions determining the right to access financial services, including insurance, without reference to the risk associated with cancer. Member States should also undertake to adopt measures to inform consumers of the existence of this right. The imposition of restrictive conditions in policies, which are not based on medical, scientific and statistical data, should be avoided whenever pre-existing conditions are disclosed.
Amendment 204 #
2021/0171(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 62
Recital 62
(62) The consumer should have the right to discharge his or her obligations before the date agreed in the credit agreement. As provided by the Court of JusticeThe consumer should have the right to a reduction in the total cost of the credit in the event of early repayment of the credit, which includes all the costs imposed by the creditor ofn the EU Lexitor ruling,34 the right of the consumer to a reduction in the total cost of the credit in the event of early repayment of the credit includes all the costs imposconsumer with the exclusion of up-front costs - in so far as they are preliminary and preparatory activities for the granting of the loan, and are fully exhausted at the time of granting the loan - that have been adequately identified and declared and the cost of third parties (e.g fee of credit intermediaries, insurance charges and taxes). As regards the method of reimbursement, the amortised cost criterion (interest curve) for the calculation of the proportional reduction of costs should apply unless it is otherwise regulated oin the consumertract taken in account. In the case of early repayment the creditor should be entitled to a fair and objectively justified compensation for the costs directly linked to the early repayment, taking into account also any savings thereby made by the creditor. However, in order to determine the method of calculating the compensation, it is important to respect several principles. The calculation of the compensation due to the creditor should be transparent and comprehensible to consumers already at the pre-contractual stage and in any case during the performance of the credit agreement. In addition, the calculation method should be easy for creditors to apply, and supervisory control of the compensation by the competent authorities should be facilitated. Therefore, and due to the fact that consumer credit is, given its duration and volume, not financed by long- term funding mechanisms, the ceiling for the compensation should be fixed in terms of a flat-rate amount. This approach reflects the specific nature of consumer credits and should not prejudice the approach in respect of other products which are financed by long-term funding mechanisms, such as fixed-rate mortgage loans. _________________ 34 Judgment of the Court of Justice of 11 September 2019, Lexitor, C-383/18, ECLI:EU:C:2019:702.
Amendment 278 #
2021/0171(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)
(3a) 'minicrédit' means any instant loan of small sums up to EUR 1 000 contracted for a short term equivalent to less than three months and managed as an advance against salary repaid when the borrower finally receives his or her income;
Amendment 280 #
2021/0171(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 b (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 b (new)
(3a) 'long-term lease' means any operation enabling the transfer of the use of an asset from a lessor to a lessee in return for a lease payment without an option to purchase at the end of the lease term;
Amendment 384 #
2021/0171(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 3 – point d
Article 10 – paragraph 3 – point d
Amendment 385 #
2021/0171(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 3 – point e
Article 10 – paragraph 3 – point e
Amendment 445 #
2021/0171(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1
Article 10 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1
Any additional information which the creditor may provide to the consumer shall be given in a separate document which may be annexed to the Standard European Consumer Credit Information form or the Standard European Consumer Credit Overview form.
Amendment 460 #
2021/0171(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 7
Article 10 – paragraph 7
7. If the agreement has been concluded at the consumer's request using a means of distance communication which does not enable the information to be provided in accordance with this article, the creditor and, where applicable, the credit intermediary or the provider of crowdfunding credit services shall provide the consumer with the Standard European Consumer Credit Information form and the Standard European Consumer Credit Overview form immediately after the conclusion of the credit agreement or of the agreement for the provision of crowdfunding credit services.
Amendment 464 #
2021/0171(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 8
Article 10 – paragraph 8
8. Upon request from the consumer, the creditor and, where applicable, the credit intermediary or the provider of crowdfunding credit services shall, in addition to the Standard European Consumer Credit Information form and the Standard European Consumer Credit Overview form, provide the consumer free of charge with a copy of the draft credit agreement, or of the draft agreement for the provision of crowdfunding credit services, provided that the creditor at the time of the request is willing to proceed to the conclusion of the credit agreement or of the agreement for the provision of crowdfunding credit services with the consumer.
Amendment 517 #
2021/0171(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 4
Article 14 – paragraph 4
4. Member States may allow creditors or providers of crowdfunding credit services to require the consumer to hold a relevant insurance policy related to the credit agreement or crowdfunding credit services, taking into account proportionality considerations. In such cases, Member States shall ensure that the creditor or the provider of crowdfunding credit services is required to accept the insurance policy from a supplier different to his or her preferred supplier where such insurance policy has a level of guarantee equivalent to the one the creditor or the provider of crowdfunding credit services has proposed, without modifying the condition of the credit offering to the consumer. Under those circumstances, the insurance policy shall avoid imposing restrictive conditions, whenever specific requirements related to pre-existing medical conditions are fulfilled (such as the “right to be forgotten” criteria for cancer survivors). Member States shall guarantee that people cured of specific pathologies have equal access to insurance policies. For this purpose, Member States should define, with the support of medical, scientific and statistical experts, the conditions that determine the right to access financial services, including insurance, without reference to cancer, committing themselves to review these conditions periodically. Member States should also take measures to inform consumers of the existence of this right.
Amendment 541 #
2021/0171(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 1
Article 17 – paragraph 1
Member States shall prohibit any sale of credit to consumers, without their prior request and explicit agreement. This provision shall not apply to credit agreements concluded at point of sale to finance the purchase of a good or a service
Amendment 552 #
2021/0171(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 1
Article 18 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall require that, before concluding a credit agreement, or an agreement for the provision of crowdfunding credit services, the creditor or, where applicable, the provider of crowdfunding credit services makes a thorough assessment of the consumer’s creditworthiness. That assessment shall be done in the interest of the consumer, taking into account the nature and the risks of the credit, to prevent irresponsible lending practices and over-indebtedness, and shall take appropriate account of factors relevant to verifying the prospect of the consumer to meet his or her obligations under the credit agreement or the agreement for the provision of crowdfunding credit services. The obligation to assess the creditworthiness is considered fulfilled if the creditor has met the requirements provided by Directive 2013/36/EU, Regulation n. 575/2013 EU and EBA Guidelines ABE/GL/2020/06.
Amendment 570 #
2021/0171(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Given that STIF credit agreements (as defined in Article 3) are a relatively new and rapidly expanding market, Member States shall impose additional reporting requirements on STIF credit providers licensed in their territory including on usage levels, default rates and late fee revenues accrued. Where default rates and late fees are found to be excessively high, Member States shall take additional steps to ensure the full compliance of the STIF credit provider with the conduct rules set out in Article 38 and require remedial measures as appropriate.
Amendment 651 #
2021/0171(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 21 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 21 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Member States shall identify, among the elements listed in paragraph 1, those which, if absent or uncertain, shall lead to the nullity of the contract, those which can be replaced by law and those which extend the period for exercising the right of withdrawal defined by article 26.
Amendment 688 #
2021/0171(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 29 – paragraph 1
Article 29 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that the consumer is at any time entitled to early repayment. In such cases, the consumer shall be entitled to a reduction in the total cost of the credit, consisting of the interest and the costs for the remaining duration of the contract. When calculating that reduction, all the costs imposed on the consumer by the creditor shall be taken into consideration, except for up-front costs, which are fully exhausted at the time of granting of the loan and corresponded to services effectively provided to the consumer or to costs effectively incurred by creditor as well as third party costs. The up-front costs should be adequately identified and declared in the credit contract. In any case, costs that remunerate credit intermediaries activities or costs that remunerate creditor’s services as well as taxes are excluded from the calculation of the reduction of the total cost of credit. As regards the method of reimbursement the amortised cost criterion (interest curve) for the calculation of the proportional reduction of costs should be used unless otherwise regulated in the contract.
Amendment 711 #
2021/0171(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 31 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 31 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. 1. Member States shall introducemay set caps on one or more of the following:
Amendment 721 #
2021/0171(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 31 – paragraph 2
Article 31 – paragraph 2
2. Member States may introduce additional caps for revolving credit facilitiesThe provision of Paragraph 1 is considered fulfilled whereas there are national legislations already in force setting up caps on one of the options listed in letters a,b, c.
Amendment 796 #
2021/0171(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 46 – paragraph 2
Article 46 – paragraph 2
2. The Commission shall also monitor the effect of the existence of the regulatory choices referred to in Article 42 on the internal market and consumers. Given that STIF credit products (as defined in Article 3) are a relatively new and rapidly expanding market, it is appropriate that the Commission gives particular consideration in its review to the further development of this market and the evidence base regarding consumer harm, and to whether the treatment of such products under this Directive needs to be revised.
Amendment 203 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24 a (new)
Recital 24 a (new)
(24 a) The indication of origin is a necessary supplement to the basic traceability requirements laid down in this Regulation concerning the name and address of the manufacturer. Furthermore, the indication of the country of origin helps to identify the actual place of manufacture in all those cases where the manufacturer cannot be contacted, in particular where its given address is different from the actual place of manufacture, where the name and address of the manufacturer is missing altogether or where the address was on the packaging that has been lost. Suchinformation can facilitate the task of market surveillance authorities in tracing the product back to the actual place of manufacture and enable contacts with the authorities of the countries of origin in the framework of bilateral or multilateral cooperation on consumer product safety for appropriate follow-up actions.
Amendment 294 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
(a a) printed books and periodical different from children's books and printed periodicals;
Amendment 316 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3
3. ‘dangerous product’ means any product which does not conform to the definition of ‘safe product’, by virtue of the manner it is created, or the components with which it is manufactured, or use to which it is intended, may potentially endanger the health and/or safety of consumers;
Amendment 336 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Amendment 337 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Manufacturers and a natural or legal person, other than the manufacturer, that substantially modifies the product pursuant to article 12 thereof, shall place or make available on the Union market only products as defined in accordance with this Regulation.
Amendment 390 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 a (new)
Article 7 a (new)
Amendment 398 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Manufacturers shall make publicly available to consumers, communication channels such as telephone number, electronic address or dedicated section of their website, allowing the consumers to file complaints and to inform them of any accident or safety issue they have experienced with the product. These communication channels and the reporting methods shall be provided in accessible formats for persons with disabilities.
Amendment 429 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 6
Article 8 – paragraph 6
6. Manufacturers shall ensure that their products bear a type, batch or serial number or other element allowing the identification of the product which is easily visible and legible for consumers, or, where the size or nature of the product does not allow it, that the required information is provided on the packaging or in a document accompanying the product. This information shall be provided in accessible formats for persons with disabilities.
Amendment 432 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 7
Article 8 – paragraph 7
7. Manufacturers shall indicate their name, registered trade name or registered trade mark and the postal and electronic address at which they can be contacted on the product or, where that is not possible, on its packaging or in a document accompanying the product. The address shall indicate a single contact point at which the manufacturer can be contacted. This information shall be provided in accessible formats for persons with disabilities.
Amendment 437 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 8
Article 8 – paragraph 8
8. Manufacturers shall ensure that their product is accompanied by instructions and safety information in a language which can be easily understood by consumers, as determined by the Member State in which the product is made available. Alternatively, the instructions may be provided in a digital format. However, upon consumer’s request at the time of the purchase of the product, the instructions shall be provided in paper format free of charge. This requirement shall not apply where the product can be used safely and as intended by the manufacturer without such instructions and safety information.
Amendment 459 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) provide asupport market surveillance authority, upon its reasoned request, withand ensure that all information and documentation necessary is available for inspection by the market surveillance authority to demonstrate the safety of the product in an official language which can be understood by that authority;
Amendment 468 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Amendment 474 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3
Article 10 – paragraph 3
3. ITaking into account the practices and characteristics of each product sector, importers shall indicate their name, registered trade name or registered trade mark, the postal and electronic address at which they can be contacted on the product or, where that is not possible, on its packaging or in a document accompanying the product. They shall ensure that any additional label does not obscure any information on the label provided by the manufacturer. This information shall be provided in accessible formats for persons with disabilities.
Amendment 523 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2
Article 15 – paragraph 2
2. In addition to the tasks referred to in Article 4(3) of Regulation (EU) 2019/1020, the economic operator referred to in Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 shall periodically carry out sample testing ofaking into account the practice and characteristics of each product sector as well as the evidence, based on the same characteristics and functions, of the safety of the product, the economic operator referred to in Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 shall be able to provide testing documentation against harmonized standards upon request for randomly chosen products made available on the market. When the products made available on the market have been subject to a Commission decision adopted under Article 26(1) of this Regulation, the economic operator referred to in Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 shall carry out, at least once a year, for the entire duration of the decision, representative sample testing of products made available on the market chosen under the control of a judicial officer or any qualified person designated by the Member State where the economic operator is situated.
Amendment 545 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Where products are made available on the market online or through other means of distance sales by the relevant economic operators, the relevant offer of the product shall clearly and visibly indicate at least the following information to achieve parity with offline sales, such as:
Amendment 548 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) information that allow to identify the product, includingfor example its type and, when available, batch or serial number and any other product identifier;
Amendment 550 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) any warning or safety information that is to be affixed on the product or to accompany itpackaging in accordance with this Regulation or the applicable Union harmonisation legislation in a language which can be easily understood by consumers. and enable additional information to be accessible through manufacturer’s e-label. This information shall be provided in accessible formats for persons with disabilities
Amendment 574 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 20 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Online marketplaces should comply with the obligations set out in Article 10 for products they facilitate the sale of when there is no manufacturer established in the Union and no importer.
Amendment 579 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 20 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Online marketplaces shall take the necessary measures to receive and process the orders issued in accordance with this paragraph. They shall act upon receipt of the order issued without undue delay, and in any event within two working days in the Member State where the online marketplace operates, from receipt of the order. They shall inform the issuing market surveillance authority of the effect given to the order by using the contacts of the market surveillance authority published in the Safety Gatereplying via email to the notified order.
Amendment 585 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 3
Article 20 – paragraph 3
3. Online marketplaces shall take into account regular information on dangerous products notified by the market surveillance authorities in line with Article 24, received via the Safety Gate portal, for the purpose of applying their voluntary measures aimed at detecting, identifying, removing or disabling access to the illegal content referring to dangerous products offered on their marketplace, where applicable. They shall informprovide periodic agreed reports to the authority that made the notification to the Safety Gate of any action taken by using the contacts of the market surveillance authority published in the Safety Gate.
Amendment 592 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 4
Article 20 – paragraph 4
4. Online marketplaces shall give an appropriate answer without undue delay, and in any event within five working days, in the Member State where the online marketplace operates, to notices related to product safety issues and dangerous products received in accordance with [Article 14] of Regulation (EU) […/…] on a Single Market for Digital Services (Digital Service Act) and amending Directive 2000/31/EC.
Amendment 698 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 1
Article 29 – paragraph 1
1. In the framework of the activities referred to in Article 28(3), point (b), market surveillance authorities may agree with other relevant authorities orand with organisations representing economic operators orand consumers to carry out activities aimed at ensuring safety and protection of consumers health with respect to specific categories of products placed or made available on the market, in particular categories of products that are often found to present a serious risk.
Amendment 710 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 2
Article 31 – paragraph 2
2. Member States and the Commission shall take the necessary steps to ensure that their officials and agents are required not to disclose information, different from the ones pointed out in article 31(1), obtained for the purposes of this Regulation which, by its nature, is covered by professional secrecy in duly justified cases, except for information relating to the safety properties of products pursuant to article 31(1) which must be made public in order to protect consumers.
Amendment 720 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 2
Article 32 – paragraph 2
2. Consumers shall have the possibility to inform the Commission of products which may presenting a risk to consumer health and safety through a separate section of the Safety Gate portal. The Commission shall take in due consideration the information received and ensure follow up, where appropriate.
Amendment 14 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) A more harmonised approach to digital identification should reduce the risks and costs of the current fragmentation due to the use of divergent national solutions and will strengthen the Single Market by allowing citizens, other residents as defined by national law and businesses to identify online in a convenient and uniform way across the Union. Everyone should be able to securely access public and private services relying on an improved ecosystem for trust services and on verified proofs of identity and attestations of attributes, such as a university degree legally recognised and accepted everywhere in the Union. Users should, however, not be obliged to use a digital identity wallet to access public or private services. It should be possible to use digital key generator applications or ID card readers, for example. The framework for a European Digital Identity aims to achieve a shift from the reliance on national digital identity solutions only, to the provision of electronic attestations of attributes valid at European level. Providers of electronic attestations of attributes should benefit from a clear and uniform set of rules and public administrations should be able to rely on electronic documents in a given format.
Amendment 18 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 a (new)
Recital 5 a (new)
(5a) It should be made clear that recognition of a qualified electronic attestation of attributes in a given Member State is limited to the confirmation of the facts. Recognition of a qualified electronic attestation of attributes in any other Member State shall be limited to confirming the factual circumstances relating to the attribute concerned, and shall not have legal effect there unless the attested attributes are in accordance with its national law.
Amendment 23 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) It is necessary to set out the harmonised conditions for the establishment of a framework for European Digital Identity Wallets to be issued by Member States, which should empower all Union citizens and other residents as defined by national law to share securely data related to their identity in a user friendly and convenient way under the sole control of the user. Technologies used to achieve those objectives should be developed aiming towards the highest level of security, user convenience and wide usability. Member States should ensure equal access to digital identification to all their nationals and legal residents.
Amendment 27 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) All European Digital Identity Wallets should allow users to electronically identify and authenticate online and offline across borders for accessing a wide range of public and private services. Without prejudice to Member States’ prerogatives as regards the identification of their nationals and residents, Wallets can also serve the institutional needs of public administrations, international organisations and the Union’s institutions, bodies, offices and agencies. Offline use would be important in many sectors, including in the health sector where services are often provided through face-to-face interaction and ePrescriptions should be able to rely on QR-codes or similar technologies to verify authenticity. Relying on the level of assurance “high”, the European Digital Identity Wallets should benefit from the potential offered by tamper-proof solutions such as secure elements, to comply with the security requirements under this Regulation. The European Digital Identity Wallets should also allow users to create and use qualified electronic signatures and seals which are accepted across the EU. To achieve simplification and cost reduction benefits to persons and businesses across the EU, including by enabling powers of representation and e- mandates, Member States should issue European Digital Identity Wallets relying on common standards to ensure seamless interoperability and a high level of security. Only Member States’ competent authorities can provide a high degree of confidence in establishing the identity of a person and therefore provide assurance that the person claiming or asserting a particular identity is in fact the person he or she claims to be. It is therefore necessary that the European Digital Identity Wallets rely on the legal identity of citizens, other residents or legal entities. Trust in the European Digital Identity Wallets would be enhanced by the fact that issuing parties are required to implement appropriate technical and organisational measures to ensure a level of security commensurate to the risks raised for the rights and freedoms of the natural persons, in line with Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
Amendment 32 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) Only Member States’ competent authorities may establish the identity of a person with a high degree of assurance and, therefore, guarantee that the person claiming or asserting a particular identity is in fact the person he or she claims to be. The process of notification of electronic identification schemes should be simplified and accelerated to promote the access to convenient, trusted, secure and innovative authentication and identification solutions and, where relevant, to encourage private identity providers to offer electronic identification schemes to Member State’s authorities for notification asto issue national electronic identity card schemes under Regulation 910/2014.
Amendment 33 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14 a (new)
Recital 14 a (new)
(14a) Penalties for negligence in protecting personal data by private identity providers or on consumer platforms and sites should be dissuasive so as to foster access to convenient, reliable, secure and innovative authentication and identification solutions.
Amendment 61 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) A more harmonised approach to digital identification should reduce the risks and costs of the current fragmentation due to the use of divergent national solutions and will strengthen the Single Market by allowing citizens, other residents as defined by national law and businesses to identify online in a convenient and uniform way across the Union. However, particular attention should be paid to specific national rules, in so far as some Member States ensure a high level of protection of personal data. Everyone should be able to securely access public and private services relying on an improved ecosystem for trust services and on verified proofs of identity and attestations of attributes, such as a university degree legally recognised and accepted everywhere in the Union. The framework for a European Digital Identity aims to achieve a shift from the reliance on national digital identity solutions only, to the provision of electronic attestations of attributes valid at European level. Providers of electronic attestations of attributes should benefit from a clear and uniform set of rules and public administrations should be able to rely on electronic documents in a given format.
Amendment 64 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point i
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point i
EU 910/2014
Article 3
Article 3
Amendment 64 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) To support the competitiveness of European businesses, online service providers should be able to rely on digital identity solutions recognised across the Union, irrespective of the Member State in which they have been issued, thus benefiting from a harmonised European approach to trust, security and interoperability. Particular attention shall be paid to the storage of data, which should, in so far as possible, take place on European territory. Users and service providers alike should be able to benefit from the same legal value provided to electronic attestations of attributes across the Union.
Amendment 65 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) Regulation (EU) No 2016/6791919 applies to the processing of personal data in the implementation of this Regulation. Therefore, this Regulation should lay down specific safeguards to prevent providers of electronic identification means and electronic attestation of attributes from combining personal data from other services with the personal data relating to the services falling within the scope of this Regulation. Sensitive health data should be excluded from the digital portfolio. _________________ 19 Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation), (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1).
Amendment 67 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) It is necessary to set out the harmonised conditions for the establishment of a framework for European Digital Identity Wallets to be issued by Member States, which should empower all Union citizens and other residents as defined by national law to share securely data related to their identity in a user friendly and convenient way under the sole control of the user. Technologies used to achieve those objectives should be developed aiming towards the highest level of security, user convenience and wide usability. Member States should ensure equal access to digital identification to all their nationals and legal residents. The entire creation and production chain and maintenance of the technologies used must be under the exclusive control of European companies.
Amendment 69 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) In order to ensure compliance within Union law or national law compliant with Union law, service providers should communicate their intent to rely on the European Digital Identity Wallets to Member States. That will allow Member States to protect users from fraud and prevent the unlawful use of identity data and electronic attestations of attributes as well as to ensure that the processing of sensitive data, like health data, can be verified by relying parties in accordance with Union law or national law. Consideration should be given to aligning these digital portfolios with the minimum standards of the most protective Member States in terms of personal data.
Amendment 70 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) In order to ensure compliance within Union law or national law compliant with Union law, service providers should communicate their intent to rely on the European Digital Identity Wallets to Member States. That will allow Member States to protect users from fraud and prevent the unlawful use of identity data and electronic attestations of attributes as well as to ensure that the processing of sensitive data, like health data, can be verified by relying parties in accordance with Union law or national law.
Amendment 72 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 7
EU 910/2014
Article 6a – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 6a – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) under a mandate from a Member State by a European public organisation or company, based in Europe and which employs staff and pays a significant amount in taxes in Europe;
Amendment 73 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) All European Digital Identity Wallets should allow users to electronically identify and authenticate online and offline across borders for accessing a wide range of public and private services. Without prejudice to Member States’ prerogatives as regards the identification of their nationals and residents, Wallets can also serve the institutional needs of public administrations, international organisations and the Union’s institutions, bodies, offices and agencies. Offline use would be important in many sectors, including in the health sector where services are often provided through face-to-face interaction and ePrescriptions should be able to rely on QR-codes or similar technologies to verify authenticity. Relying on the level of assurance “high”, the European Digital Identity Wallets should benefit from the potential offered by tamper-proof solutions such as secure elements, to comply with the security requirements under this Regulation. The European Digital Identity Wallets should also allow users to create and use qualified electronic signatures and seals which are accepted across the EU. To achieve simplification and cost reduction benefits to persons and businesses across the EU, including by enabling powers of representation and e- mandates, Member States should issue European Digital Identity Wallets relying on common standards to ensure seamless interoperability and a high level of security. Only Member States’ competent authorities can provide a high degree of confidence in establishing the identity of a person and therefore provide assurance that the person claiming or asserting a particular identity is in fact the person he or she claims to be. It is therefore necessary that the European Digital Identity Wallets rely on the legal identity of citizens, other residents or legal entities. Trust in the European Digital Identity Wallets would be enhanced by the fact that issuing parties are required to implement appropriate technical and organisational measures to ensure a level of security commensurate to the risks raised for the rights and freedoms of the natural persons, in line with Regulation (EU) 2016/679. The highest standard of data protection of the most advanced Member States in this area should be implemented.
Amendment 74 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) All European Digital Identity Wallets should allow users to electronically identify and authenticate online and offline across borders for accessing a wide range of public and private services. Without prejudice to Member States’ prerogatives as regards the identification of their nationals and residents, Wallets can also serve the institutional needs of public administrations, international organisations and the Union’s institutions, bodies, offices and agencies. Offline use would be important in many sectors, including in the health sector where services are often provided through face-to-face interaction and ePrescriptions should be able to rely on QR- codes or similar technologies to verify authenticity. Relying on the level of assurance “high”, the European Digital Identity Wallets should benefit from the potential offered by tamper-proof solutions such as secure elements, to comply with the security requirements under this Regulation. The European Digital Identity Wallets should also allow users to create and use qualified electronic signatures and seals which are accepted across the EU. To achieve simplification and cost reduction benefits to persons and businesses across the EU, including by enabling powers of representation and e-mandates, Member States should issue European Digital Identity Wallets relying on common standards to ensure seamless interoperability and athe highest level of security. Only Member States’ competent authorities can provide a high degree of confidence in establishing the identity of a person and therefore provide assurance that the person claiming or asserting a particular identity is in fact the person he or she claims to be. It is therefore necessary that the European Digital Identity Wallets rely on the legal identity of citizens, other residents or legal entities. Trust in the European Digital Identity Wallets would be enhanced by the fact that issuing parties are required to implement appropriate technical and organisational measures to ensure a level of security commensurate to the risks raised for the rights and freedoms of the natural persons, in line with Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
Amendment 76 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) In order to achieve a high level of security and trustworthiness, this Regulation establishes the requirements for European Digital Identity Wallets of the highest standard. The conformity of European Digital Identity Wallets with those requirements should be certified by accredited public or private sector bodies designated by Member States. Relying on a certification scheme based on the availability of commonly agreed standards with Member States should ensure a high level of trust and interoperability. Certification should in particular rely on the relevant European cybersecurity certifications schemes established pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2019/88120. Such certification should be without prejudice to certification as regards personal data processing pursuant to Regulation (ECU) 2016/679 _________________ 20 Regulation (EU) 2019/881 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 April 2019 on ENISA (the European Union Agency for Cybersecurity) and on information and communications technology cybersecurity certification and repealing Regulation (EU) No 526/2013 (Cybersecurity Act), (OJ L 151, 7.6.2019, p. 15).
Amendment 79 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) European Digital Identity Wallets should ensure the highest level of security for the personal data used for authentication irrespective of whether such data is stored locally or, on cloud-based solutions, based exclusively on European territory, taking into account the different levels of risk. Using biometrics to authenticate is one of the identifications methods providing a high level of confidence, in particular when used in combination with other elements of authentication. Since biometrics represents a unique characteristic of a person, the use of biometrics requires organisational and security measures, commensurate to the risk that such processing may entail to the rights and freedoms of natural persons and in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2016/679. It should be possible for potential users of these digital wallets who no longer wish to use them to permanently delete their data.
Amendment 84 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) Only Member States’ competent authorities can provide a high degree of confidence in establishing the identity of a person and therefore provide assurance that the person claiming or asserting a particular identity is in fact the person he or she claims to be. The process of notification of electronic identification schemes should be simplified and accelerated to promote the access to convenient, trusted, secure and innovative authentication and identification solutions and, where relevant, to encourage private identity providers to offer electronic identification schemes to Member State’s authorities for notification asto produce national electronic identity card schemes under Regulation 910/2014.
Amendment 105 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 7
EU 910/2014
Article 6a – paragraph 7a
Article 6a – paragraph 7a
7a. Digital identity wallets shall not contain health data.
Amendment 105 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33
Recital 33
(33) Many Member States have introduced national requirements for services providing secure and trustworthy digital archiving in order to allow for the long term preservation of electronic documents and associated trust services. To ensure legal certainty and trust, it is essential to provide a legal framework to facilitate the cross border recognition of qualified electronic archiving services. That framework could also open new market opportunities for Union trust service providers. It should be set on the basis of the highest standard of the most protective Member State in terms of archiving.
Amendment 106 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 7
EU 910/2014
Article 6a – paragraph 7b
Article 6a – paragraph 7b
7b. Digital identity wallets should not be used as a means of discriminating between EU citizens.
Amendment 112 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37
Recital 37
(37) The European Data Protection Supervisor has been consulted pursuant to Article 42 (1) of Regulation (EU) 2018/1525 of the European Parliament and of the Council27. Each time a standard is modified in this regard, prior consultation should be carried out in order to ensure maximum protection. _________________ 27 Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2018 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data by the Union institutions, bodies, offices and agencies and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 and Decision No 1247/2002/EC (OJ L 295, 21.11.2018, p. 39).
Amendment 119 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 7
EU 910/2014
Article 6b – paragraph 3
Article 6b – paragraph 3
3. Relying parties shall be responsible for carrying out the procedure for authenticating person identification data and electronic attestation of attributes originating from European Digital Identity Wallets.
Amendment 123 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 11
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 11
EU 910/2014
Article 10 b (new)
Article 10 b (new)
3a. Users of European Digital Identity Wallets should be ensured compensation for any undesirable situation related to their data, such as theft, loss, disclosure or use for purposes other than those originally intended. This liability should extend to all of the above situations, regardless of the provider's intentions or negligence (whether it is culpable or not).
Amendment 128 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point i
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point i
Regulation (EU) No 910/2014
Article 3(46)
Article 3(46)
Amendment 137 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 16
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 16
EU 910/2014
Article 12 a – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 12 a – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. It must be possible to check attributes without fully identifying the digital identity wallet holder.
Amendment 138 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 16
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 16
EU 910/2014
Article 12 a – paragraph 3 b (new)
Article 12 a – paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. The issuance and systematic use of EU-wide persistent unique identifiers gives rise to data protection and privacy risks for individuals. The use of privacy by design architectures should therefore be promoted by the Member States and the Commission.
Amendment 142 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 16
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 16
EU 910/2014
Article 12 a – paragraph 5
Article 12 a – paragraph 5
5. The Commission shall make an assessment within 18 months after deployment of the European Digital Identity Wallets whether on the basis of evidence showing availability, security and usability of the European Digital Identity Wallet, additional private online service providers shall be mandated to accept the use of the European Digital identity Wallet strictly upon voluntary request of the user. Criteria of assessment may include extent of user base, cross-border presence of service providers, technological development, evolution in usage patterns. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts based on this assessment, regarding a revision of the requirements for recognition of the European Digital Identity wallet under points 1 to 4 of this article.
Amendment 143 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 17
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 17
EU 910/2014
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. Notwithstanding paragraph 2 of this Article, tThe liability of trust service providers cannot be limited by an internal policy on service provision. Trust service providers shall be liable for damage caused intentionally or negligently to any natural or legal person due to a failure to comply with the obligations under this Regulation and with the cybersecurity risk management obligations under Article 18 of the Directive XXXX/XXXX [NIS2].’;
Amendment 144 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 18
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 18
EU 910/2014
Article 14 – paragraph 1
Article 14 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission may not adopt implementing acts, in accordance with Article 48(2), setting out the conditions under which the requirements of a third country applicable to the trust service providers established in its territory and to the trust services they provide can be considered equivalent to the requirements applicable to qualified trust service providers established in the Union and to the qualified trust services they provide.
Amendment 144 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 7
Regulation (EU) No 910/2014
Article 6a – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 6a – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) under a mandate from a Member State, by a European public organisation or company, based in Europe, which stores the data in that territory and which employs staff in an EU Member State and pays significant corporate tax there;
Amendment 146 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 18
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 18
EU 910/2014
Article 14 – paragraph 2
Article 14 – paragraph 2
Amendment 153 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 24
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 24
EU 910/2014
Article 23 – paragraph 2 a
Article 23 – paragraph 2 a
Amendment 157 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 7
Regulation (EU) No 910/2014
Article 6a – paragraph 6
Article 6a – paragraph 6
6. The European Digital Identity Wallets shall be issued under a notified electronic identification scheme of level of assurance ‘high’. The use of the European Digital Identity Wallets shall be free of charge to natural persons. In order to leave each citizen free to choose not to use these portfolios at all if they so wish, it is recalled that they cannot be made compulsory under any circumstances.
Amendment 158 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 7
6. The European Digital Identity Wallets shall be issued under a notified electronic identification scheme of level of assurance ‘high’. The use of the European Digital Identity Wallets shall be free of charge to natural persons. They shall not contain health data.
Amendment 159 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 38
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 38
EU 910/2014
Article 45 – paragraph 2
Article 45 – paragraph 2
2. Qualified certificates for website authentication referred to in paragraph 1 shall be recognised by web-browsers. For those purposes web-browsers shall ensure that the identity data provided using any of the methods is displayed in a user friendly manner. Web-browsers shall ensure support and interoperability with qualified certificates for website authentication referred to in paragraph 1, with the exception of enterprises, considered to be microenterprises and small enterprises in accordance with Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC in the first 5 years of operating as providers of web- browsing services. This new digital identity framework does not prevent web browsers from undertaking additional security processes with due diligence to protect consumers and their reputation.
Amendment 165 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 39
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 39
EU 910/2014
Article 45 b – paragraph 3
Article 45 b – paragraph 3
3. Personal data relating to the provision of qualified electronic attestation of attributes services shall be kept physically and logically in Europe, separate from any other data held.
Amendment 169 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 40
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 40
(EU)910/2014
Article 48a – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 48a – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) the number of natural and legal persons having a valid European Digital Identity Wallet;
Amendment 170 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 40
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 40
EU 910/2014
Article 48 a – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
Article 48 a – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
(c a) The number of people who have suffered data theft; the number of companies that have reported data theft; the number of complaints to the authorities about a data breach (identity theft, data fraud, etc).
Amendment 172 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 40
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 40
EU 910/2014
Article 48 a – paragraph 2 – point c b (new)
Article 48 a – paragraph 2 – point c b (new)
(c b) The most stringent sanctions imposed on companies during the year for failure to protect identity data (both within and outside the EU).
Amendment 172 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 7
Regulation (EU) No 910/2014
Article 6a – paragraph 6
Article 6a – paragraph 6
Amendment 176 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 41
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 41
EU 910/2014
Article 49 – paragraph 2
Article 49 – paragraph 2
2. The evaluation report shall include an assessment of the availability, security and usability of the identification means including European Digital Identity Wallets in scope of this Regulation and assess whether all online private service providers relying on third party electronic identification services for users authentication, shall be mandated to accept the use of notified electronic identification means and European
Amendment 178 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex VI – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Annex VI – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Further to Article 45d, Member States shall ensure that measures are taken to allow qualified providers of electronic attestations of attributes to verify by electronic means at the request of the user, the authenticity of the following attributes against the relevant authentic source at national level or via designated intermediaries recognised at national level, in accordance with national or Union law and in cases where these attributes rely on authentic sources stored in Europe within the public sector:
Amendment 180 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex VI – paragraph 1 – point 2 a (new)
Annex VI – paragraph 1 – point 2 a (new)
2a. Whether or not they are on the national register of paedophiles or sex offenders;
Amendment 186 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex VI – paragraph 1 – point 9 a (new)
Annex VI – paragraph 1 – point 9 a (new)
9a. Criminal records index;
Amendment 189 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 16
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 16
Regulation (EU) No 910/2014
Article 2 a – paragraph 2
Article 2 a – paragraph 2
2. Where private relying parties providing services are required by national or Union law, to use strong user authentication for online identification, or where strong user authentication is required by contractual obligation, including in the areas of transport, energy, banking and financial services, social security, health, drinking water, postal services, digital infrastructure, education or telecommunications, private relying parties shall also accept the use of European Digital Identity Wallets issued in accordance with Article 6a.
Amendment 192 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 18
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point 18
Regulation (EU) No 910/2014
Article 14 – paragraph 2
Article 14 – paragraph 2
Amendment 47 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) Where the Commission examines a foreign subsidy on its own initiative, it should have the power to impose redressive measures on an undertaking to remedy any distortion caused by a foreign subsidy in the internal market. Redressive measures should be proportionate and suitable to remedy the distortion at stake. They should include behavioural or structural remedies or the repayment of the foreign subsidy. This process should be transparent for the public;
Amendment 48 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) The undertaking concerned should have the possibility to offer commitments in order to remedy the distortion caused by the foreign subsidy. If the Commission considers that the commitments offered fully and effectively remedy the distortion, it could accept them and make them binding by public decision.
Amendment 52 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
Recital 25
(25) The Commission should close the in-depth investigation by adopting a publicly accessible decision.
Amendment 114 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 6 a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 6 a (new)
(6a) If an undertaking does not make commitments or take redressive measures, this may lead to exclusion from the market.
Amendment 136 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 2
Article 27 – paragraph 2
(2) For the purpose of Article 28, a notifiable foreign financial contribution in an EU public procurement procedure shall be deemed to arise where the estimated value of that public procurement is equal or greater than EUR 25100 million.
Amendment 145 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 2
Article 28 – paragraph 2
(2) The obligation to notify foreign financial contributions under this paragraph shall extend to economic operators, groups of economic operators referred to in Article 26(2) of Directive 2014/23/EU, Article 19(2) of Directive 2014/24/EU and Article 37(2) of Directive 2014/25/EU, main subcontractors and main suppliers. A subcontractor or supplier shall be deemed to be main where their participation ensures key elements of the contract performance and in any case where the economic share of their contribution exceeds 320% of the estimated value of the contract.
Amendment 158 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 2
Article 29 – paragraph 2
(2) The Commission shall carry out a preliminary review no later than 630 days after it received the notification.
Amendment 163 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 4
Article 29 – paragraph 4
(4) The Commission may adopt a decision closing the in-depth investigation no later than 200 days after it received the notification. In exceptional circumstances, this time limit may be extended for 60 days after consultation with the concerned contracting authority or contracting entity.
Amendment 317 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) The purpose of this Regulation is to improve the functioning of the internal market by laying down a uniform legal framework in particular for the development, marketing and use of artificial intelligence in conformity with Union values. This Regulation pursues a number of overriding reasons of public interest, such as a high level of protection of health, safety and fundamental rights, and it ensures the free movement of AI- based goods and services cross-border, thus preventing Member States from imposing restrictions on the development, marketing and use of AI systems, unless explicitly authorised by this Regulation and without prejudice to stricter national legislation governing the protection of fundamental rights.
Amendment 323 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) Artificial intelligence systems (AI systems) can be easily deployed in multiple sectors of the economy and society, including cross border, and circulate throughout the Union. Certain Member States have already explored the adoption of national rules to ensure that artificial intelligence is safe and is developed and used in compliance with fundamental rights obligations. Differing national rules may lead to fragmentation of the internal market and decrease legal certainty for operators that develop or use AI systems. A minimum, consistent and high level of protection throughout the Union should therefore be ensured, while divergences hampering the free circulation of AI systems and related products and services within the internal market should be prevented, by laying down uniform obligations for operators and guaranteeing the uniform protection of overriding reasons of public interest and of rights of persons throughout the internal market based on Article 114 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). To the extent that this Regulation contains specific rules on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data concerning restrictions of the use of AI systems for ‘real-time’ remote biometric identification in publicly accessible spaces for the purpose of law enforcement, it is appropriate to base this Regulation, in as far as those specific rules are concerned, on Article 16 of the TFEU. In light of those specific rules and the recourse to Article 16 TFEU, it is appropriate to consult the European Data Protection Board.
Amendment 361 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) The notion of AI system should be clearly defined to ensure legal certainty, while providing the flexibility to accommodate future technological developments. The definition should be based on the key functional characteristics of the software, in particular the ability, for a given set of human-defined objectivesobjectives or parameters which have human control at their origin, to generate outputs such as content, predictions, recommendations, or decisions which influence the environment with which the system interacts, be it in a physical or digital dimension. AI systems can be designed to operate with varying levels of autonomy and be used on a stand- alone basis or as a component of a product, irrespective of whether the system is physically integrated into the product (embedded) or serve the functionality of the product without being integrated therein (non-embedded). The definition of AI system should be complemented by a list of specific techniques and approaches used for its development, which should be kept up-to–date in the light of market and technological developments through the adoption of delegated acts by the Commission to amend that list. These delegated acts should consist only of additions to the list of techniques used.
Amendment 381 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) For the purposes of this Regulation the notion of publicly accessible space should be understood as referring to any physical place that is accessible to the public, irrespective of whether the place in question is privately or publicly owned. Therefore, the notion does not cover places that are private in nature and normally not freely accessible for third parties, including law enforcement authorities, unless those parties have been specifically invited or authorised, such as homes, private clubs, offices, warehouses and factories. Online spaces are not covered either, as they are not physical spaces. However, the mere fact that certain conditions for accessing a particular space may apply, such as admission tickets or age restrictions, does not mean that the space is not publicly accessible within the meaning of this Regulation. Consequently, in addition to public spaces such as streets, relevant parts of government buildings and most transport infrastructure, spaces such as cinemas, theatres, shops and shopping centres are normally also publicly accessible. Whether a given space is accessible to the public should however be determined on a case-by-case basis by the competent judicial or administrative authority, having regard to the specificities of the individual situation at hand.
Amendment 389 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) In light of their digital nature, certain AI systems should fall within the scope of this Regulation even when they are neither placed on the market, nor put into service, nor used in the Union. This is the case for example of an operator established in the Union that contracts certain services to an operator established outside the Union in relation to an activity to be performed by an AI system that would qualify as high-risk and whose effects impact natural persons located in the Union. In those circumstances, the AI system used by the operator outside the Union could process data lawfully collected in and transferred from the Union, and provide to the contracting operator in the Union the output of that AI system resulting from that processing, without that AI system being placed on the market, put into service or used in the Union. To prevent the circumvention of this Regulation and to ensure an effective protection of natural persons located in the Union, this Regulation should also apply to providers and users of AI systems that are established in a third country, to the extent the output produced by those systems is used in the Union. Nonetheless, to take into account existing arrangements and special needs for cooperation with foreign partners with whom information and evidence is exchanged, this Regulation should not apply to public authorities of a third country and international organisations when acting in the framework of international agreements concluded at national or European level for law enforcement and judicial cooperation with the Union or with its Member States. Such agreements have been concluded bilaterally between Member States and third countries or between the European Union, Europol and other EU agencies and third countries and international organisations.
Amendment 398 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) This Regulation should also apply to Unionthe institutions, offices, bodibodies, offices and agencies when acting as a provider or user of an AI systemof the Union. AI systems exclusively developed or used for military purposes should be excluded from the scope of this Regulation where that use falls under the exclusive remit of the Common Foreign and Security Policy regulated under Title V of the Treaty on the European Union (TEU). This Regulation should be without prejudice to the provisions regarding the liability of intermediary service providers set out in Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council [as amended by the Digital Services Act].
Amendment 410 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) In order to ensure a consistent and high level of protection of public interests as regards health, safety and fundamental rights, minimum common normative standards for all high-risk AI systems should be established. Those standards should be consistent with the Charter of fundamental rights of the European Union (the Charter) and should be non- discriminatory and in line with the Union’s international trade commitments.
Amendment 412 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) In order to introduce a proportionate and effective set of binding rules for AI systems, a clearly defined risk- based approach should be followed. That approach should tailor the type and content of such rules to the intensity and scope of the risks that AI systems can generate. It is therefore necessary to prohibit certain artificial intelligence practices, to lay down requirements for high-risk AI systems and obligations for the relevant operators, and to lay down transparency obligations for certain AI systems. It is also necessary to establish the criteria and conditions which determinine the category to which an AI system belongs.
Amendment 416 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) Aside from the many beneficial uses of artificial intelligence, that technology can also be misused and provide novel and powerful tools for manipulative, exploitative and social control practices. Such practices are particularly harmful and should be prohibited because they contradict Union the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, equality, democracy and the rule of law, which are protected values under EU law, and Union fundamental rights, including the right to non-discrimination, data protection and privacy and the rights of the child.
Amendment 426 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) The placing on the market, putting into service or use of certain AI systems intended to distort human behaviour, whereby physical or psychological harms are likely to occur, should be forbidden. Such AI systems deploy subliminal components individuals cannot perceive or exploit vulnerabilities of children and people due to their age, physical or mental incapacities. They do so with the intention to materially distort the behaviour of a person and in a manner that causes or is likely to cause harm to that or another person. The intention may not be presumed if the distortion of human behaviour results from factors external to the AI system which are outside of the control of the provider or the userpeople such as children or people who are vulnerable due to their age, physical or mental incapacities, or other traits. Research for legitimate purposes in relation to such AI systems should not be stifled by the prohibition, if such research does not amount to use of the AI system in human- machine relations with uninformed or non-consenting third parties that exposes natural persons to harm and such research is carried out in accordance with recognised ethical standards for scientific research.
Amendment 432 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) AI systems providing social scoring of natural persons for general purpose by public authorities or on their behalf may lead to discriminatory outcomes and the exclusion of certain groupsare, by definition, discriminatory. They may violate the right to dignity and non- discrimination and the values of equality and justice. Such AI systems evaluate or classify the trustworthiness of natural persons based on their social behaviour in multiple contexts or known or predicted personal or personality characteristics. The social score obtained from such AI systems may leads to the detrimental or unfavourable treatment of natural persons or whole groups thereof in social contexts, which are unrelated to the context in which the data was originally generated or collected or to a detrimental treatment that is disproportionate or unjustified to the gravity of their social behaviour. Such AI systems should be therefore prohibited.
Amendment 455 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) The use of AI systems for ‘real- time’ remote biometric identification of natural persons in publicly accessible spaces for the purpose of law enforcement is considered particularly intrusive in the rights and freedoms of the concerned persons, to the extent that it may affects the private life of a large part of the population, evoke a feeling ofconstitutes constant surveillance and indirectly dissuades the exercise of the freedom of assembly and other fundamental rights. In addition, the immediacy of the impact and the limited opportunities for further checks or corrections in relation to the use of such systems operating in ‘real-time’ carry heightened risks for the rights and freedoms of the persons that are concerned by law enforcement activities.
Amendment 471 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) The use of those systems for the purpose of law enforcement should therefore be prohibited, except in three exhaustively listed and narrowly defined situations, where the use is ad hoc and strictly necessary to achieve a substantial public interest, the importance of which outweighs the risks. Those situations involve the search for potential victims of crime, including missing children; certain threats to the life or physical safety of natural persons or of a terrorist attack; and the detection, localisation, identification or prosecution of perpetrators or suspects of the criminal offences referred to in Council Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA38if those criminal offences are punishable in the Member State concernedif they are punishable by a custodial sentence or a detention order for a maximum period of at least threen years and as they are defined in the law of thatin the Member State concerned. Such threshold for the custodial sentence or detention order in accordance with national law contributes to ensure that the offence should be serious enough to potentially justify the use of ‘real-time’ remote biometric identification systems. Moreover, of the 32 criminal offences listed in the Council Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA, some are in practice likely to be more relevant than others, in that the recourse to ‘real-time’ remote biometric identification will foreseeably be necessary and proportionateThe nature of the offences deemed sufficiently serious to justify a penalty up to thighly varying degrees for the practical pursuit of the detection, localisation, identification or prosecution of a perpetrator or suspect of the different criminal offences listed and having regard to the likely differences in the seriousness, probability and scale of the harm or possible negative consequences. _________________ 38 Council Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA of 13 June 2002 on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States (OJ L 190, 18.7.2002, p. 1)s threshold is a matter for the national legislation of each Member State in accordance with its own criminal law.
Amendment 505 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) The use of AI systems for ‘real- time’ remote biometric identification of natural persons in publicly accessible spaces for the purpose of law enforcement necessarily involves the processing of biometric data. The rules of this Regulation that prohibit, subject to certain exceptions, such use, which are based on Article 16 TFEU, should apply as lex specialis in respect of the rules on the processing of biometric data contained in Article 10 of Directive (EU) 2016/680, thus regulating such use and the processing of biometric data involved in an exhaustive manner. Therefore, such use and processing should only be possible in as far as it is compatible with the framework set by this Regulation, without there being scope, outside that framework, for the competent authorities, where they act for purpose of law enforcement, to use such systems and process such data in connection thereto on the grounds listed in Article 10 of Directive (EU) 2016/680. In this context, this Regulation is not intended to provide the legal basis for the processing of personal data under Article 8 of Directive 2016/680. However, the use ofThe use of biometric identification systems, including ‘real-time’ remote biometric identification systems in publicly accessible spaces for purposes other than law enforcement, including by competent authorities, should not be covered by the specific framework regarding such use for the purpose of law enforcement set by this Regulation. Such use for purposes other than law enforcement should therefore not be subject to the requirement of an authorisation under this Regulation and the applicable detailed rules of national law that may give effect to itset by this Regulation, with the exception of customs formalities and individual authentication.
Amendment 526 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27
Recital 27
(27) High-risk AI systems should only be placed on the Union market or put into service if they comply with certain mandatory requirements. Those requirements should ensure that high-risk AI systems available in the Union or whose output is otherwise used in the Union do not pose unacceptable risks to important Union public interests as recognised and protected by Union law. AI systems identified as high-risk should be limited to those that have a significant harmful impact on the health, safety and fundamental rights of persons in the Union, as well as the public order and national security of the Member States, and such limitation minimises any potential restriction to international trade, if any.
Amendment 536 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
Recital 31
(31) The classification of an AI system as high-risk pursuant to this Regulation should not necessarily mean that the product whose safety component is the AI system, or the AI system itself as a product, is considered ‘high-risk’ under the criteria established in the relevant Union harmonisation legislation that applies to the product. This is notably the case for Regulation (EU) 2017/745 of the European Parliament and of the Council47 and Regulation (EU) 2017/746 of the European Parliament and of the Council48, where a third-party conformity assessment is provided for medium-risk and high-risk products. However, the classification of an AI system as high risk for the sole purpose of this Regulation will apply to all products which use that AI system or which are themselves AI systems, irrespective of their classification under the sector-specific harmonisation legislation of the Union under which they are otherwise covered. _________________ 47 Regulation (EU) 2017/745 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 April 2017 on medical devices, amending Directive 2001/83/EC, Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 and Regulation (EC) No 1223/2009 and repealing Council Directives 90/385/EEC and 93/42/EEC (OJ L 117, 5.5.2017, p. 1). 48 Regulation (EU) 2017/746 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 April 2017 on in vitro diagnostic medical devices and repealing Directive 98/79/EC and Commission Decision 2010/227/EU (OJ L 117, 5.5.2017, p. 176).
Amendment 555 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 34
Recital 34
(34) As regards the management and operation of critical infrastructure, iIt is appropriate to classify as high- risk the AI systems intended to be used as safety components in the management and operation of critical infrastructure such as road traffic andor the supply of water, gas, heating and electricity, since their failure or malfunctioning may put at risk the life and health of persons at large scale and lead to appreciable disruptions in the ordinary conduct of social and economic activities.
Amendment 558 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35
Recital 35
(35) AI systems used in education or vocational training, notably for determining access or assigning persons to educational and vocational training institutions or to evaluate persons on tests as part of or as a precondition for their education should be considered high-risk, since they may determine the educational and professional course of a person’s life and therefore affect their ability to secure their livelihood. When improperly designed and used, such systems may violate the right to education and training as well as the right not to be discriminated against and perpetuate historical patterns of discrimination.
Amendment 562 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36
Recital 36
(36) AI systems used in employment, workers management and access to self- employment, notably for the recruitment and selection of persons, for making decisions on promotion and termination and for task allocation, monitoring or evaluation of persons in work-related contractual relationships, should also be classified as high-risk, in so far as such use does not correspond to practices prohibited by this Regulation, since those systems may appreciably impact future career prospects and livelihoods of these persons. Relevant work-related contractual relationships should involve employees and persons providing services through platforms as referred to in the Commission Work Programme 2021. Such persons should in principle not be considered users within the meaning of this Regulation. Throughout the recruitment process and in the evaluation, promotion, or retention of persons in work-related contractual relationships, such systems may perpetuate historical patterns oflead to discrimination, for example against women, certain age groups, persons with disabilities, or persons of certain racial or ethnic origins or sexual orientation. AI systems used to monitor the performance and behaviour of these persons may also impact their rights to data protection and privacy.
Amendment 590 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 39
Recital 39
(39) AI systems used in migration, asylum and border control management affect people who are often in particularlysometimes in a vulnerable position and who are dependent on the outcome of the actions of the competent public authorities. The accuracy, non-discriminatory nature and transparency of the AI systems used in those contexts are therefore particularly important to guarantee the respect of the fundamental rights of the affected persons, notably, and where applicable, their rights to free movement, non- discrimination, protection of private life and personal data, international protection and good administration. It is therefore appropriate to classify as high-risk AI systems intended to be used by the competent public authorities charged with tasks in the fields of migration, asylum and border control management as polygraphs and similar tools or to detect the emotional state of a natural person; for assessing certain risks posed by natural persons entering the territory of a Member State or applying for visa or asylum; for verifying the authenticity of the relevant documents of natural persons; for assisting competent public authorities for the examination of applications for asylum, visa and residence permits and associated complaints with regard to the objective to establish the eligibility of the natural persons applying for a status. AI systems in the area of migration, asylum and border control management covered by this Regulation should comply with the relevant procedural requirements set by the Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council49, the Regulation (EC) No 810/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council50 and other relevant legislation. _________________ 49 Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on common procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection (OJ L 180, 29.6.2013, p. 60). 50 Regulation (EC) No 810/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 July 2009 establishing a Community Code on Visas (Visa Code) (OJ L 243, 15.9.2009, p. 1).
Amendment 598 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40
Recital 40
(40) Certain AI systems intended for the administration of justice and democratic processes should be classified as high-riskprohibited, considering their potentially significant impact on democracy, rule of law, individual freedoms as well as the right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial. In particular, to address the risks of potential biases, errors and opacity, it is appropriate to qualify as high-riskprohibit the use of AI systems intended to assist judicial authorities in researching and interpreting facts and the law and in applying the law to a concrete set of facts. Such qualification should not extend, however, to AI systems intended for purely ancillary administrative activities that do not affect the actual administration of justice in individual cases, such as anonymisation or pseudonymisation of judicial decisions, documents or data, communication between personnel, administrative tasks or allocation of resources.
Amendment 624 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 44
Recital 44
(44) High data quality is essential for the performance of many AI systems, especially when techniques involving the training of models are used, with a view to ensure that the high-risk AI system performs as intended and safely and it does not become the source of discrimination prohibited by Union law. High quality training, validation and testing data sets require the implementation of appropriate data governance and management practices. Training, validation and testing data sets should be sufficiently relevant, representative and free of errors and complete in view of the intended purpose of the system. They should also have the appropriate statistical properties, including as regards the persons or groups of persons on which the high-risk AI system is intended to be used. In particular, training, validation and testing data sets should take into account, to the extent required in the light of their intended purpose, the features, characteristics or elements that are particular to the specific geographical, behavioural or functional setting or context within which the AI system is intended to be used. In order to protect the right of others from the discrimination that might result from the bias in AI systems, the providers shouldbe able to process also special categories of personal data, as a matter of substantial public interest, in order to ensure the bias monitoring, detection and correction in relation to high-risk AI systems.
Amendment 632 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 45
Recital 45
(45) For the development of high-risk AI systems, certain actors, such as providers, notified bodies and other relevant entities, such as digital innovation hubs, testing experimentation facilities and researchers, should be able to access and use high quality datasets within their respective fields of activities which are related to this Regulation. European common data spaces established by the Commission, developed and operated by European actors and which do not transfer any data outside the territory or legal jurisdiction of the European Union, and the facilitation of data sharing between businesses and with government in the public interest will be instrumental to provide trustful, accountable and non- discriminatory access to high quality data for the training, validation and testing of AI systems. For example, in health, the European health data space will facilitate non- discriminatory access to health data and the training of artificial intelligence algorithms on those datasets, in a privacy- preserving, secure, timely, transparent and trustworthy manner, and with an appropriate institutional governance. Relevant competent authorities, including sectoral ones, providing or supporting the access to data may also support the provision of high-quality data for the training, validation and testing of AI systems.
Amendment 642 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 48
Recital 48
(48) High-risk AI systems should be designed and developed in such a way that natural persons can actually oversee their functioning. For this purpose, appropriate human oversight measures should be identified by the provider of the system before its placing on the market or putting into service. In particular, where appropriate, such measures should guarantee that the system is subject to in- built operational constraints that cannot be overridden by the system itself and, that it cannot make decisions without approval by the human operator, that it is responsive to the human operator, and that the natural persons to whom human oversight has been assigned have the necessary competence, training and authority to carry out that role.
Amendment 646 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 49
Recital 49
(49) High-risk AI systems should perform consistently throughout their lifecycle and meet an appropriate level of accuracy, robustness and cybersecurity in accordance with the generally acknowledged state of the art. The level of accuracy and accuracy metrics should be communicated to the userdefined by standards or common technical specifications and communicated to the users. The European Commission should be able to decide on such standards or common technical specifications or to adopt existing ones developed by third parties such as suppliers, stakeholders or standardisation bodies.
Amendment 654 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 51
Recital 51
(51) Cybersecurity plays a crucial role in ensuring that AI systems are resilient against attempts to alter their use, behaviour, performance or compromise their security properties by malicious third parties exploiting the system’s vulnerabilities. Cyberattacks against AI systems can leverage AI specific assets, such as training data sets (e.g. data poisoning) or trained models (e.g. adversarial attacks), or exploit vulnerabilities in the AI system’s digital assets or the underlying ICT infrastructure. To ensure a level of cybersecurity appropriate to the risks, suitable measures should therefore be taken by the providers of high-risk AI systems, also taking into account as appropriate the underlying ICT infrastructure.
Amendment 655 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 53
Recital 53
(53) It is appropriate that a specific natural or legal person, defined as the provider, takes the responsibility for the placing on the market or putting into service of a high-risk AI system, regardless of whether that natural or legal person is the person who designed or developed the system, without prejudice to the right of a provider to take action against the manufacturer of that system.
Amendment 664 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 58
Recital 58
(58) Given the nature of AI systems and the risks to safety and fundamental rights possibly associated with their use, including as regard the need to ensure proper monitoring of the performance of an AI system in a real-life setting, it is appropriate to set specific responsibilities for users. Users should in particular use high-risk AI systems in accordance with the instructions of usefor the purpose for which they were intended and in accordance with the instructions of use, to that end high-risk AI systems should structurally limit, to the greatest extent possible, the technical possibility for a user to use these AI systems in another way, and certain other obligations should be provided for with regard to monitoring of the functioning of the AI systems and with regard to record- keeping, as appropriate.
Amendment 669 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 59
Recital 59
(59) It is appropriate to envisage that the user of the AI system should be the natural or legal person, public authority, agency or other body under whose authority the AI system is operated except where the use is made in the course of a personal non- professional activity.
Amendment 673 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 61
Recital 61
(61) Standardisation should play a key role to provide technical solutions to providers to ensure compliance with this Regulation. Compliance with harmonised standards as defined, in particular as regards the levels and metrics of accuracy and robustness for high-risk AI systems. The Commission should be able to adopt common technical specifications in areas where no harmonised standards exist or where they are insufficient. The Commission should also be able to adopt standards or common technical specifications developed by third parties such as suppliers, stakeholders or standardisation bodies. Compliance with the common technical specifications adopted by the Commission should be a means for suppliers to demonstrate compliance with the requirements of this Regulation. Compliance with other harmonised standards set out in Regulation (EU) No 1025/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council54 should be a means for providers to demonstrate conformity with the requirements of this Regulation. However, the Commission could adopt common technical specifications in areas where no harmonised standards exist or where they are insufficientalso help to demonstrate suppliers’ compliance with the requirements of this Regulation, without having the same probative value as the common technical specifications adopted by the Commission. _________________ 54 Regulation (EU) No 1025/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on European standardisation, amending Council Directives 89/686/EEC and 93/15/EEC and Directives 94/9/EC, 94/25/EC, 95/16/EC, 97/23/EC, 98/34/EC, 2004/22/EC, 2007/23/EC, 2009/23/EC and 2009/105/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Decision 87/95/EEC and Decision No 1673/2006/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ L 316, 14.11.2012, p. 12).
Amendment 680 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 63
Recital 63
(63) It is appropriate that, in order to minimise the burden on operators and avoid any possible duplication, for high- risk AI systems related to products which are covered by existing Union harmonisation legislation following the New Legislative Framework approach, the compliance of those AI systems with the requirements of this Regulation should be assessed as part of the conformity assessment already foreseen under that legislation. The applicability of the requirements of this Regulation should thus not affect the specific logic, methodology or general structure of conformity assessment under the relevant specific New Legislative Framework legislation. This approach is fully reflected in the interplay between this Regulation and the [Machinery Regulation]. While safety risks of AI systems ensuring safety functions in machinery are addressed by the requirements of this Regulation, certain specific requirements in the [Machinery Regulation] will ensure the safe integration of the AI system into the overall machinery, so as not to compromise the safety of the machinery as a whole. The [Machinery Regulation] applies the same definition of AI system as this Regulation. However, should this Regulation and another legislative act of the European Union both cover the same product or component of a product and provide diverging definitions or impose different safety requirements, the applicable text shall be the one with the definition or safety requirements offering the best protection for people, Member States, society and fundamental rights.
Amendment 682 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 64
Recital 64
(64) Given the more extensive experience of professional pre-market certifiers in the field of product safety and the different nature of risks involved, it is appropriate to limit, at least in an initial phase of application of this Regulation, the scope of application of third-party conformity assessment for high-risk AI systems other than those related to products. Therefore, the conformity assessment of such systems should be carried out as a general rule by the provider under its own responsibility, with the only exception of AI systems intended to be used for the remote biometric identification of persons, for which the involvement of a notified body in the conformity assessment should be foreseen, to the extent theyallow them to carry out a conformity assessment for AI systems, including high-risk AI systems, as qualified bodies, to the extent that these systems are not prohibited.
Amendment 692 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 66
Recital 66
(66) In line with the commonly established notion of substantial modification for products regulated by Union harmonisation legislation, it is appropriate that an AI system undergoes a new conformity assessment whenever a change occurs which may affect the compliance of the system with this Regulation or when the intended purpose of the system changes. In addition, as regards AI systems which continue to ‘learn’ after being placed on the market or put into service (i.e. they automatically adapt how functions are carried out), it is necessary to provide rules establishing that changes to the algorithm and its performance that constitute substantial modifications are subject to new conformity assessments, including in cases where the substantial modifications have been pre-determined by the provider and assessed at the moment of the initial conformity assessment should not constitute a substantial modification.
Amendment 715 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 70
Recital 70
(70) Certain AI systems intended to interact with natural persons or to generate content may pose specific risks of impersonation or deception irrespective of whether they qualify as high-risk or not. In certain circumstances, the use of these systems should therefore be subject to specific transparency obligations without prejudice to the requirements and obligations for high-risk AI systems. In particular, natural persons should be notified that they are interacting with an AI system, unless this is obvious from the circumstances and the context of use. Moreover, natural persons should be notified when they are exposed to an emotion recognition system or a biometric categorisation system. Such information and notifications should be provided in accessible formats for persons with disabilities. Further, users, who use an AI systems used to generate or manipulate image, audio or video content that appreciably resembles existing persons, places or events and would falsely appear to a person to be authentic, should disclosesystematically contain an indication on the content generated that the content has been artificially created or manipulated by labelling the artificial intelligence output accordingly and disclosing its artificial origi, and users who use such AI systems or reuse the content generated should not be allowed to remove or conceal that indication.
Amendment 731 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 73
Recital 73
(73) In order to promote and protect innovation, it is important that the interests of small-scale providers and users of AI systems are taken into particular account. To this objective, Member States should develop initiatives, which are targeted at those operators, including on awareness raising and information communication. Moreover, the specific interests and needs of small-scale providers shall be taken into account when Notified Bodies set conformity assessment fees. Translation costs related to mandatory documentation and communication with authorities may constitute a significant cost for providers and other operators, notably those of a smaller scale. Member States should possibly ensure that one of the languages determined and accepted by them for relevant providers’ documentation and for communication with operators is one which is broadly understood by the largest possible number of cross-border users.
Amendment 747 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 78
Recital 78
(78) In order to ensure that providers of high-risk AI systems can take into account the experience on the use of high-risk AI systems for improving their systems and the design and development process or can take any possible corrective action in a timely manner, all providers should have a post-market monitoring system in place. In view of the sensitive nature of high-risk AI systems, this post-market monitoring system should not be able to automatically send data or error reports to the supplier via the AI system. This system is also key to ensure that the possible risks emerging from AI systems which continue to ‘learn’ after being placed on the market or put into service can be more efficiently and timely addressed. In this context, providers should also be required to have a system in place to report to the relevant authorities any serious incidents or any breaches to national and Union law protecting fundamental rights resulting from the use of their AI systems.
Amendment 769 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 85
Recital 85
(85) In order to ensure that the regulatory framework can be adapted where necessary, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 TFEU should be delegated to the Commission to amend the techniques and approaches referred to in Annex I to define AI systems, the Union harmonisation legislation listed in Annex II, the high-risk AI systems listed in Annex III, the provisions regarding technical documentation listed in Annex IV, the content of the EU declaration of conformity in Annex V, the provisions regarding the conformity assessment procedures in Annex VI and VII and the provisions establishing the high-risk AI systems to which the conformity assessment procedure based on assessment of the quality management system and assessment of the technical documentation should apply. As the purpose of delegating that power is to allow this Regulation to be adapted to technical advancements, the Commission should only be able to adopt such delegated acts to include non- restrictive additions or clarifications in the lists in those Annexes, whereas deletions, restrictive clarifications or amendments to the definitions of the items in those Annexes should only result from the adoption of amending regulations. 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 of 13 April 2016 on Better Law-Making58. 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. _________________ 58 OJ L 123, 12.5.2016, p. 1.
Amendment 785 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point a
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) harmonised minimum rules for the development of human-centric AI in the Union through the placing on the market, the putting into service and the use of artificial intelligence systems (‘AI systems’) in the Union;
Amendment 877 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 4
Article 2 – paragraph 4
Amendment 915 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 1
(1) ‘artificial intelligence system’ (AI system) means software that is developed with one or more of the techniques and approaches listed in Annex I and can, for a given set of human-defined objectivesobjectives or parameters subject to human command, generate outputs such as content, predictions, recommendations, or decisions influencing the environments they interact with;
Amendment 922 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new)
(1a) ‘human-centric AI’ means an approach which strives to ensure that human values are central to the development, deployment, use and monitoring of AI systems, by ensuring respect for fundamental rights, including those set out in the Treaties of the European Union and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, all of which are united by reference to a common foundation rooted in respect for human dignity, in which every human being enjoys a unique and inalienable moral status, which also entails consideration of the natural environment and of other living beings that are part of the human ecosystem, as well as a sustainable approach enabling the flourishing of future generations;
Amendment 941 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 4
(4) ‘user’ means any natural or legal person, public authority, agency or other body using an AI system under its authority, except where the AI system is used in the course of a personal non- professional activity;
Amendment 996 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 18 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 18 a (new)
(18a) ‘lifecycle of AI’ means the process of developing, deploying and using an AI system, including the research, design, data supply, training, limited-scale deployment, implementation and withdrawal stages;
Amendment 1006 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 23
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 23
(23) ‘substantial modification’ means a change, including a change based on ‘learning’, to the AI system following its placing on the market or putting into service which affects the compliance of the AI system with the requirements set out in Title III, Chapter 2 of this Regulation or results in a modification to the intended purpose for which the AI system has been assessed;
Amendment 1011 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 25
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 25
(25) ‘post-market monitoring’ means all activities carried out by providers of AI systems to proactively collect and review experience gained from the use of AI systems they place on the market or put into service for the purpose of identifying any need to immediately apply any necessary corrective or preventive actions, whereby such activities may not consist in the AI system automatically sending data or error reports to the provider;
Amendment 1013 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 28 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 28 a (new)
(28a) ‘sandbox’, in connection with the development of AI systems, means an isolated operating and experimental environment enabling certain actions to be carried out using an AI system while protecting the user from any harm resulting from computer bias, damage or compromise;
Amendment 1024 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 33
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 33
(33) ‘biometric data’ means personal data resulting from specific technical processing relating to the physical, or physiological or behavioural characteristics of a natural person, which allow or confirm the unique identification of that natural person, such as facial images or dactyloscopic data;
Amendment 1034 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 34
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 34
(34) ‘emotion recognition system’ means an AI system for the purpose of identifying or inferring emotions or intentions of natural persons on the basis of their biometric dataor behavioural data or by means of biological or brain implants;
Amendment 1042 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 35
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 35
(35) ‘biometric categorisation system’ means an AI system for the purpose of assigning natural persons to specific categories, such as sex, age, hair colour, eye colour, tattoos, health, ethnic origin or sexual or political orientation, on the basis of their biometric data;
Amendment 1060 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 36
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 36
(36) ‘remote biometric identification system’ means an AI system for the purpose, after a unique process, of identifying natural persons at a distance through the comparison of a person’s biometric data with the biometric data contained in a reference database, and without prior knowledge of the user of the AI system whether the person will be present and can be identified ;
Amendment 1066 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 38
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 38
(38) ‘‘post’ remote biometric identification system’ means a remote biometric identification system other than a ‘real-time’ remote biometric identification system, regardless of whether the acquired data is hosted in a separate system prior to the comparison and identification;
Amendment 1070 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 40 – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 40 – introductory part
(40) ‘law enforcement authority’ means: any public authority competent for 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;
Amendment 1071 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 40 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 40 – point a
Amendment 1073 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 40 – point b
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 40 – point b
Amendment 1082 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 44 – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 44 – introductory part
(44) ‘serious incident’ means any incident or malfunctioning that directly or indirectly leads, might have led or might lead to any of the following:
Amendment 1087 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 44 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 44 – point a
(a) the death of a person or serious damage to a person’s health or wealth, to property or the environment,
Amendment 1093 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 44 – point b
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 44 – point b
(b) a serious and irreversible disruption of the management and operation of critical infrastructure.,
Amendment 1094 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 44 – point b a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 44 – point b a (new)
(ba) a breach of obligations under national law or Union law intended to protect fundamental rights.
Amendment 1102 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 44 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 44 a (new)
(44a) ‘bias’ means any inclination of prejudice towards or against a person, object or position, whether voluntary or involuntary, that may arise as a result of the design, data supply, interactions, personalisation or configuration of an IA system;
Amendment 1113 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 44 b (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 44 b (new)
(44b) ‘auditability’ means the ability of an AI system to undergo an assessment of the system’s algorithms, data and design processes;
Amendment 1115 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 44 c (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 44 c (new)
(44c) ‘reproducibility’ means the ability of an AI system to exhibit the same behaviour when an experiment is repeated under the same conditions;
Amendment 1139 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 1
The Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 73 to amend the list of techniques and approaches listed in Annex I, in order to update that list to market and technological developments by means of additions or non-restrictive precisions on the basis of characteristics that are similar to the techniques and approaches listed therein.
Amendment 1142 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 a (new)
The techniques and approaches listed in Annex I may only be amended by an amending regulation if the amendment concerns a withdrawal, a restrictive precision or a change in the definition of those techniques and approaches.
Amendment 1161 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the placing on the market, putting into service or use of an AI system that deploys subliminal techniques beyond a person’s consciousness in order to materially distort a person’s behaviour in a manner that causes or is likely to cause that person or another person physical or psychological harm;
Amendment 1179 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the placing on the market, putting into service or use of an AI system that exploits any of the vulnerabilities of a person or a specific group of persons due to their, such as age, or physical or mental disability, in order to materially distort the behaviour of a person pertaining to that group in a manner that causes or is likely to cause that person or another person physical or psychological harm;
Amendment 1188 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c – introductory part
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c – introductory part
(c) the placing on the market, putting into service or use of AI systems by public authorities or on their behalf for the evaluation or classification of the trustworthiness of natural persons over a certain period of time based on their social behaviour or known or predicted personal or personality characteristics, with the social score leading to either or both of the following:;
Amendment 1198 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c – point i
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c – point i
Amendment 1210 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c – point ii
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c – point ii
Amendment 1227 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c c (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c c (new)
(c c) the placing on the market, putting into service or use of an AI system for the administration of justice and for democratic processes, which helps judicial authorities to investigate and interpret facts and the law, and to apply the law to a specific set of facts, with the exception of purely ancillary administrative activities which have no impact on the actual administration of justice in individual cases;
Amendment 1228 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c d (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c d (new)
(c d) the placing on the market, putting into service or use of an AI system that performs genomic, physiological, psychological or behavioural analyses of a natural person for the purpose of profiling that natural person;
Amendment 1229 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c e (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c e (new)
(c e) the placing on the market, putting into service or use of an AI system that may affect the cognitive integrity or personality of a natural person, with or without the support of physical implants;
Amendment 1231 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d – introductory part
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d – introductory part
(d) the use of ‘real-time’ remote biometric identification systems in publicly accessible spaces for the purpose of, except those strictly used for individual authentication of access to protected spaces or systems, those used for the execution of administrative procedures by tax and customs authorities, and by law enforcement, unless authorities if and in as far as such use is strictly necessary for one of the following objectives:
Amendment 1378 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
The competent judicial or administrative authority shall only grant the authorisation where it is satisfied, based on objective evidence or clear indications presented to it, that the use of the ‘real-time’ remote biometric identification system at issue is necessary for and proportionate to achieving one of the objectives specified in paragraph 1, point (d), as identified in the request. In deciding on the request, the competent judicial or administrative authority shall take into account the elements referred to in paragraph 2. It shall grant the authorisation for a limited period and scope. Any renewal or amendment of the authorisation shall be subject to the submission of a new request to the competent judicial or administrative authority.
Amendment 1465 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 73 to update the list set out in Annex III by adding fields of high-risk AI systems where both of the following conditions are fulfilled:they present a risk of harm to health and safety or a risk of a negative impact on fundamental rights which, taking into account its severity and likelihood of occurrence, is equivalent to or higher than the risk of harm or negative impact of high-risk AI systems already listed in Annex III.
Amendment 1471 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point a
Amendment 1477 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point b
Amendment 1487 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. When assessing an AI system for the purposes of paragraph 1 whether an AI system poses a risk of harm to the health and safety or a risk of adverse impact on fundamental rights that is equivalent to or greater than the risk of harm posed by the high-risk AI systems already referred to in Annex III, the Commission shall take into account the following criteria:
Amendment 1546 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. When assessing an AI system for the purposes of paragraph 1, the Commission shall consult, where appropriate, national and European authorities and bodies, representatives of the groups concerned by that system, industry professionals, independent experts and civil society organisations. The Commission shall organise public consultations in this regard.
Amendment 1551 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. The Commission shall publish a detailed report on the assessment referred to in paragraph 2.
Amendment 1552 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 c (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 2 c (new)
Amendment 1589 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
(aa) identification of the risks, damage and harm actually caused by the high-risk AI system in the past, whether these are the result of use of the high-risk AI system for its intended purpose or of another use;
Amendment 1599 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
(ca) sandbox experimentation on the functioning of the AI systems;
Amendment 1604 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3
Article 9 – paragraph 3
3. The risk management measures referred to in paragraph 2, point (d) shall give due consideration to the effects and possible interactions resulting from the combined application of the requirements set out in this Chapter 2. They shall take into account the generally acknowledged state of the art, including as reflected in the common technical specifications adopted by the Commission or in relevant harmonised standards or common specifications.
Amendment 1608 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
Article 9 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. The risk management measures referred to in paragraph 2, point (d) shall be such that any residual risk associated with each hazard, as well as the overall residual risk of the high-risk AI systems is judged acceptable, provided that the high- risk AI system is used in accordance with its intended purpose or under conditions of reasonably foreseeable misuse. Those residual risks shall be communicated to the user., is:
Amendment 1636 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 4 – point a (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 4 – point a (new)
(a) technically and structurally minimised by the high-risk AI system;
Amendment 1637 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 4 – point b (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 4 – point b (new)
(b) deemed acceptable, provided that the high-risk AI system is used for its intended purpose or under conditions of reasonably foreseeable misuse.
Amendment 1638 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Those residual risks shall be communicated to the user.
Amendment 1646 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 6
Article 9 – paragraph 6
6. Testing procedures shall be suitable to achieve the intended purpose of the AI system and do not need to go beyond what is necessary to achieve that purpose.
Amendment 1649 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 (new)
They shall test:
Amendment 1650 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 6 – point a (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 6 – point a (new)
(a) the ability of the high-risk AI system to generate an accurate and robust result;
Amendment 1651 #
2021/0106(COD)
(b) the trustworthiness of the high- risk AI system and its ability to actually generate a result such as that expected in accordance with its intended purpose;
Amendment 1652 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 6 – point c (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 6 – point c (new)
(c) the structural and technical capacity of the high-risk AI system to ensure it cannot be used for purposes other than its intended purpose.
Amendment 1654 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 7
Article 9 – paragraph 7
7. The testing of the high-risk AI systems shall be performed, as appropriate, at any point in time throughout the development process, and, in any event, prior to the placing on the market or the putting into service. Testing shall be made against preliminarily defined metrics and probabilistic thresholds that are preliminarily defined according to common standards or technical specifications and appropriate to the intended purpose of the high-risk AI system.
Amendment 1687 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) the relevant design choices, including the extent to which the functioning of the algorithms can be audited and reproduced;
Amendment 1734 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 5
Article 10 – paragraph 5
Amendment 1741 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 10 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. The dissemination of data by an AI system to other AI systems, whether or not they are of the same origin and whether or not they are installed on the same medium, shall be checked by the provider and may be retracted if necessary.
Amendment 1763 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3
Article 11 – paragraph 3
3. The Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 73 to amenddd to Annex IV where necessary to ensure that, in the light of technical progress, the technical documentation provides all the necessary information to assess the compliance of the system with the requirements set out in this Chapter.
Amendment 1765 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 1
1. High-risk AI systems shall be designed and developed with capabilities enabling the automatic recording of events (‘logs’) while the high-risk AI systems isare operating. Those logging capabilities shall conform to recognised standards or common specifications. Where possible, these capabilities shall be local ones and the logs shall be stored on the medium employed by the user of the AI system.
Amendment 1800 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 3 – point b – point ii
Article 13 – paragraph 3 – point b – point ii
(ii) the level of accuracy, robustness and cybersecurity referred to in Article 15 against which the high-risk AI system has been tested and validated before being placed on the market and which can be expected, and any known and foreseeable circumstances that may have an impact on that expected level of accuracy, robustness and cybersecurity;
Amendment 1815 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2
Article 14 – paragraph 2
2. Human oversight shall aim at preventing or minimising the risks to health, safety or fundamental rights that may emerge when a high-risk AI system is used in accordance with its intended purpose or under conditions of reasonably foreseeable misuse, in particular when such risksprovided that those risks, if they persist notwithstanding the application of other requirements set out in this Chapter, do not result in a requirement for the high-risk AI system to be recalled or withdrawn.
Amendment 1864 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Article 15 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
It shall be possible for the user, the provider, the national competent authority or authorities and the Commission, as appropriate, to audit and reproduce the functioning of the high-risk AI systems.
Amendment 1892 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) ensure that the high-risk AI system undergoes the relevant conformity assessment procedure, prior to its placing on the market or putting into service, and ensure it is periodically reviewed;
Amendment 1898 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point g
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) take the necessary corrective actions, if the high-risk AI system is not in conformity with the requirements set out in Chapter 2 of this Title, before the high- risk AI system concerned is placed on the market, made available on the market or put into service, or before a high-risk AI system that has been withdrawn or recalled is placed on the market, made available on the market or put into service once again;
Amendment 1951 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1
Article 19 – paragraph 1
1. Providers of high-risk AI systems shall ensure that their systems undergo the relevant conformity assessment procedure in accordance with Article 43, prior to their placingbefore they are placed on the market, made available on the market or putting into service. Where the compliance of the AI systems with the requirements set out in Chapter 2 of this Title has been demonstrated following that conformity assessment, the providers shall draw up an EU declaration of conformity in accordance with Article 48 and affix the CE marking of conformity in accordance with Article 49.
Amendment 1954 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1
Article 20 – paragraph 1
1. Providers of high-risk AI systems shall keepguarantee the storage of the logs automatically generated by their high-risk AI systems, where possible on the media employed by users, to the extent such logs are under their control by virtue of a contractual arrangement with the user or otherwise by law. The logs shall be kept for a period that is appropriate in the light of the intended purpose of the high-risk AI system and applicable legal obligations under Union or national law.
Amendment 1961 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1
Article 21 – paragraph 1
Providers of high-risk AI systems which consider or have reason to consider that a high-risk AI system which they have placed on the market or put into service is not in conformity with this Regulation shall immediately take the necessary corrective actions to bring that system into conformitywithdraw or recall the system, as appropriate, tso withdraw it or to recall it, as appropriateas to bring it into conformity. They shall inform the distributors of the high-risk AI system in question and, where applicable, the authorised representative and importers accordingly.
Amendment 1983 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 25 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. As of the time they are appointed, authorised representatives must be able to correspond, exchange technical information and carry out the duties required of them under this Regulation with the national authorities and in the official languages of all the Member States.
Amendment 1985 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 25 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) keep a copy of the EU declaration of conformity and the technical documentation at the disposal of the national competent authorities and national authoritiescarry out or commission the conformity assessment referred to in Article 63(7)43;
Amendment 1987 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 25 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) provide a national competent authority, upon a reasoned request, with all the information and documentation necessary to demonstrate the conformity of a high-risk AI system wikeep a copy of the EU declaration of conformity and the the requirements set out in Chapter 2 of this Title, including access to the logs automatically generated by the high-risk AI system to the extent such logs are under the control of the provider by virtue of a contractual arrangement with the user or otherwise by lawechnical documentation at the disposal of the national competent authorities and national authorities referred to in Article 63(7);
Amendment 1990 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 25 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) cooperate withprovide a national competent national authoritiesy, upon a reasoned request, on any action the latter takes in relation to the high-risk AI system.with all the information and documentation necessary to demonstrate the conformity of a high-risk AI system with the requirements set out in Chapter 2 of this Title, including access to the logs automatically generated by the high-risk AI system to the extent such logs are under the control of the provider by virtue of a contractual arrangement with the user or otherwise by law;
Amendment 1994 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
Article 25 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
(ca) cooperate with competent national authorities, upon a reasoned request, on any action the latter takes in relation to the high-risk AI system.
Amendment 1997 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the appropriate conformity assessment procedure has been carried out by the provider of that AI system following its import and prior to its deployment;
Amendment 2007 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 5
Article 26 – paragraph 5
5. Importers shall provide national competent authorities, upon a reasoned request, with all necessary information and documentation to demonstrate the conformity of a high-risk AI system with the requirements set out in Chapter 2 of this Title in a language which can be easily understood byn official language of that national competent authority, including access to the logs automatically generated by the high-risk AI system to the extent such logs are under the control of the provider by virtue of a contractual arrangement with the user or otherwise by law. They shall also cooperate with those authorities on any action national competent authority takes in relation to that system.
Amendment 2016 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 4
Article 27 – paragraph 4
4. A distributor that considers or has reason to consider that a high-risk AI system which it has made available on the market is not in conformity with the requirements set out in Chapter 2 of this Title shall take the corrective actions necessary to bring that systemto withdraw or recall that system in order to bring it into conformity with those requirements, to withdraw it or recall it or shall ensure that the provider, the importer or any relevant operator, as appropriate, takes those corrective actions. Where the high- risk AI system presents a risk within the meaning of Article 65(1), the distributor shall immediately inform the national competent authorities of the Member States in which it has made the product available to that effect, giving details, in particular, of the non-compliance and of any corrective actions taken.
Amendment 2029 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) they have placed on the market or put into service a high-risk AI system which they have substantially modified by their own means;
Amendment 2091 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 8
Article 30 – paragraph 8
8. Notifying authorities shall make sure that conformity assessments are carried out in a proportionate manner, avoiding unnecessary burdens for providers and that notified bodies perform their activities taking due account of the size of an undertaking, the sector in which it operates, its structure and the degree of complexity of and risk posed by the AI system in question.
Amendment 2099 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 4
Article 32 – paragraph 4
4. The conformity assessment body concerned may begin to perform the activities of a notified body only where no objections are raised by the Commission or the other Member States within one month of a notification.
Amendment 2106 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 7
Article 33 – paragraph 7
7. Notified bodies shall have procedures for the performance of activities which take due account of the size of an undertaking, the sector in which it operates, its structure, and the degree of complexity of and risk posed by the AI system in question.
Amendment 2108 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 3
Article 34 – paragraph 3
3. Activities may be subcontracted or carried out by a subsidiary only with the agreement of the provider and the notifying authority.
Amendment 2114 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 4
Article 37 – paragraph 4
4. Where the Commission ascertains that a notified body does not meet or no longer meets the requirements laid down in Article 33, it shall adopt a reasoned decision requesting the notifying Member State to take the necessary corrective measures, including withdrawal of notification if necessary. That implementing acrequest shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 74(2).
Amendment 2117 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39
Article 39
Amendment 2123 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 1
Article 40 – paragraph 1
High-risk AI systems which arshall be in conformity with harmonised standards or parts thereof the references of which have been published in the Official Journal of the European Union shall be presumed to be in conformity with the requirements set out in Chapter 2 of this Title, to the extent those standards cover those requirements.
Amendment 2145 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 3
Article 41 – paragraph 3
Amendment 2147 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 4
Article 41 – paragraph 4
Amendment 2158 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 43 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. For high-risk AI systems listed in point 1 of Annex III, where, in demonstrating the compliance of a high- risk AI system with the requirements set out in Chapter 2 of this Title, the provider has applied harmonised standards referred to in Article 40, or, where applicable, common specifications referred to in Article 41, the provider shall follow one of the following procedures:the conformity assessment procedure based on assessment of the quality management system and assessment of the technical documentation, with the involvement of a notified body, referred to in Annex VII.
Amendment 2162 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 43 – paragraph 1 – point a
Amendment 2167 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 43 – paragraph 1 – point b
Amendment 2184 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 2
Article 43 – paragraph 2
2. For high-risk AI systems referred to in points 2 to 8 of Annex III, providers shall follow the conformity assessment procedure based on internal control as referred to in Annex VI, which does not provide forassessment of the quality management system and assessment of the technical documentation, with the involvement of a notified body, referred to in Annex VII. For high-risk AI systems referred to in point 5(b) of Annex III, placed on the market or put into service by credit institutions regulated by Directive 2013/36/EU, the conformity assessment shall be carried out as part of the procedure referred to in Articles 97 to101 of that Directive.
Amendment 2187 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 43 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. High-risk AI systems shall periodically be subject to a conformity assessment review procedure.
Amendment 2195 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Article 43 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
For high-risk AI systems that continue to learn after being placed on the market or put into service, changes to the high-risk AI system and its performance tshatll constitute a substantial modification, including if they have been pre-determined by the provider at the moment of the initial conformity assessment and are part of the information contained in the technical documentation referred to in point 2(f) of Annex IV, shall not constitute a substantial modification.
Amendment 2202 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 5
Article 43 – paragraph 5
5. The Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 73 for the purpose of updating Annexes VI and Annex VII in order to introduce elements of the conformity assessment procedures that become necessary in light of technical progress.
Amendment 2203 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 6
Article 43 – paragraph 6
Amendment 2209 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 1
Article 44 – paragraph 1
1. Certificates issued by notified bodies in accordance with Annex VII shall be drawn-up in anthe official Union language determined byof the Member State in which the notified body is established or in an official Union language otherwise acceptable to the notified body.
Amendment 2211 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 46 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Each notified body shall inform the other notified bodies and the notifying authority of:
Amendment 2231 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 49 – paragraph 1
Article 49 – paragraph 1
1. The CE marking shall be affixed visibly, legibly and indelibly for high-risk AI systems before they are placed on the market, made available on the market or put into service. Where that is not possible or not warranted on account of the nature of the high-risk AI system, it shall be affixed to the packaging or to the accompanying documentation, as appropriate.
Amendment 2354 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Article 54 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
(aa) natural persons whose personal data are used for the development and testing of certain innovative AI systems in the sandbox shall be informed of the collection and use of their data and shall have given their consent thereto;
Amendment 2433 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 1
Article 57 – paragraph 1
1. The Board shall be composed of the national supervisory authorities, who shall be represented by the head or equivalent high-level official of that authority, and the European Data Protection Supervisor and the national data protection bodies. Other national authorities may be invited to the meetings, where the issues discussed are of relevance for them.
Amendment 2446 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 2
Article 57 – paragraph 2
2. The Board shall adopt its rules of procedure by a simpletwo-thirds majority of its members, following the consent of the Commission. The rules of procedure shall also contain the operational aspects related to the execution of the Board’s tasks as listed in Article 58. The Board may establish sub-groups as appropriate for the purpose of examining specific questions.
Amendment 2452 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 3
Article 57 – paragraph 3
3. The Board shall be chaired by the Commission. The Commissionnational supervisory authority of the Member State holding the Presidency of the Council of the European Union. The latter shall convene the meetings and prepare the agenda in accordance with the tasks of the Board pursuant to this Regulation and with its rules of procedure. The Commission shall provide administrative and analytical support for the activities of the Board pursuant to this Regulation.
Amendment 2565 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 59 – paragraph 2
Article 59 – paragraph 2
2. Each Member State shall designate aone or more national supervisory authorityies among the national competent authorities. The national supervisory authority or authorities shall act as notifying authorityies and market surveillance authority unless a Member State has organisational and administrative reasons to designate more than one authorityies.
Amendment 2567 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 59 – paragraph 3
Article 59 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall inform the Commission of their designation or designations and, where applicable, the reasons for designating more than one authority.
Amendment 2579 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 59 – paragraph 5
Article 59 – paragraph 5
5. Member States shall report to the Commission on an annual basis on the status of the financial and human resources of the national competent authorities with an assessment of their adequacy. The Commission shall transmit that information to the Board for discussion and possible recommendations.
Amendment 2645 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 61 – paragraph 2
Article 61 – paragraph 2
2. The post-market monitoring system shall actively and systematically collect, document and analyse relevant data provided by users or collected through other sources, not including the automated transmission of data, on the performance of high- risk AI systems throughout their lifetime, and allow the provider to evaluate the continuous compliance of AI systems with the requirements set out in Title III, Chapter 2.
Amendment 2647 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 61 – paragraph 3
Article 61 – paragraph 3
3. The post-market monitoring system shall be based on a post-market monitoring plan. The post-market monitoring plan shall be part of the technical documentation referred to in Annex IV. The Commission shall adopt an implementing act laying down detailed provisions establishing a template for the post-market monitoring plan and the list of elements to be included in the plan. These provisions shall not provide for the automated and systematic transmission of data.
Amendment 2659 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 62 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 62 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Such notification shall be made immediately after the provider has established a causal link between the AI system and the incident or malfunctioning or the reasonable likelihood of such a link, and, in any event, not later than 15 day72 hours after the providers becomes aware of the serious incident or of the malfunctioning.
Amendment 2707 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 65 – paragraph 1
Article 65 – paragraph 1
1. AI systems presenting a risk shall be understood as a product presenting a risk defined in Article 3, point 19 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 insofar as risks to the health or safety or to the protection of fundamental rights of persons, or of public order or the national security of the Member States are concerned.
Amendment 2718 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 65 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 65 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Where, in the course of that evaluation, the market surveillance authority finds that the AI system does not comply with the requirements and obligations laid down in this Regulation, it shall without delay require the relevant operator to take all appropriate corrective actions to bring the AI system into compliancwithin a reasonable period, commensurate with the nature of the risk, and which it may prescribe, to withdraw the AI system from the market, or to recall it within a reasonable period, commensurate with the nature of the risk, as it may prescribto bring it into compliance.
Amendment 2732 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 65 – paragraph 7
Article 65 – paragraph 7
7. The market surveillance authorities of the Member States other than the market surveillance authority of the Member State initiating the procedure shall without delay inform the Commission and the other Member States of any measures adopted and of any additional information at their disposal relating to the non-compliance of the AI system concerned, and, in the event of disagreement with the notified national measure, of their objections.
Amendment 2734 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 65 – paragraph 8
Article 65 – paragraph 8
Amendment 2738 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 66
Article 66
Amendment 2757 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 67 – paragraph 4
Article 67 – paragraph 4
4. The Commission shall without delay enter into consultation with the Member States and the relevant operator and shall evaluate the national measures taken. On the basis of the results of that evaluation, the Commission shall decide whether the measure is justified or not and, where necessary, propose appropriate measures.
Amendment 2767 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 2
Article 68 – paragraph 2
2. Where the non-compliance referred to in paragraph 1 persists for longer than one week following receipt of the relevant notice, the Member State concerned shall take all appropriate measures to restrict or prohibit the high- risk AI system being made available on the market or ensure that it is recalled or withdrawn from the market. , imposing, where necessary, the penalties laid down in national law.
Amendment 2789 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 69 – paragraph 2
Article 69 – paragraph 2
2. The Commission and the Board shall encourage and facilitate the drawing up of codes of conduct intended to foster the voluntary application to AI systems of requirements related for example to environmental sustainability, accessibility for persons with a disability, and stakeholders’ participation in the design and development of the AI systems and diversity of development teams on the basis of clear objectives and key performance indicators to measure the achievement of those objectives.
Amendment 2814 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 71 – paragraph 1
Article 71 – paragraph 1
Amendment 2834 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 71 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 71 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. The following infringements shall be subject to administrative fines of up to 31 000 000 000 EUR or, if the offender is a company, up to 610 % of its total worldwide annual turnover for the preceding financial year, whichever is higher:
Amendment 2889 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 72 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 72 – paragraph 1 – point b
Amendment 2897 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 72 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 72 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The following infringements shall be subject to administrative fines of up to 530 000 000 EUR:
Amendment 2907 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 72 – paragraph 3
Article 72 – paragraph 3
3. The non-compliance of the AI system with any requirements or obligations under this Regulation, other than those laid down in Articles 5 and 10, shall be subject to administrative fines of up to 250 000 000 EUR.
Amendment 2914 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 72 – paragraph 6
Article 72 – paragraph 6
Amendment 2944 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 83 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 83 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. This Regulation shall not apply to the AI systems which are components of the large-scale IT systems established by the legal acts listed in Annex IX that have been placed on the market or put into service before [12 months after the date of application of this Regulation referred to in Article 85(2)], unless the replacement or amendment of those legal acts leads to a significant change in the design or intended purpose of the AI system or AI systems concerned.
Amendment 2958 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 83 – paragraph 2
Article 83 – paragraph 2
2. This Regulation shall apply to the high-risk AI systems, other than the ones referred to in paragraph 1, that have been placed on the market or put into service before [date of application of this Regulation referred to in Article 85(2)], only if, from that date, those systems are subject to significant changes in their design or intended purpose.
Amendment 3026 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point c a (new)
Annex I – point c a (new)
(c a) Approaches based on neural network imitation and neuro-robotic networks;
Amendment 3027 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point c b (new)
Annex I – point c b (new)
(c b) Machine learning tasks on graphs for repetition tasks or pattern recognition;
Amendment 3028 #
2021/0106(COD)
(c c) Natural language programming techniques, including emotion detection and recognition systems, using interactions between human language and computer language;
Amendment 3029 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point c d (new)
Annex I – point c d (new)
(c d) Artificial vision for pattern recognition, including graphical analysis or digital signature identification;
Amendment 3030 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point c e (new)
Annex I – point c e (new)
(c e) Interactive systems related to mechatronics, robotics and automation systems.
Amendment 3036 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – Part A – point 12 a (new)
Annex II – Part A – point 12 a (new)
12a. [REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on a Single Market For Digital Services (Digital Services Act) and amending Directive 2000/31/EC]
Amendment 3037 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – Part A – point 12 b (new)
Annex II – Part A – point 12 b (new)
12b. [REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on contestable and fair markets in the digital sector (Digital Markets Act)].
Amendment 3061 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point a
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point a
(a) AI systems intended to be used for the ‘real-time’ and ‘post’ remote biometric identification of natural persons, within the strict limits of the exemption from the general prohibition on their use laid down in Article 5;
Amendment 3070 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point a a (new)
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point a a (new)
(a a) AI systems intended to be used by autonomous devices, drones or vehicles to transport or collect natural persons;
Amendment 3141 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point c
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point c
(c) AI systems intended to be used, without taking any decisions on the matter, to dispatch, or to establish priority in the dispatching of emergency first response services, including by firefighters and medical aid.
Amendment 3148 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point a
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point a
Amendment 3156 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point b
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point b
Amendment 3173 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point e
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point e
Amendment 3180 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point f
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point f
Amendment 3228 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 8
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 8
Amendment 3283 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex VI
Annex VI
Amendment 46 #
2021/0045(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital (29)
Recital (29)
(29) Roaming providers should be able to apply a ‘fair use policy’ to the consumption of regulated retail roaming services provided at the applicable domestic retail price. The ‘fair use policy’ is intended to prevent abusive or anomalous usage of regulated retail roaming services by roaming customers, such as the use of such services by roaming customers in a Member State other than that of their domestic provider for purposes other than periodic travel. Roaming providers should, in cases of force majeure caused by circumstances such as pandemics or natural catastrophes which involuntarily extend the period of temporary stay of the roaming customer in another Member State, consider extending the applicable fair use allowance for an appropriate period, upon a justified request by the roaming customer . Any fair use policy should enable the roaming provider’s customers to consume volumes of regulated retail roaming services at the applicable domestic retail price that are consistent with their respective tariff plans.
Amendment 50 #
2021/0045(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35
Recital 35
(35) A contract which includes any type of regulated retail roaming service should specify the characteristics of that regulated retail roaming service, including the expected level of quality of serviceclear and comprehensible information on the expected level of quality of service. Such information should be provided in line with BEREC’s retail roaming guidelines. The provider should make available information on relevant factors that can affect the quality of service, such as availability of certain technologies, coverage or variation due to external factors such as topography.
Amendment 57 #
2021/0045(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36
Recital 36
(36) Roaming customers and home operators sometimes unwittingly incur large bills as a result of the lack of transparency on the numbers used for value added services across the Union and on the wholesale prices charged for value added services. Communications to certain numbers which are used for providing value added services, for example, premium-rate numbers, freephone numbers or shared cost numbers, are subject to particular pricing conditions at the national level. This Regulation should not apply to the part of the tariff that is charged for the provision of value added services but only to the tariffs for the connection to such services. Nevertheless, the RLAH principle might create an expectation for end-users that communications to such numbers while roaming should not incur any increased cost in comparison to the domestic situation. However, this is not always the case when roaming. End-users are confronted with increased costs, even when they call numbers that are free when called domestically. This could erode customers’ confidence in using their phones when roaming and could result in bill shocks, thus having a negative impact on a genuine RLAH experience. This is mainly caused, at retail level by the insufficient level of transparency on the higher charges which can be incurred because of communications to value added services numbers. Therefore measures should be introduced to increase the transparency on the conditions for communications to value added services numbers. To that end, roaming customers and roaming customers living with a disability should be informed in their contract and notified and warned, in a timely manner and free of charge, that communications to value added services numbers in roaming can entail additional charges.
Amendment 60 #
2021/0045(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 43
Recital 43
(43) In order to improve the transparency of retail prices for roaming services and to help roaming customers make decisions on the use of their mobile devices while abroad, providers of mobile communication services should supply their roaming customers with information free of charge on the roaming charges applicable to them when using roaming services in a visited Member State. Since certain customer groups might be well informed about roaming charges, roaming providers should provide a possibility to easily opt-out from this automatic message service. In addition, roaming customers should be provided with a text message including a link to a web page giving detailed information about the types of services (calls and SMS) that may be subject to increased costs. Such communications should be guaranteed and easily accessible for roaming customers living with a disability. Moreover, providers should actively give their customers, provided that the latter are located in the Union, on request and free of charge, additional information on the per- minute, per-SMS or per-megabyte data charges (including VAT) for the making or receiving of voice calls and also for the sending and receiving of SMS, MMS and other data communication services in the visited Member State.
Amendment 86 #
2021/0045(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – point c
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – point c
(c) clear and comprehensible information on the quality of service that can reasonably be expected when roaming in the Union, including in particular information on the speed and potential limitation to the transmission of data.
Amendment 94 #
2021/0045(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
Roaming providers shall, except when the roaming customer has notified the roaming provider that he does not require this service, provide the customer, automatically by means of a Message Service, without undue delay and free of charge, when the roaming customer enters a Member State other than that of his domestic provider, with information on the potential risk of increased charges due to the use of value added services including a link to a dedicated webpage providing information about the types of services that may be subject to increased costs and, if available, information on value added services number ranges. Such communications shall be guaranteed and easily accessible in particular for roaming customers living with a disability.
Amendment 1 #
2020/2262(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recalls the importance, for a properly functioning and competitive, fair and efficient internal market, of effective better law- making tools that take subsidiarity and proportionality fully into account when drawing up scientifically based and, balanced legislation that safeguards Europeans, particularly for consumers and SMEs; deeply regrets that that is very rarely the case, as consideration of those two criteria, though required by the Treaties, often takes up no more than a few lines in presentations of Union legislative acts and is confined to making basic assertions with no analytical content;
Amendment 11 #
2020/2262(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Reiterates that internal market objectives such as improving competitiveness, digitalisation, sustainability, safety, autonomy, resilience, justice and consumer protection should be underpinned by the enhanced use of scrutmonitorinyg instruments such as the regulatory fitness and performance programme (REFIT) and the Regulatory Scrutiny Board;
Amendment 37 #
2020/2262(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Warns that legislation which increasesone of the aims of good legislation ought to be to reduce the administrative burdens greatly affectsimposed on SMEs and consumers by hindering competitiveness and prevent, albeit without hindering the fair and efficient functioning of the single market or preventing it from unlocking its full potential; calls on the Commission, with a view to providing evidence on the added value of EU action, and its costs and benefits, to strengthen the SME fitness check.
Amendment 12 #
2020/2260(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the fact that the aim of the Farm to Fork Strategy is to establish a local, sustainable, healthy and resilient food system which benefits consumers in the EU;
Amendment 27 #
2020/2260(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Considers that promoting healthy and sustainable food consumption calls for changesinvolves paying attention to diets, production systems and, internal trade and promoting public food education campaigns starting from primary schools;
Amendment 37 #
2020/2260(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Notes that quality food, fair profits for producers, fair prices for consumers, food sovereignty, environmental protection and high standards of animal welfare are key objectives for a balanced consumption policy;
Amendment 45 #
2020/2260(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls on the Commission to step up its support for regional food systems and short supply chains, which act as a source of fresh, sustainable and better quality products for consumers; takes the view that legislation on European public procurement should be revised in order to foster local, high-quality food supply systems; underlines the fundamental role of public administrations in the collective catering sector, in which priority should be given to organic, traditional, typical products, products with geographical indication and from a short supply chain;
Amendment 57 #
2020/2260(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Considers that local, national or European preference in public tenders for food (canteens, hospitals, etc.) should be encouraged;
Amendment 58 #
2020/2260(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Calls on the Commission to identify practical ways of encouraging short supply chains, such as an exemption from VAT for products sold less than 100 km from their production site, and providing public spaces for the regular or seasonal sale of products from micro- enterprises or regional cooperatives;
Amendment 71 #
2020/2260(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Urges the Commission to allow Member States that so wish (Bulgaria, Slovakia, etc.) to encourage the creation of special shelves in supermarkets for local or national products;
Amendment 75 #
2020/2260(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Calls on the Commission to make it easier for quality products from micro- enterprises to access local markets;
Amendment 80 #
2020/2260(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Supports the establishment of a governance framework and a code of conduct for food and retail businesses, in order to make them accountable and aware of the importance of sustainability and health; points out the importance of tackling free-riding throughout the food supply chain in order to ensure a fair price for products and protect the reputation of those products with quality marks;
Amendment 85 #
2020/2260(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Supports the establishment of a governance framework and a code of conduct for food and retail businesses, in order to make them accountable and aware of the importance of sustainability and health; recalls the importance of effective application of the Directive on unfair practices in the agri-food chain;
Amendment 90 #
2020/2260(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Points out that, although food prices are soaring for consumers, producers are still receiving too low a share of the value added; calls for the distribution of value added to be rebalanced;
Amendment 100 #
2020/2260(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. WelcomAcknowledges the Commission’s initiative to promote healthier diets by introducing nutritional profiles, accompanied by mandatthrough consumer education campaigns and actions that inforym and harmonised labelling of the nutritional vabout the importance of a varied and balanced diet, which does not exclude ofany food as lon the front of packagingg as it is consumed in the right quantities and frequencies and which is accompanied by adequate physical activity;
Amendment 108 #
2020/2260(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Stresses that the key to pursue the objective of healthier diets should be providing clear and correct information to consumers, not influencing their food choices with distortive claims on nutritional values; it further underlines that nutrition labelling schemes could be detrimental to some products that benefit from an indication of origin;
Amendment 113 #
2020/2260(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Amendment 127 #
2020/2260(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Regards it as essential, further, to keep consumers better informed by introducing mandatory ingredient origin labelling of processed and unprocessed food, which would be broadened to cover animal welfare, sustainability and pesticide residue levels;
Amendment 134 #
2020/2260(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Underlines the importance of extending the indication of origin labelling, including that of primary ingredients, to all agricultural supply chains; stresses that the indication of origin requirement should be made uniform throughout the EU internal market in such a way that is sustainable for the entire agri-food chain;
Amendment 135 #
2020/2260(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Amendment 143 #
2020/2260(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7b. Calls for the ‘EU and non-EU’ indication of origin to be immediately prohibited for foodstuffs such as honey and jam, because it is often fake and misleads consumers about the European origin of the product;
Amendment 144 #
2020/2260(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 c (new)
Paragraph 7 c (new)
7c. Calls for a ban on all European public subsidies for slaughterhouses not stunning animals before their slaughter;
Amendment 145 #
2020/2260(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 d (new)
Paragraph 7 d (new)
7d. Considers that the clear and mandatory origin labelling of food should indicate a precise place of origin in the Member State or third country concerned;
Amendment 169 #
2020/2260(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Supports the Commission in its efforts to combat food fraud, which misleads consumers and distorts competition in the internal market, and regards it as essential to make the penalties imposed on fraudsters more dissuasive and to earmark sufficient resources so that checks can be stepped up and legally define at EU level the concepts of “Fraud and Agri-food Crime” and that of “Sounding”;
Amendment 175 #
2020/2260(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Recalls that numerous food scandals have shocked European consumers: processed meat products, such as lasagne, made from horse meat, tainted Brazilian beef, chicken and beef containing hormones and antibiotics, as well as fake honey and fraudulent alcohol and wine; calls for food checks to be increased in order to protect consumers, by setting a minimum number or rate of annual inspections;
Amendment 183 #
2020/2260(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Notes that Turkey has engaged in unilateral and provocative activities against the EU, Member States and European leaders; notes, further, that Turkish unilateral and provocative activities in the Eastern Mediterranean are still taking place, including in Cyprus’ Exclusive Economic Zone; calls on the Commission and Member States to temporarily limit the access of Turkish foodstuffs to the internal market and European consumers.
Amendment 186 #
2020/2260(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Recalls that the tools of the Farm to Fork Strategy could be profitable for the European market only if environmental and social sustainability are placed at the core of the EU trade policy in relation to agreements with third Countries;
Amendment 5 #
2020/2223(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Stresses that competition policy applies only to actors operating on European territory, but that the globalised nature of the economy and trade enables key players to implement global strategies that are not subject to EU legislation and are designed to circumvent it, generating significant economic and social harm in Europe while appearing to meet the objectives of European competition; strongly recommends that these objectives, in particular those of low prices and the strong competition supposedly conducive to creativity, be revised in the light of the costs and destruction that their implementation entails, with the focus shifting to fair prices and equitable development;
Amendment 8 #
2020/2223(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Recalls the importance of safeguarding consumers' right to a conscious and safe choice by promoting tools that will ensure the highest level of transparency about the composition and origin of products;
Amendment 34 #
2020/2223(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Highlights the importance of a few online operators acting as gatekeepers to the digital economy, including access to e- commerce markets and the consequences on freedom of choice for consumers and access to markets for companies; underlines, thereforein that connection, the strategic requirement for the EU to have companies with comparable capacities, and calls on the Commission to adapt competition law rules in order to foster the rapid recovery of Member States’ economies and the emergence of such companies; stresses, further, the need for an internal market ex ante regulatory instrument to ensure that impacted markets remain fair and competitive; looks forward to seeing this instrument in the forthcoming Digital Markets Act proposal;
Amendment 45 #
2020/2223(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Notes that the Vertical Block Exemption Regulation has been inadequately adapted to recent market developments, notably the growth of online sales and online platforms; welcomes the impact assessment recently launched by the Commission and calls for further steps to address the issue, without prejudice to legislation on future services and digital markets;
Amendment 59 #
2020/2223(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6b. Encourages the adoption of measures to strengthen European start- ups and SMEs as a means of supporting their competitiveness with non-EU ones, in accordance with the level playing field principle; stresses the need of a proper application of competition policy to third- country companies operating in the EU internal market;
Amendment 61 #
2020/2223(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Commission to ensure fair and secure access to data for all market participantsin keeping with a European strategy of protection and sovereignty in their hosting, processing and management; notes that ithis should empower all consumers to control their data, whatever form they take and including the metadata of online services, such as connection details, interaction arrangements or information on the IT equipment used, and provide them with additional rights in terms of data portability and interoperability in order to ensure that the single market for data is based on European values and fair competitionthe full and uniform application of European law.
Amendment 37 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Calls on the Commission and Member State authorities to combat tax evasion and abuses of dominant positions by non-European businesses active on the market for algorithmic systems for personal-data analysis;
Amendment 38 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Calls for consideration to be given to different models for the taxation of digital businesses in order to prevent across-the-board user surveillance; states that taxing digital businesses according to the volume of data they collect, analyse or store would make it possible to rebalance economic models based on ‘surveillance capitalism’ and to protect consumers;
Amendment 47 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Highlights the need to create a single European data space with the aim of ensuring the free flow of non-personal data across borderall Member States and sectors; underlines the principle of the free flow of non-personal data as imperative for a single market for data, providing a level playing field for data sharing between stakeholders; considers that business-to- business (B2B) and business-to- government (B2G) data sharing should be voluntary, while mandatory access to data should also be envisaged to remedy potential market failures relating to the monopoly exercised by particular third- country actors;
Amendment 58 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Emphasises how important it is that European citizens’ personal data should preferably be processed in Europe;
Amendment 62 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Points to the unique nature of certain personal data, such as health data, children’s data and intimate private data, e.g. sexual preferences or personal photos; stresses that anonymisation of such data should be guaranteed and that storage or analysis thereof outside the European Union should not be authorised;
Amendment 72 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)
Paragraph 3 c (new)
3c. Considers that a Member State should be able to oblige cloud service providers and digital businesses operating in the European Union, whether located in the European Union or in a third country, to provide access to any relevant personal data relating to terrorism, even if stored in a third country;
Amendment 76 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 d (new)
Paragraph 3 d (new)
3d. Regrets that the Commission does not envisage any specific protection for Europeans with critical economic responsibilities against third-country laws such as the US Cloud Act; states that that legislation allows third-country law enforcement authorities to access personal data in connection with criminal investigations that are sometimes conducted on economic competition grounds; states that the strategic impact of such cases is sometimes considerable for European firms, Alstom being a case in point,;
Amendment 97 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Points out that the development of a European industrial and technological base requires the introduction of a European preference for local or European production in digital procurement in Europe;
Amendment 99 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Considers that any authorisation by a contracting authority for economic operators from countries outside the European Union or the European Economic Area to participate in a procedure for the award of digital contracts, such as for cloud services, must take into account, inter alia, the imperatives of information and supply security, the safeguarding of defence and state security interests, the interest in developing a European digital industrial and technological base, and reciprocity requirements;
Amendment 106 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 c (new)
Paragraph 4 c (new)
4c. Points to the need to protect European subcontractors and producers of critical digital components, applications or systems in view of the predatory approach of third-country businesses;
Amendment 107 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 d (new)
Paragraph 4 d (new)
4d. Points out that, in the United States, the government has invested massively in new technologies: USD 1 400 billion in 20 years since the inception, in the early 1990s, of Al Gore’s information superhighway plan; points out that, by comparison, the EUR 2 billion investment planned by the Commission in a project on European data spaces and federated cloud infrastructure appears derisory; calls therefore on the Commission to authorise Member State aid to strengthen local or European businesses active in the field of digital data and to put an end to third-country businesses’ monopoly in Europe in this strategic area;
Amendment 9 #
2020/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas artificial intelligence (AI) can offers many benefits but also presents certain risks;
Amendment 10 #
2020/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas the EU’s technology lag in AI poses a threat to the independence and security of the European states;
Amendment 20 #
2020/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Believes the EU needs to become a world leader in digital innovation; considers that the digital single market is about removing national barriers and having a better organised and common European approach for market integration and harmonisation; believes that further actions are needed at both Member State and EU level to achieve this;
Amendment 46 #
2020/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls on the Commission to follow the ‘one in, one out’ principle in its future legislative proposals, and to address the fragmentation of the digital single market, remove any existing unjustified barriers, and support innovation by reducing red tape;
Amendment 56 #
2020/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Considers that substantial investment in AI and other key new technologies is required; calls for NextGenerationEU, as well as public and private funding, to increase investment so as to reflect the EU’s ambition of becomstrengthen and improve the EU’s standing at global technological leader and reaping the full benefits of digitalisationlevel;
Amendment 73 #
2020/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Recalls that we need a data economy that works for the entire EU, as it is a key enabler of digitalisation; believes that it is important for the EU to guarantee a high degree of control over data, with clear and balanced rules on intellectual property rights (IPR), but considers it essential to maintain openness towards third countries, and that the free flow of non-personal data across borders is important;
Amendment 79 #
2020/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Stresses the need to require that Europeans’ data be processed and hosted on EU territory and in accordance with EU law;
Amendment 99 #
2020/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Strongly bBelieves that AI can be a force for goodplay a positive role for all European citizens, and offer significant benefits and value for the economy, safety, security, education, healthcare, transport and the environment; believes the security, inclusiveness, accessibility and fairness, especially for groups in vulnerable situations, of AI- driven products and services need to be ensured;
Amendment 105 #
2020/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Notes that while AI offers greatood potential, it can also present certain risks due to issues such as bias and opacity;
Amendment 157 #
2020/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Considers that the development of a voluntary labelling scheme for trustworthy AI, based on clear and common guidance drawn up by the Commission, could help improve consumer trust involving all relevant stakeholders and based on transparent standards could help improve consumer trust; this labelling could notably include information on safety aspects, such as a safety score, and minimum age requirements;
Amendment 186 #
2020/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Highlights the importance of education and research for AI; therefore calls on the Commission and the Member States to establish an EUrengthen and enhance existing centres of excellence for AI; considers that this should be done with the involvement of universities, companies and research institutions; believes that such a centre can help to provide specialised training and development for regulatory authoritie such as the European Artificial Intelligence Networks;
Amendment 114 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) are based on the rights of all individuals to have their bodily integrity and personal autonomy respected; define their sexual orientation and gender identity; decide whether, with whom and when to be sexually active; decide whether, when and who to marry and when, whether and by what means to have a child or children, naturally or by legal means ensuring that the child, at the moment of conception, has a father and a mother; have access to the information and support necessary to achieve all of the above9; _________________ 9 Guttmacher-Lancet Commission, Executive Summary on sexual and reproductive health and rights, The Lancet, London, 2018, https://www.guttmacher.org/guttmacher- lancet-commission/accelerate-progress- executive-summary
Amendment 115 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) are based on the rights of all individuals to have their bodily integrity and personal autonomy respected; define their sexual orientation and gender identity; decide whether, with whom and when to be sexually active; decide whether, when and who to marry, in compliance with national legislation on marriage, and when, whether and by what means to have a child or children; have access to the information and support necessary to achieve all of the above9; _________________ 9 Guttmacher-Lancet Commission, Executive Summary on sexual and reproductive health and rights, The Lancet, London, 2018, https://www.guttmacher.org/guttmacher- lancet-commission/accelerate-progress- executive-summary
Amendment 117 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) are based on the rights of all individuals to have their bodily integrity and personal autonomy respected; define their sexual orientation and gender identity; decide whether, with whom and when to be sexually active; decide whether, when and who to marry and when, whether and by what means to have a child or children; have access to the information and support necessary to achieve all of the above9; _________________ 9 Guttmacher-Lancet Commission, Executive Summary on sexual and reproductive health and rights, The Lancet, London, 2018, https://www.guttmacher.org/guttmacher- lancet-commission/accelerate-progress- executive-summary
Amendment 119 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas having children is something that can be achieved only by a couple formed of a man and a woman, whether through natural or medically- assisted reproduction or by adoption;
Amendment 138 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas violations of SRHRhealth constitute breaches of human rights, specifically the right to life, physical and mental integrity, equality, non- discrimination, health and education; whereas such violations of women’s SRHR are a form of violence against women and girls;
Amendment 140 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas the right to information on these issues must be as comprehensive as possible, and whereas the French law known as the digital obstruction to abortion constitutes not only a violation of civil liberties but also an infringement of the right to information in this area;
Amendment 147 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas although the EU has some of the highest SHRH standards in the world, there are still challenges, a lack of access, gapslegitimate differences exist between Member States based on the wishes of sovereign peoples; whereas inequalities in this area for economic or geographic reasons within and inequalitiesdividual Member State should be avoided;
Amendment 154 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas SRHR challenges and obstacles include: a lack of access, denial of medical care based on personal beliefs, gender-based violence, gynaecological and obstetric violence, a lack of comprehensive sexuality educationaccess to teaching about contraception and the risks of transmission of sexually transmitted diseases, denial of access to information/education, a lack of available contraception methods, limited access to medically assisted reproduction treatments, forced sterilisation, high rates of STIs and HIV, disparities in maternal mortality, high adolescent pregnancy rates, harmful gender stereotypes and practices such as female genital mutilation, early, forced and child marriages and honour killings;
Amendment 155 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas SRHR challenges and obstacles include: a lack of access, denial of medical care based on personal beliefs, gender-based violence, gynaecological and obstetric violence, a lack of comprehensive sexuality education, denial of access to information/education, a lack of available contraception methods, limited access to medically assisted reproduction treatments, forced sterilisation, high rates of STIs and HIV, disparities in maternal mortality, high adolescent pregnancy rates, harmful gender stereotypes and practices such as female genital mutilation, early, forced and child marriages, certificates of virginity, hymenoplasty under family pressure and honour killings;
Amendment 156 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas SRHR challenges and obstacles include: a lack of access, denial of medical care based on personal beliefsgrounds other than the doctors' conscience clause, gender-based violence, gynaecological and obstetric violence, a lack of comprehensive sexuality education, denial of access to information/education, a lack of available contraception methods, limited access to medically assisted reproduction treatments, forced sterilisation, high rates of STIs and HIV, disparities in maternal mortality, high adolescent pregnancy rates, harmful gender stereotypes and practices such as female genital mutilation, early, forced and child marriages and honour killings;
Amendment 157 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas SRHR challenges and obstacles include: a lack of access, denial of medical care based on personal beliefs, gender-based violence, gynaecological and obstetric violence, a lack of comprehensive sexuality education, denial of access to information/education, a lack of available contraception methods, limited access to medically assisted reproduction treatments, forced sterilisation, high rates of STIs and HIV, disparities in maternal mortality, high adolescent pregnancy rates, harmful gender stereotypes and practices such as female genital mutilation, early, forced and child marriages and honour killings;
Amendment 158 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas SRHR challenges and obstacles include: a lack of access, denial of medical care based on personal beliefs, gender-based violence, gynaecological and obstetric violence, a lack of comprehensive sexuality education, denial of access to information/education, a lack of available legal contraception methods in the Member State, limited access to medically assisted reproduction treatments, forced sterilisation, high rates of STIs and HIV, disparities in maternal mortality, high adolescent pregnancy rates, harmful gender stereotypes and practices such as female genital mutilation, early, forced and child marriages and honour killings;
Amendment 159 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas SRHR challenges and obstacles include: a lack of access, denial of medical care based on personal beliefs, gender-based violence, gynaecological and obstetric violence, a lack of comprehensive sexuality education, denial of access to information/education, a lack of available contraception methods, limited access to medically assisted reproduction treatments, forced sterilisation, high rates of STIs and HIV, disparities in maternal mortality, high adolescent pregnancy rates, harmful gender stereotypes and practices such as female genital mutilation, polygamy, early, forced and child marriages and honour killings;
Amendment 160 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas SRHR challenges and obstacles include: a lack of access, denial of medical care based on personal beliefs, gender-based violence, gynaecological and obstetric violence, a lack of comprehensive sexuality education, denial of access to information/education, a lack of available contraception methods, limited access to medically assisted reproduction treatments, forced sterilisation, high rates of STIs and HIV, disparities in maternal mortality, high adolescent pregnancy rates, harmful gender-based stereotypes and practices such as female genital mutilation, early, forced and child marriages and honour killings;
Amendment 174 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas the essential package of SRH measures includes: comprehensive sexuality education; modern contraceptives; antenatal, childbirth and postnatal care; midwifery; obstetric and newborn care; safe and legal abortion services; the prevention and treatment of HIV and other STIs; services aimed at detecting, preventing and treating sexual and gender-based violence; treatment for reproductive cancers; and fertility services; for living, heterosexual couples of reproductive age;
Amendment 175 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas the essential package of SRH measures includes: comprehensive sexuality educationaccess to teaching about contraception and the risks of transmission of sexually transmitted diseases; modern contraceptives; antenatal, childbirth and postnatal care; midwifery; obstetric and newborn care; safe and legal abortion services; the prevention and treatment of HIV and other STIs; services aimed at detecting, preventing and treating sexual and gender-based violence; treatment for reproductive cancers; and fertility services;
Amendment 178 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas the essential package of SRH measures includes: comprehensive sexuality education; modern contraceptives; antenatal, childbirth and postnatal care; midwifery; obstetric and newborn care; safe and legal abortion services if permitted under national law; the prevention and treatment of HIV and other STIs; services aimed at detecting, preventing and treating sexual and gender- based violence; treatment for reproductive cancers; and fertility services;
Amendment 186 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
I. whereas comprehensive sexuality educationeducation about contraception and the risks of transmission of sexually transmitted diseases facilitates informed reproductive choices;
Amendment 191 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J
Recital J
Amendment 198 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J a (new)
Recital J a (new)
Ja. whereas, under Article 6 TFEU, in the area of protection and improvement of human health, the EU can only intervene to support, coordinate or supplement the actions of EU countries, and whereas Member States are therefore sovereign in this area;
Amendment 202 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
K. whereas even when abortion is legally available, there are often barriers to accessing itit is till a traumatic experience for women and alternatives such as anonymous childbirth must be offered, without influencing a woman's choice one way or the other;
Amendment 219 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital M
Recital M
M. whereas SRHR issues are often instrumentalised by opponents of reproductive rights who appeal to national interests in order to achieve demographic objectives, thus contributing to the erosion of democracy and personal freedomfall within the competence of the Member States;
Amendment 222 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital M a (new)
Recital M a (new)
Ma. whereas medically-assisted reproduction should be restricted to sterile, living heterosexual couples of reproductive age;
Amendment 225 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital M b (new)
Recital M b (new)
Mb. whereas surrogacy cannot under any circumstances be considered as forming part of sexual and reproductive rights;
Amendment 226 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital N
Recital N
Amendment 232 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital N a (new)
Recital N a (new)
Na. whereas freedom of opinion and expression and democratic debate are the basis of Member States’ democracies and no supranational body can impose policies in the area of sexual and reproductive rights on sovereign peoples and the democratically elected national governments that represent them, nor limit the right of expression in this area;
Amendment 253 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Calls upon the EU, its bodies and agencies to support and promote access to SRHR services and calls upon the Member States to ensure access to a full range ofnational SRHR, and to remove all barriers impeding fullsuch access to SRHR;
Amendment 284 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 336 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Urges the Member States to ensure access to scientifically accurate and comprehensive sexuality education for all primary and secondary school children in line with WHO standardthat all adolescents have access to scientifically correct education on contraception and sexually transmitted diseases;
Amendment 337 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Urges the Member States to ensure access to scientifically accurate and comprehensive sexuality education for all primary and secondary school children in line with WHO standards;
Amendment 344 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
Amendment 359 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Calls upon the Member States to ensure access to contraceptive methods, thereby safeguarding the fundamental right to health; stresses that abortion should only be used, where appropriate, as a last resort and that contraception should be encouraged to avoid the need for abortion;
Amendment 365 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
Amendment 377 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Reaffirms that abortion must be a voluntary decision based on a woman’s request, given of her own free will, in accordance with medical standards based on WHO guidelines and calls upon the Member States to ensure access to safe and legal abortion; reaffirms that, in accordance with Article 6 TFEU, in the area of protection and improvement of human health, the EU can only intervene to support, coordinate or supplement the actions of EU countries and that Member States are therefore sovereign in the area of sexual and reproductive rights;
Amendment 396 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Urges the Member States which so wish to regulate obstacles to legal abortion and recalls that they have a responsibility to ensure that women have access to the rights afforded to them by national law;
Amendment 402 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Stresses that abortion legislation must remain within the exclusive competence of the Member States;
Amendment 406 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Invites the Member States to review their national legal provisions on abortion and bring them in line with international human rights standards and regional best practices by ensuring that abortion at a woman’s request is legal in early pregnancy and even beyondRecalls that, in accordance with Article 6 TFEU, in the area of protection and improvement of human health, the EU can only intervene to support, coordinate or supplement the actions of EU countries, and that Member States are therefore sovereign ifn the woman’s health or life is in dangerarea of sexual and reproductive rights;
Amendment 425 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
Amendment 457 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Calls upon the Member States to exercise their competence in SRHR by striving to protect human rights, specifically the right of the child to have a father and a mother at the moment of conception, the right to health, and implement a wide range of SRH services, ensuring that the principle of non- retrogression is respected;
Amendment 458 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Calls upon the Member States to exercise their competence in SRHR by striving to protect human rights, specifically the right to health, and implement a wide range of SRH services, ensuring that the principle of non- retrogression is respected;
Amendment 472 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Calls upon the Commissioner for Democracy and Demography to take a human-rights-based approach to tackling demographic challenges, ensuring that every EU resident can fully realise their SRHR, and to confront those who instrumentalise SRHR in order to undermine EU values andto attack the sovereignty of the Member States and national democracy;
Amendment 475 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Calls upon the Commissioner for Health and Food Safety to promote and protect SRHR and to include them in the next EU public health strategy, while respecting the Member States' sovereignty in this area;
Amendment 9 #
2020/2131(INI)
2. Stresses that the implementation of the SME strategy should focus on supporting SMEs to help them maintaand reacting their existence, as the COVID-19 crisis has delivered a shock to many SMEs and their role in the everyday life of Europeanso the COVID-19; micro and SMEs should be considered an essential asset in the post- COVID 19 transition;
Amendment 23 #
2020/2131(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes that SMEs should be burdened as little as possible and encourages the Commission to use strong enforcement action to ensure that the single market benefits all businesses and consumers and to counter gold-plating and other regulatory restrictions; recalls that in the post-COVID recovery further market deregulation should be harmonised with workers’ rights protection;
Amendment 30 #
2020/2131(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Stresses Member States to avoid practices of unfair competition inside the internal market, as they could seriously affect micro and SMEs and consumer rights;
Amendment 33 #
2020/2131(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Highlights that unfair competition usually driven by extra - UE companies is very detrimental to the European SMEs, especially in the post-COVID recovery; efficient trade defence instruments should be accessible to SMEs and they should avoid unfair practices from third countries;
Amendment 35 #
2020/2131(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)
Paragraph 3 c (new)
3c. Recalls that an effective “green” approach, favourable to SMEs, should avoid imposing extra burdens on SMEs while allowing imports from third countries which are not respecting free trade and “green” standards;
Amendment 39 #
2020/2131(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Highlights the crucial role of data as the lifeblood of the digital economy; supports the Commission in establishing European data spaces for trusted and secure data sharing to ramp up data flows between businesses and with governments; recalls that digital trainings and upskilling and reskilling programs for entrepreneurs and employees could support the recovery of SMEs and foster their competitiveness in the EU market;
Amendment 61 #
2020/2131(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls on the Member States to simplify procurement tendering processes by using the flexibility of the EU’s new procurement framework and to enhance opportunities for SMEs by using digital tools and platforms to expand cross-border procurement; stresses that green public procurement and a simplified access to tenders can make an important contribution to building a sustainable economy; where possible, calls for preferring European micro and SMEs in public tenders;
Amendment 77 #
2020/2131(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Highlights the importance of family -run and family-owned businesses, as the backbone of local economies; they create wealth, provide jobs, are locally rooted and connected to local communities; underlines that family businesses make up more than 60% of all companies in Europe, they range from sole proprietors to large international enterprises; big or small, listed or un- listed, family businesses play a significant role in the EU economy.
Amendment 15 #
2020/2077(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Considers that placing sustainable products either from member states or third countries on the internal market should be the norm and calls for a horizontal Sustainable Product Framework Directive setting mandatory minimum requirements for durability, interoperability, reparability, by the consumer or by an authorised specialist, upgradability, reusability and recyclability for all products alongside further product- specific requirements; therefore a clear and comprehensible definition of "sustainable products" has to be provided by the Commission;
Amendment 21 #
2020/2077(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Underlines the importance of not unilaterally passing on the additional costs arising from the New Circular Economy Action Plan to consumers; further it is inevitable to set all measures in the sense of the free market economy and the preservation of the competitive ability in the international competition;
Amendment 36 #
2020/2077(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Highlights the sustainability of local supply chains; notes that the definition of the durability of a product or service should accordingly focus on relocalised production, recycling or reparability in Europe;
Amendment 44 #
2020/2077(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomes the Commission’s intention to empower consumers to further engage in sustainable consumption practices; calls for mandatory labelling on product durability and reparability, and the development of a repair score, in addition to minimum information requirements; asks for both the legal guarantee rights and the reversed burden of proof rules to be extended based on the lifespan of products, the introduction of direct producer liability, and for legislative measures to ban practices resulting in premature obsolescence; the minimum legal guarantee period of two years is not appropriate for all products. In order to meet consumers legitimate expectations, a guarantee period of five or 10 years should be set for certain categories of products;
Amendment 63 #
2020/2077(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Supports the establishment of an EU-wide ‘right to repair’; calls, in this context, for measures to provide unrestricted and free access to repair and maintenance information and to spare parts for a proportionate price to all market participants, to define a mandatory minimum period of time for the availability of spare parts and/or updates, a maximum time-limit for their delivery, and for repair to be given priority under the legal guarantee regime;
Amendment 73 #
2020/2077(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses that effective enforcement is crucial to making sure that products placed on the market comply with sustainability requirements; calls, therefore, for greater EU oversight, through setting harmonised rules on the minimum number of checks and their frequency, and by empowerasking the Commission to monitor, report in a recurrent period to be determined and audit the activities of national authorities, as well as to carry out regular tests and inspections;
Amendment 76 #
2020/2077(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Calls on the Commission to present an impact assessment of the planned tax on plastics; points out that, if such a tax cannot be avoided, the funds will not be transferred to the EU budget but will be provided to the Member States for the implementation of the New Circular Economy Action Plan;
Amendment 91 #
2020/2077(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Calls for mandatory country-of- origin information on all products imported or produced in Europe;
Amendment 105 #
2020/2077(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls for a revision of EU public procurement legislation introducing mandatory minimum targets, through defining a certain percentage for procurement based on economic, environmental, social and ethical criteria, and introducing a transparent hierarchy of award criteria, together with sector-specific targets.;
Amendment 109 #
2020/2077(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Considers that binding minimum targets should be introduced for public procurement purposes to facilitate the sustainable relocation of jobs in Europe through allocation clauses giving preference to local businesses and workers;
Amendment 8 #
2020/2076(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recognises that the Industrial Strategy, prepared prior to the outbreak and published at an early stage of the pandemic in Europe, will require substantial revision, to reflect the change in fundamentals and; calls on the new Commission of the Von Der Leyen Commission:to develop realistic strategies to return economies across the EU to growth and therefore to strengthen all economies, both north and south and east and west, to the benefit of citizens and businesses; stresses that the Green Deal is an inappropriate and unaffordable approach for this;
Amendment 11 #
2020/2076(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Strongly and crucially highlights that such a revision must be made in accordance with a decisive shift in fundamental political perspective and cannot involve maintaining, let alone reinforcing, previous pieces of legislation such as an indivisible Single Market or global free trade prohibiting barriers to cross-border flows and opening public procurement; underlines that these objectives contradict in essence the goals yet outlined of developing autonomic domestic industries through public driving and support, or promoting the emergence of European global leaders;
Amendment 14 #
2020/2076(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1 b. Further highlights that the principles of free trade, free movement of economic actors, economic liberalism, shutting down planning, discarding protectionism and the preservation of domestic interests, putting forward economic growth, and aiming for the lowest prices are precisely what has led the European industry to dismantling in order to chase profit without regard to the national interests of Member States and citizens; critically underlines the role of the policies of the Commission in implementing such principles despite obvious, consistent and lasting industrial, social and political negative effects;
Amendment 15 #
2020/2076(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1 c. Emphasizes that any revised Strategy, to have any chance to succeed, should forfeit these principles and focus on putting the economy at the service of nations and people, enabling Member States to drive industrial equipment, the processes and capital of which are located on their soil, giving them effective control over the movement of capital, goods, persons and services, aiming for autonomy and resilience in all fields, protecting European citizens, businesses and economies from future crises, and building heavyweight European global actors for the purpose of outward, not inward, competition;
Amendment 20 #
2020/2076(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls for the Commission to undertake, together with Members States, a comprehensive and cross-sectoral analysis of the economies within the EU, in order to understand the depth of impacts felt by the COVID-19 pandemic; considers this an essential evidence base in order for the Commission to issue updated recommendations and determine the key policies that will act to strengthen the collective long-term recovery within the Single Market; welcomes the fourteen coherent industrial ecosystems identified by the Commission, whose strategic independence is to be ensured;
Amendment 28 #
2020/2076(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Calls on the Commission to focus on domestic productivity on the basis of research and innovation within Europe, in order to establish a strategic autonomy and less dependence on vulnerable supply chains in core industry sectors such as the tech and telecommunications, medical products, pharmaceuticals and agricultural sectors, especially in times of global crisis, to remain competitive on the global markets and to provide European consumers with essential goods;
Amendment 42 #
2020/2076(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses that EU industrial competitiveness relies on a fully functioning Single Market in Services; underlines that the Commission must consider how to address barriers to cross- border services as part of any revised set of priorities;
Amendment 49 #
2020/2076(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Underlines the importance of a prudent and not rushed sustainability strategy, which is central to plans to develop European industry; recalls in this regard the European Council conclusions of 12 December 2019, highlighting the need to establish a framework for actions that benefits all Member State and which does not jeopardise the global competitiveness of European industry and SMEs;
Amendment 56 #
2020/2076(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Recognises that the public and private sector will encounter significant financial constraints in the coming years, impacting their ability to support a programme of investment, particularly with regard to the Green Deal objectives; expresses concern about an unequal pace of development, particularly in less developed parts of the EU, where achieving transformation demands far more significant adisproportionately high Green Deal objectionves; strongly calls on the Commission in its revised Industrial Strategy to adopt a model with flexibility and support, in order that no one is lefto leave the Green Deal behind;
Amendment 101 #
2020/2076(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Recalls that the automotive sector is touched by many of the transformations expected in the future economy and has been deeply affected by the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic; considers that the revised Industrial Strategy should foresee particular actions for this economic core sector, including appropriate financial support., independent of the orientation of production towards electric motor or combustion engine;
Amendment 112 #
2020/2029(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses the importance of the funding of the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF) and Internal Security Fund (ISF) programmes to ccontinuing to finance the fight against THB with European funds; notes that this funding must not result in any reductiont inue to be used for projects tackling THB, as well as using other available instruments the resources earmarked for tackling illegal immigration;
Amendment 125 #
2020/2029(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Stresses that between 15% and 30% of patients on organ donor waiting lists die before they receive a transplant; points out that criminal organisations exploit this problem and the vulnerability of people living in extreme poverty in order to encourage them to sell their organs; notes that this type of trafficking is one of the most heinous aspects of THB;
Amendment 131 #
2020/2029(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Urges the Commission and the Member States to ensure differentiation between trafficking and smuggling, which require different responses in law; highlights that the confusion between them often leads to failings in correctly identifying victims and in ensuring that they can access protection measures and avoid secondary victimisation; points out that THB should also be punished harshly;
Amendment 147 #
2020/2029(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Points out that knowingly hiring people in vulnerable situations and paying them less than the legal minimum or making them work under unacceptable working conditions, with a view to maximising profits, is a form of THB; notes that this particularly affects men who are exploited in manual sectors;
Amendment 230 #
2020/2029(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Highlights that sexual exploitation remains the most prevalent form of trafficking in the EU since 2008, as 60% of victims are trafficked for sexual exploitation; notes that more than 90% of these victims are women and girls, and that more than 70% of traffickers are male; points out, too, that many of those responsible are from non-EU countries;
Amendment 263 #
2020/2029(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Calls on the Commission to prioritise the prevention of the crime of trafficking for sexual exploitation, including through adopting measures and programmes to discourage and reduce demandpimping, and calls on the Member States to include the use of the services of victims of trafficking as a criminal offence in their national statutes, as recommended by Article 8 of the Anti-Trafficking Directive and reiterated by the Commission in 201819; _________________ 19Second progress report on the implementation of the Directive, COM(2018)0777, p. 6.
Amendment 276 #
2020/2029(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. Is concerned about the development of paedophile and female trafficking rings in the form of community gangs, as in the gang rape cases in Telford, Rotherham and Oulu; calls on the Commission and the Member States to dismantle these rings and to expel the guilty foreigners from their territories after their sentences;
Amendment 327 #
2020/2029(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Reiterates that asylum seekers, refugees and migrants are particularly vulnerabthe best way to tackle tohe trafficking and that special attention should be given to the trafficking of women, children and other vulnerable groups; highlights that there are vulnerabilities and risks at the different stages in the migration process prior to migration itself, en route to the EU, at the destination and on return22; _________________ 22European implementation assessment – ‘Implementation of Directive 2011/36/EU: Migration and gender issues’, Directorate-General for Parliamentary Research, Ex-Post Evaluation Unit, 15 September 2020, p. 50.smuggling of human beings is to have zero tolerance for illegal immigration and smuggling rings, like the ‘No Way’ programme successfully introduced by the Australian Government in 2014;
Amendment 334 #
2020/2029(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
Amendment 338 #
2020/2029(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
Amendment 345 #
2020/2029(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Calls on the Member States to step up their efforts to early identify potential victims, in particular within migration flows and hotspots; calls on the Member States to provide adequate resources for specialised facilities for unaccompanied minors and female victims of traffickingthe identification of unaccompanied minors through medical tests and victims of trafficking; calls for illegal immigrants who do not meet either these criteria or the asylum criteria to be deported;
Amendment 358 #
2020/2029(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
Amendment 399 #
2020/2029(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Notes that children in migration, and, in particular, unaccompanied migrant children, continue to be at higher risk of trafficking and exploitation along migration routes en route to and within the EU; points out, however, that many supposed ‘unaccompanied minors’ are actually adults whose goal is economic immigration;
Amendment 407 #
2020/2029(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28 a (new)
Paragraph 28 a (new)
28a. Calls on the Member States to stop being deceived by the concept of ‘unaccompanied minors’, to systematically carry out medical tests to determine the age of these illegal immigrants and to deport those who are not minors to their country of origin or provenance;
Amendment 483 #
2020/2029(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
35. Emphasises the importance of a coherent approach to improve the identification of potential victims in the context of migration flows and in the hotspots, of improving access toCalls for asylum procedures and of ensurto be examined ing their complementarity with the procedures related to trafficking; calls on the Commission to assess the implementation of the Anti-Trafficking Diuntry of origin, not the prospective recteive and to come forward with proposals to revise iting country;
Amendment 490 #
2020/2029(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
Paragraph 36
Amendment 509 #
2020/2029(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37 b (new)
Paragraph 37 b (new)
37b. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to raise awareness in countries of emigration, and among women and girls in those countries as well as their parents, of the risks of sexual exploitation associated with migration to Europe;
Amendment 511 #
2020/2029(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37 c (new)
Paragraph 37 c (new)
37c. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to identify any third countries that are complicit in THB, and to adapt their diplomatic and trade relations accordingly;
Amendment 30 #
2020/2023(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5 b. Underlines however that the necessary balance of rights and obligations compels not to treat the United Kingdom less favourably than it would treat the European Union with respect to the level playing field and the rights and benefits attached thereto for each party to the future agreement;
Amendment 31 #
2020/2023(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Underlines that dynamic regulatory alignment on the market surveillance of products and robust product standards should be an essential and irreplaceable part of any future agreement so as to ensure a level playing field for EU businesses and a high level of protection for EU consumers through effective market surveillance; underlines that a level playing field requires a horizontal mechanism, such as an overall governance framework covering all areas of cooperation, to ensure effective implementation, enforcement and dispute settlement through adequately resourced domestic authorities and effective administrative and judicial proceedings;
Amendment 43 #
2020/2023(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Strongly believes that the arrangements should include provisions on market access and national treatment under host State rules to ensure that EU service providers are treated in a non- discriminatory manner by the UK, including with regard to establishment; stresses that non-discrimination should be reciprocal; underlines that the new arrangements should allow for the temporary entry and stay of EU citizens in the UK for business purposes with the aim of providing services;
Amendment 55 #
2020/2023(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Stresses that the public procurement market should remain equally open on both sides, provided there is an effective level playing field covering every relevant aspect, without prejudice to the right for each party to protect its public interests; regrets that the public procurement sector is not mentioned in the UK mandate for the negotiations;
Amendment 84 #
2020/2023(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Stresses the importance of regulatory cooperation, such as occurs with other third countries, in order to tackle non-tariff barriers, to support the economic life of businesses and citizens and to pursue objectives of public interest, so as to protect the interests of EU consumers including to ensure a secure and trustworthy environment for consumers and businesses online, as well as to combat unfair commercial practices.
Amendment 38 #
2020/2022(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Considers that access to the internet is now a fundamental right; notes that European citizens now expect to be able to contact the emergency services wherever they are, even if they do not necessarily know what network coverage they will have as they travel around Europe; considers that access to the telephone and internet network is now essential for reasons of internal market access and security; points out that the technology now exists for 100% coverage of a national network and that operating licences should impose this service requirement on operators.
Amendment 45 #
2020/2022(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Notes that information is sometimes manipulated by dominant media outlets whose loss-making economic models make them dependent on State aid; considers that the Commission authorises this type of public financing too easily without checking whether these subsidised outlets have control over all the information they produce; calls for the scope of the arrangements for monitoring the granting of State aid to be extended to cover such media outlets and public service broadcasters.
Amendment 49 #
2020/2022(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Recalls its opposition to the granting of State aid to certain sectors of the press which then gain an advantage over others not so favoured; stresses that the resulting distortion of competition in the internal market is particularly unfair given the many digital news service providers which are excluded from such aid despite performing a similar activity and having a comparable, if not larger, target audience.
Amendment 61 #
2020/2022(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Acknowledges the fact that, while the illegal nature of certain types of content can be easily established, the decision is less clear-cut for other types of content as it requires contextualisation; warns that some automated tools are not sufficiently sophisticated to take context into account, which could lead to unnecessary restrictions being placed on freedom of expression.
Amendment 68 #
2020/2022(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6b. Stresses that access to the services of a digital network should allow, on equal subscription terms, identical and indiscriminate access to the whole network; calls, therefore, for a ban on the practices of setting content quotas or profiling on the basis of users’ characteristics, opinions or interests, and on the practices of blanking and shadow banning unless justified on the grounds of clearly identified misconduct on the part of the user.
Amendment 71 #
2020/2022(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 c (new)
Paragraph 6 c (new)
6c. Emphasises the right to education and cultural identity and the need for an honest presentation of online content, particularly as regards the classification of works of fiction as ‘recreational’ or ‘historical’ products.
Amendment 33 #
2020/2019(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Considers that the websites of platforms should provide a means for consumers to easily lodge complaints concerning false or misleading third-party advertising on these platforms;
Amendment 34 #
2020/2019(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Is of the opinion that the list of legal representatives established in the EU that can be held responsible for the content of advertisements must be easily accessible on the platforms’ websites;
Amendment 145 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Recommends that the legal instrument to be proposed by the Commission should take the form of a directive, following in the footsteps of the other applicable instruments such as the Copyright Directive, in order to preserve the effectiveness of an approach by Member States according to their internal law applicable in matters as diverse as commercial law and freedom of expression;
Amendment 222 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Considers further that companies established in the territory of several States should declare their legal existence and the economic activities carried out by them in the territory of a Member State of the Union, given that such activities are actually carried out in the territory of that Member State, in order not to evade controls or the tax payable to that State under its internal law and Union law;
Amendment 233 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Calls on the Commission to require service providers to verify the information and identity of the business partners with whom they have a contractual commercial relationship, and to ensure that the information they provide is accurate and up-to-date, containing in particular the contact details of a responsible natural person;
Amendment 286 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Considers that consumers should be properly informed and their rights should be effectively guaranteed when they interact with automated decision-making systems and other innovative digital services or applications; believes that it should be possible for consumers to request checks and corrections of possible mistakes resulting from automated decisions, as well as to seek redress for any damage related to the use of automated decision-making systems; , both from the entities concerned and national courts, on the model of the mechanism described in Article 17, paragraph 9, of the Copyright Directive1a; __________________ 1a Directive (EU) 2019/790 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 April 2019 on copyright and related rights in the Digital Single Market and amending Directives 96/9/EC and 2001/29/EC (OJ L 130, 17.5.2019, p. 92).
Amendment 394 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Notes that while online platforms, such as online market places, have benefited both retailers and consumers by improving choice and lowering prices, at the same time, they have allowed sellers, in particular from third countries, to offer products which often do not comply with Union rules on product safety and to create unsustainable, distorted competition both for SMEs and for large companies, whose licensed production they sometimes copy, and do not sufficiently guarantee consumer rights;
Amendment 470 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Believes that, in view of the cross- border nature of digital services, effective supervision and cooperation between Member States is key to ensuring the proper enforcement of the Digital Services Act;
Amendment 499 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Calls on the Commission to strengthen and moderniseextend to digital services, online markets and consumer protection the current provisions on out-of-court settlement and court actions to allow for an effective enforcement and consumer redress and to harmonise the redress mechanisms present in Union law;
Amendment 546 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part I – paragraph 6 a (new)
Annex I – part I – paragraph 6 a (new)
Digital services legislation should assume the form of a directive.
Amendment 613 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part IV – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – indent 1 a (new)
Annex I – part IV – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – indent 1 a (new)
- knowledge of the commercial identity of the targeted commercial entities should be accompanied by the designation of a natural person responsible for these entities, a ‘contact point’ for complaints or appeals, whose contact details would be accessible in the event of judicial proceedings in order to render ineffective bankruptcies or fraudulent dissolutions organised by ad hoc companies guilty of online scams;
Amendment 614 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part IV – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – indent 2
Annex I – part IV – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – indent 2
- that measure should apply only to business-to-business relationships and should be without prejudice to the rights of users under the GDPR, as well as the right to internet anonymity or being an unidentified user; this right, which is very unevenly recognised and applied in the legislation of the Member States, should be the subject of guidelines for its effective recognition; the new general information requirements should review and further enhance Articles 5 and 10 of the E-Commerce Directive in order to align those measures with the information requirements established in recently adopted legislation, in particular the Unfair Contract Terms Directive5 , the Consumer Rights Directive and the Platform to Business Regulation. __________________ 5Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts, most recently amended by Directive (EU) 2019/2161 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 November 2019 amending Council Directive 93/13/EEC and Directives 98/6/EC, 2005/29/EC and 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the better enforcement and modernisation of Union consumer protection rules (OJ L 328, 18.12.2019, p. 7).
Amendment 621 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part IV – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – indent 2 a (new)
Annex I – part IV – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – indent 2 a (new)
- The information requirements referred to in Articles 5 and 10 of the E- Commerce Directive should lead to the principle of truthful legal and fiscal reporting of the commercial activities, including passive ones (in particular income from advertising), actually carried out in the territory of a Member State of the Union.
Amendment 682 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part IV – paragraph 1 – subheading 5
Annex I – part IV – paragraph 1 – subheading 5
The compliance of the due diligence provisions should be reinforced with effective, proportionate and dissuasive penalties, including the imposition of fines, without prejudice to the penal autonomy of the Member States or the powers of the European Public Prosecutor's Office.
Amendment 691 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part V – paragraph 1 – indent 1
Annex I – part V – paragraph 1 – indent 1
- clarify that any removal or disabling access to illegal content should not affect the fundamental rights and the legitimate interests of users and consumers, including persons who put the content online when it is the subject of abusive or disproportionate reporting and moderation measures;
Amendment 740 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part V – paragraph 2 – indent 7 a (new)
Annex I – part V – paragraph 2 – indent 7 a (new)
- prescribe that both the alert and the decision which follows it and the notification which is made to the supplier of the notified content cite or mention specifically the alleged illegal content, in particular where it results in the suspension of a service or an account, in order to ensure legal certainty and freedom of expression and to serve as a basis for an effective remedy;
Amendment 772 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part V – subheading 2 – indent 5 a (new)
Annex I – part V – subheading 2 – indent 5 a (new)
- Both the alternative dispute resolution mechanism and the right to have recourse to a competent national court should be expressly notified, together, in a clear and concise manner, when making, contesting, or receiving a decision on an alert. Legislation on digital services should present the principle of this organisation of dispute resolution in a similarly clear and concise manner, within a single article, along the lines of Article 17 (9) of Directive 2019/790/ EU.
Amendment 834 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part VI – paragraph 2 – indent 7
Annex I – part VI – paragraph 2 – indent 7
- address, in line with their liability, the liability for the online marketplaces when platforms have predominant influence over suppliers and essential elements of the economic transactions such as payment means, prices, default terms conditions, or conduct aimed at facilitating the sale of goods to a consumer on the European market, and there is no manufacturer, importer, or distributor established in the Union that can be held liable;
Amendment 837 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part VI – paragraph 2 – indent 8
Annex I – part VI – paragraph 2 – indent 8
- address, in line with their liability, the liability for online marketplaces if the online marketplace has not informed the consumer that a third party is the actual supplier of the goods or services, thus making the marketplace contractually liable vis-à-vis the consumer; liability should also be considered in case the marketplace provides misleading information, guarantees, or statements;
Amendment 882 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part VII – paragraph 2 – indent 6
Annex I – part VII – paragraph 2 – indent 6
- impose high levels of technical interoperability measures requiring “systemic platforms” to share appropriate tools, data, expertise, and resources deployedmake their services, mechanisms and interfaces compatible with alternatives in order to limit the risks of users and consumers’ lock-in and the artificially binding users to one systemic platform with no possibility or incentives for switching between digital platforms or internet ecosystems. As part of those measures, the Commission should explore different technologies and open standards and protocols, including the possibility of a mechanical interface (Application Programming Interface) thatrequire them also, in order to avoid these same risks, to share appropriate tools, data, expertise, and resources deployed; have the Commission study, as part of these measures, several technologies, standards and open protocols allowsing users of competing platforms to dock on to the systemic platform and exchange information with it.exchange information with the systemic platform, while preserving, for the latter, for two years after their effective use, the benefit of its skills, developments and innovations;
Amendment 3 #
2020/2017(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas gender equality and respect for difference is a core principle of the European Union enshrined in the Treaties, and should be reflected in all EU policies, not least in education, culture and the audiovisual;
Amendment 5 #
2020/2017(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas gender equality is a core principle of the European Union enshrined in the Treaties, and should be reflected in all EU policies, not least in education, culture and the audiovisual;
Amendment 8 #
2020/2017(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital B
Recital B
Amendment 14 #
2020/2017(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital C
Recital C
Amendment 21 #
2020/2017(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas AI should not be used to influence in any way opinions, perceptions or the exercise of free will by individuals;
Amendment 24 #
2020/2017(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas women are significantly underrepresented in the AI sectors, either as creators or consumers; whereas the full potential of women’s skills, knowledge and qualifications in the digital, AI and ICT (information, communication and technology) fields can contribute to boosting the European economy; whereas globally only 22 % of AI professionals are female; whereas in the lack of women in AI development not only increases the risk of bias, but also deprives the EU of talent, vision and resources, and is therefore an obstacle to innovationarea of AI, as in all sectors of activity, the number of women involved must not constitute a key analytical criterion, given that it simply reflects women's own choices;
Amendment 32 #
2020/2017(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls on the Commission to include the education sector in the regulatory framework for high-risk AI applications given the importance of ensuring that education continues to contribute to the public good and given the high sensitivity of data on pupils, students and other learners; underlines that data sets used to train AI should be reviewed to avoid reinforcing gender stereotypes and other biases;
Amendment 35 #
2020/2017(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Considers that AI has great potential to promote gender equality provided that conscious and unconscious bias are eliminated; stresses the need for AI to respect the principles and values of equality and non- discrimination between women and men; stresses, further, the importance of a risk- based approach and of continuous monitoring of existing and new algorithms; emphasises that the latter must not, on any account and in any way, undermine freedoms and the exercise of free will;
Amendment 38 #
2020/2017(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Takes the view that AI must serve users and should not on any account be used to alter individuals' perceptions, ways of thinking or exercise of free will in any way;
Amendment 41 #
2020/2017(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Draws the Commission's attention to the risks inherent in the use of new digital technologies in primary and secondary education, and even in preschooling; recalls that minors should be given special protection in relation to the digital content to which they are likely to be exposed, and in relation to the use that new technologies, such as artificial intelligence, may make of their personal data, especially in schools or educational activities; stresses that the use of digital resources in education has produced documented negative effects on pupils’ attention, development and capabilities; calls therefore on the Commission to limit the deployment of artificial intelligence to higher education and research in cases where learners would be liable come into contact with it;
Amendment 44 #
2020/2017(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls for policies targeted at increasing the participation of women in the fields related to science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) and AI, and the adoption of a multi-level approach to address the gender gap in all levels of education and employment in the digital sector, while respecting the different choices that men and women make;
Amendment 50 #
2020/2017(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Expresses its concern that schools and other public education providers are becoming increasingly dependent on educational technology services, including AI applications, provided by just a few technology companies; stresses that this may lead to unequal access to data and limit competition by restricting consumer choice; calls for this data to be shared with the relevant public authorities so it can be used in the development of curricula and pedagogical practices (in particular since these services are purchased with public money or offered to public education providers for free, and because education is a common good); dependence is likely to lead to a loss of educational know-how that can be used without digital tools, and ultimately to place European education in thrall to technological undertakings in this field, which would limit the autonomy of individual and institutional consumers, or create inequalities between institutions that are equipped with these technologies and those which are not; calls on the Commission to allow Member States leeway to regulate the use and deployment of digital new technologies within their territory in the light of their specific situations;
Amendment 51 #
2020/2017(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls on the Commission and Member States to take into account AI from a gender perspective when developing policy and legislation, and, if necessary, adapt current legislation, including EU programmes;
Amendment 60 #
2020/2017(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on the Commission and Member States to devise policy measures that fully incorporate the gender dimension, such as awareness-raising campaigns, training and curricula, which should provide information to citizens on how algorithms operate, and their impact on citizens’ daily lives;
Amendment 62 #
2020/2017(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Stresses that the dependence created in this way on a small number of educational technology players is liable to harm many suppliers, equipment producers or participants, both in the physical resources sector and among producers of knowledge, including as regards the previous generation of IT tools; stresses that it could also lead to unfair differentials in access to data and limit competition by restricting consumer choice, as these risks also arise in the field of culture; calls for this data to be shared with the relevant public authorities so that it can be used in the development of curricula and teaching methods (in particular since these services are purchased with public money or offered to public education providers for free, and because education is a public asset);
Amendment 66 #
2020/2017(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Highlights the importance of the development and deployment of AI applications in the educational, cultural and audiovisual sectors in collecting more accurate and sex-disaggregated data, and applying modern machine learning de- biasing techniques, if needed, to correct stereotype gender bias, which may have negative impacts;
Amendment 73 #
2020/2017(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses the need for diverse teams of developers and engineers working alongside the main actors in the educational, cultural and audiovisual sector in order to prevent gender and cultural bias being inadvertently included in AI algorithms, systems and applications.at the freedom to work and undertake training must not be restricted by binding employment policies, such as mandatory quotas based on criteria such as gender;
Amendment 108 #
2020/2017(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Considers that, since automatic translation tools have made so much progress, content providers and commercial digital platforms should be encouraged to provide subtitling of educational and cultural programmes in the languages of the European Union;
Amendment 117 #
2020/2017(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6b. Considers that commercial digital platforms should be encouraged to provide access to their programmes in all the languages in which their content is disseminated in Europe, i.e. without blocking access to certain languages according to the geographical location of the consumer when the oral or written version is available for other countries of dissemination.
Amendment 25 #
2020/2016(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Recognizes at the same time that policing is mainly a matter that falls under the responsibility of the Member States and that the possible use of AI in policing is ultimately for each individual Member State to decide upon;
Amendment 59 #
2020/2016(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Recalls the high risk of abuse of certain types of AI, including facial recognition technologies in public spaces, automated behaviour detection and profiling to divide people into risk categories at borders, and calls on the Commission to banrespect Member States' right and competence to ban or regulate them;
Amendment 13 #
2020/2015(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Points out that the pace of innovation is not necessarily comparable in all sectors; takes the view that measures to protect intellectual property rights have been excessively favourable to certain software providers (Word, Excel...); calls on the Commission and Member States to find legal solutions to ensure that consumers are not constantly and repeatedly being charged for the use of what has become a generic product or technical solution;
Amendment 53 #
2020/2014(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Stresses that AI systems and the devices that use them are products and must remain subject to the rules on products and not be treated as an exception;
Amendment 83 #
2020/2014(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Urges that AI systems intended for private individuals should have a limited lifetime, which would not rule out the reinstallation of the same system with identical configurations when the lifetime of the system installed at the time of sale expires; suggests that, during this lifetime, the manufacturer should have an obligation to guarantee conformity, which would be enforceable by means of regular technical inspections, the performance of which would trigger a standard extension of the applicable guarantee;
Amendment 87 #
2020/2014(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 b (new)
Paragraph 9 b (new)
9b. Strongly recommends that the Member States recruit to their judicial services full-time experts to assist those services in establishing the technical materiality of the circumstances of the case in order to determine the applicable liability, so as to enable the judicial authorities to resolve disputes swiftly, in accordance with the proper administration of justice, and without being dependent on external expertise which, given the specialised nature of AI, may only be available from industry professionals.
Amendment 10 #
2020/2013(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that in the COVID-19 health crisis, several Member States have launched the development of mobile apps to protect public health by alerting citizens to past contact with someone who has tested positive for the virus; calls for a common EU approach to AI-enabled mobile apps, the development of which must remain under state control; notes that development of these mobile apps began late; points out that some experts believe their value is now limited in view of the evolution of the pandemic and availability of alternative tracing methods; draws attention to the legitimate concerns regarding personal data protection and the inadequacy of the tests carried out;
Amendment 37 #
2020/2013(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Believes that Member States and the Commission should promote AI technologies that work for people; calls on the Member States, in close cooperation with the Commission, to develop AI applications aimed at automating and facilitating e-government services, for example in the areas of tax administration, customs and consumer protection; underlines that explainable algorithms are important to ensure that businesses and consumers benefit from better, non- discriminatory and reliable public services which do not give rise to discrimination between European citizens, and at a lower cost.
Amendment 42 #
2020/2013(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Insists that the Member States and the Commission protect European companies against political sanctions imposed by third countries in the area of public procurement and in the military or civilian sphere: the extraterritorial application of foreign law should not serve as a pretext for the use of artificial intelligence tools when providing services on European territory, even if the tools in question have been bought or developed using technologies which, in full or in part, come from outside Europe.
Amendment 46 #
2020/2013(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Insists that European competition and public procurement law be updated in order to promote the emergence of world- class AI players based in Europe;
Amendment 38 #
2020/2012(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Stresses that the personal data of European citizens should preferably be processed in Europe.
Amendment 59 #
2020/2012(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
Amendment 72 #
2020/2012(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Stresses that where European public funds contribute to the development or implementation of an algorithmic system of a consortium comprising a non-European company, the code and the non-personal data generated should be public by default.
Amendment 74 #
2020/2012(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7b. Stresses that where non-European public funds contribute to the development or implementation in Europe of an algorithmic system, the code and the non-personal data generated should be public by default.
Amendment 84 #
2020/2012(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Underlines the importance of ensuring that the interests of marginalised and vulnerable consumers and groupEuropean citizens are adequately taken into account and represented in any future regulatory framework; notes that for the purpose of analysing the impacts of algorithmic systems on consumers, access to data should be extended to appropriate parties notably independent researchers, media and civiluniversity or society organisationntific researchers, while fully respecting Union data protection and privacy law; recalls the importance of training and giving basic skills to consumers to deal with algorithmic systems in order to protect them from potential risks and detriment of their rights;
Amendment 97 #
2020/2012(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
Amendment 106 #
2020/2012(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Calls on the Commission and the authorities of the Member States to combat tax evasion and the abuse of a dominant position by non-European companies in Europe active in the market for algorithmic systems;
Amendment 117 #
2020/2012(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Stresses the need for the authorities to put an end to the practices of massive and systematic profiling or tracking of consumers organised by some players in the advertising industry on the internet or mobile phones; notes that these tools collect very sensitive data about behaviour, interests or health, even from minors and that they are then used by third parties; regrets that the lack of supervision by the authorities strengthens the market power of less ethical players and dissuades some players from offering more ethical solutions that are more favourable to consumers.
Amendment 118 #
2020/2012(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
Amendment 130 #
2020/2012(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Demands an update of European competition and public procurement law to promote the emergence of world-class players based in Europe;
Amendment 131 #
2020/2012(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 13 b (new)
Paragraph 13 b (new)
13b. Calls for measures to encourage global companies to relocate part of their employment, research and digital systems and products to Europe, if they want to benefit from full access to the European market;
Amendment 132 #
2020/2012(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 13 c (new)
Paragraph 13 c (new)
13c. Calls for respect for European and national preferences, for the development of European territories and employment in the sector of artificial intelligence and robotics; stresses the importance of preventing the takeover of strategic companies by non-European players;
Amendment 131 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) Core platform services, at the same time, feature a number of characteristics that can bare exploited by their providers. These characteristics of core platform services include among others extreme scale economies, which often result from nearly zero marginal costs to add business users or end users. Other characteristics of core platform services are very strong network effects, an ability to connect many business users with many end users through the multi-sidedness of these services, a significant degree of dependence of both business users and end users, lock-in effects, a lack of multi- homing for the same purpose by end users, vertical integration, and data driven- advantages. All these characteristics combined with unfair conduct by providers of these services can have the effect of substantially undermining the contestability of the core platform services, as well as impacting the fairness of the commercial relationship between providers of such services and their business users and end users, leading to rapid and potentially far-reaching decreases in business users’ and end users’ choice in practice, and therefore can confer to the provider of those services the position of a so-called gatekeeper.
Amendment 132 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) A small number of large – non- European and notably American – providers of core platform services have emerged with considerable economic power. Typically, they feature an ability to connect many business users with many end users through their services which, in turn, allows them to leverage their advantages and abuse their position, such as their access to large amounts of data, from one area of their activity to new ones. Some of these providers exercise control over whole platform ecosystems in the digital economy and are structurally extremely difficult to challenge or contest by existing or new market operators, irrespective of how innovative and efficient these may be. Contestability is particularly reduced due to the existence of very high barriers to entry or exit, including high investment costs, which cannot, or not easily, be recuperated in case of exit, and absence of (or reduced access to) some key inputs in the digital economy, such as data. As a result, the likelihood increases that the underlying markets do not function well – or will soon fail to function well – to the detriment of European businesses and consumers.
Amendment 136 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) Gatekeepers have a significant impact on the internal market, providing gateways for a large number of business users, to reach end users, everywhere in the Union and on different markets. The adverse impact of unfair practices on the internal market and particularly weak contestability of core platform services, including their negative societal and economic implications, have led national legislators and sectoral regulators to act. A number of national regulatory solutions have already been adopted or proposed to address unfair practices and the contestability of digital services or at least with regard to some of them. This has created a risk of divergent regulatory solutions and thereby fragmentation of the internal market, thus raising the risk of increased compliance costs due to different sets of national regulatory requirements.
Amendment 138 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) Therefore, bBusiness users and end- users of core platform services provided by gatekeepers should be afforded appropriate regulatory safeguards throughout the Union and the Member States against the unfair behaviour of gatekeepers in order to facilitate cross- border business within the Union and thereby improve the proper functioning of the internal market and to address existing or likely emerging fragmentation in the specific areas covered by this Regulation. Moreover, while gatekeepers tend to adopt global or at least pan-European business models and algorithmic structures, they can adopt, and in some cases have adopted, different and unfair business conditions and practices in different Member States, which is liable to create disparities between thewhich create unequal competitive conditions for the users of core platform services provided by gatekeepers, to the detriment of integration with and prevent commercial alternatives, including future innovative players and European digital businesses and SMEs, from entering and operating in the interndigital market.
Amendment 139 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) By approximating diverging national laws, obstacles to the freedom to provide and rWhile the harmonisation of the internal market is not an objecetive services, including retail services, withinin itself, fragmentation of the internal market should be eliminated. A targeted set of harmonised mandatory rules should therefore be established at Union level as far as possible, in pursuit of the objective of that regulation, which is to ensure contestable and fair digital markets featuring the presence of gatekeepers within the internal marketor the benefit of European consumers and businesses.
Amendment 146 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) A fragmentation of the internal market can only be effectively averted if Member States are prevented from applying national rules which are specific to the types of undertakings and services covered by this Regulation. At the same time, sSince this Regulation aims at complementing the enforcement of competition law, it should be specified that this Regulation is without prejudice to Articles 101 and 102 TFEU, to the corresponding national competition rules and to other national competition rules regarding unilateral behaviour that are based on an individualised assessment of market positions and behaviour, including its likely effects and the precise scope of the prohibited behaviour, and which provide for the possibility of undertakings to make efficiency and objective justification arguments for the behaviour in question. However, the application of the latter rules should not affect the obligations imposed on gatekeepers under this Regulation and their uniform and effective application in the internal market.
Amendment 189 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26
Recital 26
Amendment 191 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27
Recital 27
Amendment 204 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33
Recital 33
(33) The obligations laid down in this Regulation are limited to what is necessary and justified to address the unfairness of the identified practices by gatekeepers and to ensure contestability in relation to core platform services provided by gatekeepers. Therefore, the obligations should correspond to those practices that are considered unfair by taking into account the features of the digital sector and where experience gained, for example in the enforcement of the EU and national competition rules, shows that they have a particularly negative direct impact on the business users and end users as well as businesses operating in the digital market including innovative players and European digital businesses and SMEs. In addition, it is necessary to provide for the possibility of a regulatory dialogue with gatekeepers to tailor those obligations that are likely to require specific implementing measures in order to ensure their effectiveness and proportionality. The obligations should only be updated after a thorough investigation on the nature and impact of specific practices that may be newly identified, following an in-depth investigation, as unfair or limiting contestability in the same manner as the unfair practices laid down in this Regulation while potentially escaping the scope of the current set of obligations.
Amendment 230 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 39
Recital 39
(39) To safeguard a fair commercial environment and protect the contestability of the digital sector it is important to safeguard the right of business users, end users and disadvantaged European enterprises to raise concerns about unfair behaviour by gatekeepers with any relevant administrative or other public authorities. For example, business users may want to complain about different types of unfair practices, such as discriminatory access conditions, unjustified closing of business user accounts or unclear grounds for product de-listings. Any practice that would in any way inhibit such a possibility of raising concerns or seeking available redress, for instance by means of confidentiality clauses in agreements or other written terms, should therefore be prohibited. This should be without prejudice to the right of business users and gatekeepers to lay down in their agreements the terms of use including the use of lawful complaints-handling mechanisms, including any use of alternative dispute resolution mechanisms or of the jurisdiction of specific courts in compliance with respective Union and national law This should therefore also be without prejudice to the role gatekeepers play in the fight against illegal content online.
Amendment 317 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 58
Recital 58
(58) To ensure the effectiveness of the obligations laid down by this Regulation, while also making certain that these obligations are limited to what is necessary to ensure contestability and tackling the harmful effects of the unfair behaviour by gatekeepers, it is important to clearly define and circumscribe them so as to allow the gatekeeper to immediately comply with them, in full respect of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Directive 2002/58/EC, consumer protection, cyber security and product safety. The gatekeepers should ensure the compliance with this Regulation by design. The necessary measures should therefore be as much as possible and where relevant integrated into the technological design used by the gatekeepers. However, it may in certain cases be appropriate for the Commission, following a dialogue with the gatekeeper concerned, to further specify some of the measures that the gatekeeper concerned should adopt in order to effectively comply with those obligations that are susceptible of being further specified. This possibility of a regulatory dialogue should facilitate compliance by gatekeepers and expedite the correct implementation of the Regulation. This procedure may be initiated at the request of a competent national authority. The competent national authorities shall be consulted during the procedure.
Amendment 325 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 60
Recital 60
(60) IA national competent authority within its territory or the Commission within the Union may decide, in exceptional circumstances justified on the limited grounds of public morality, public health or public security, the Commission should be able to decide that the obligation concerned does not apply, for a maximum period of one year, to a specific core platform service. Affecting these public interests can indicate that the cost to society as a whole of enforcing a certain obligation would in a certain exceptional case be too high and thus disproportionate. The regulatory dialogue to facilitate compliance with limited suspension and exemption possibilities should ensure the proportionality of the obligations in this Regulation without undermining the intended ex ante effects on fairness and contestability.
Amendment 327 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 60
Recital 60
(60) In exceptional circumstances justified on the limited grounds of public morality, public health or public security, the Commission should be able to decide that the obligation concerned does not apply to a specific core platform service. Affecting these public interests can indicate that the cost to society as a whole of enforcing a certain obligation would in a certain exceptional case be too high and thus disproportionate. The regulatory dialogue to facilitate compliance with limited suspension and exemption possibilities should ensure the proportionality of the obligations in this Regulation without undermining the intended ex ante effects on fairness and contestability.
Amendment 330 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 61
Recital 61
(61) The data protection and privacy interests of end users are relevantessential to any assessment of potential negative effects of the observed practice of gatekeepers to collect and accumulate large amounts of data from end users. Ensuring an adequate level of transparency of profiling practices employed by gatekeepers facilitates contestability of core platform services, by putting external pressure on gatekeepers to prevent making deep consumer profiling the industry standard, given that potential entrants or start-up providers cannot access data to the same extent and depth, and at a similar scale. Enhanced transparency should allow other providers of core platform services to differentiate themselves better through the use of superior privacy guaranteeing facilities. To ensure a minimum level of effectiveness of this transparency obligation, gatekeepers should at least provide a description of the basis upon which profiling is performed, including whether personal data and data derived from user activity is relied on, the processing applied, the purpose for which the profile is prepared and eventually used, the impact of such profiling on the gatekeeper’s services, and the steps taken to enable end users to be aware of the relevant use of such profiling, as well as to seek their consent.
Amendment 335 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 63
Recital 63
(63) Following a market investigation, an undertaking providing a core platform service could be found to fulfil all of the overarching qualitative criteria for being identified as a gatekeeper. It should then, in principle, comply with all of the relevant obligations laid down by this Regulation. However, for gatekeepers that have been designated by the Commission as likely to enjoy an entrenched and durable position in the near future, the Commission should only impose those obligations that are necessary and appropriate to prevent that the gatekeeper concerned achieves an entrenched and durable position in its operations. With respect to such emerging gatekeepers, the Commission should take into account that this status is in principle of a temporary nature, and it should therefore be decided at a given moment whether such a provider of core platform services should be subjected to the full set of gatekeeper obligations because it has acquired an entrenched and durable position, or conditions for designation are ultimately not met and therefore all previously imposed obligations should be waived.
Amendment 337 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 64
Recital 64
(64) TAt the request of the European High-Level Group of Digital Regulators established by this Regulation, or on its own initiative, the Commission shouldall investigate and assess whether additional behavioural, or, where appropriate, structural remedies are justified, in order to ensure that the gatekeeper cannot frustratethwart the objectives of this Regulation by systematically non-t complianceying with one or severalmore of the obligations laid down in this Regulation, which has further strengthened its gatekeeper position. This would be the case if the gatekeeper’s size in the internal market has further increased, economic dependency of business users and end users on the gatekeeper’s core platform services has further strengthened as their number has further increased and the gatekeeper benefits from increased entrenchment of itsthereby maintaining or strengthening its gatekeeper position. The Commission should therefore in such cases have the power to impose, any remedy, whether behavioural or structural, having due regard to the principle of proportionality. St the request of the European High-Level Group of Digital Regulators, any necessary remedy, including structural remedies, suc through as legal, functional or structural separation, including or the divestiture of a business, or parts of it, should only be imposed either where there is no equally effective behavioural remedy or where any equally effective behavioural remedy would be more burdensome for the undertaking concerned than the structural remedy. Changes to the structure of an undertaking as it existed before the systematic non-compliance was established would only be proportionate where there is a substantial risk that this systematic non-compliance results from the very structure of the undertaking concernedin order to ensure compliance with the objectives of this Regulation.
Amendment 344 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 66
Recital 66
(66) In the event that gatekeepers engage in behaviour that is unfair or that limits the contestability of the core platform services that are already designated under this Regulation but without these behaviours being explicitly covered by the obligations, the Commission should be able, after having consulted the European High-Level Group of Digital Regulators or on a proposal by that group, to update this Regulation through delegated acts. Such updates by way of delegated act should be subject to the same investigatory standard and therefore following a market investigation. The Commission should also apply a predefined standard in identifying such behaviours. This legal standard should ensure that the type of obligations that gatekeepers may at any time face under this Regulation are sufficiently predictable.
Amendment 353 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 68
Recital 68
(68) In order to ensure effective implementation and compliance with this Regulation, the Commission should haveand the Member States should pool their strong investigative and enforcement powers, to allow it to investigate, enforce and monitor the rules laid down in this Regulation, while at the same time ensuring the respect for the fundamental right to be heard and to have access to the file in the context of the enforcement proceedings. The Commission should dispose of these investigative powers also for the purpose of carrying out market investigations for the purpose of updating and reviewing this Regulation.
Amendment 356 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 70
Recital 70
(70) The Commission should be able to directly request that undertakings or association of undertakings provide any relevant evidence, data and information. In addition, the Commission should be able to request any relevant information from any public authority, body or agency within the Member State, or from any natural person or legal person for the purpose of this Regulation. WhenAny complying with a decision of the Commission, uetent national authority may initiate an investigation and provide information which the Commission must take into account in its assessments. Undertakings are obliged to answer factual questions and to provide documents.
Amendment 363 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 73
Recital 73
(73) Compliance with the obligations imposed under this Regulation should be enforceable by means of fines and, periodic penalty payments. To that end, appropriate levels of fin, behavioural and structural measures, and, periodic penalty payments should also be laid down for non-compliance with the obligations and breach of the procedural rules subject to appropriate limitation periods. The Court of Justice should have unlimited jurisdiction in respect of fines and penalty paymentsossibly, personal sanctions against the directors, representatives or employees responsible for the failing within the undertaking concerned.
Amendment 369 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 75 a (new)
Recital 75 a (new)
(75a) In order to ensure cooperation and coordination between the Commission and the Member States in their implementing measures, it is essential to set up a European High-Level Group of Digital Regulators, which will identify priorities, provide direct guidance to the Commission and offer advice. The establishment of the High-Level Group should promote the exchange of information and best practices between Member States, as well as better monitoring and more rigorous implementation, which together will ensure that gatekeepers comply with this Regulation.
Amendment 374 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 78 a (new)
Recital 78 a (new)
(78a) Points out that the development of a European industrial and technological base in the digital sector requires the introduction of a European preference for local or European production in digital procurement in Europe;
Amendment 375 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 78 b (new)
Recital 78 b (new)
(78b) Stresses that the personal data of European citizens should preferably be processed in Europe.
Amendment 376 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 79 – introductory part
Recital 79 – introductory part
(79) The objective of this Regulation is to ensure a contestable and fair digital sector in general and core platform services in particular, with a view to promoting innovation, high quality of digital products and services, fair and competitive prices, as well as a high quality and choice for end users in the digital sector. This cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States, but can only, by reason of the business model and operae Regulation should also create the conditions ofor the gatekeepers and the scale and effects of their operations, be fully achieved at Union leveldevelopment of the digital sector in Europe. The Union may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Regulation does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve that objective.
Amendment 383 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article premier – paragraph 1
Article premier – paragraph 1
1. This Regulation layse purpose of this Regulation is to contribute to the proper functioning of the internal market and consumer protection by laying down harmonised rules ensuring contestable and fair markets in the digital sector across the Union for European undertakings, including SMEs, where gatekeepers are present.
Amendment 395 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article premier – paragraph 5
Article premier – paragraph 5
5. Member States shall notmay, in keeping with the spirit of this Regulation, impose on gatekeepers further obligations by way of laws, regulations or administrative action for the purpose of ensuring contestable and fair markets. This is without prejudice to rules and pursuing other legitimate public interests, in compliance with Union law. In particular, nothing in this Regulation precludes Member States from imposing obligations, which are compatible with Union law, on undertakings, including providers of core platform services where these obligations are unrelated to the relevant undertakings having a status of gatekeeper within the meaning of this Regulation in order to protect consumers or to fight against acts of unfair competition.
Amendment 407 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 6
Article 1 – paragraph 6
6. This Regulation is without prejudice to the application of Articles 101 and 102 TFEU. It is also without prejudice to the application of: national rules prohibiting anticompetitive agreements, decisions by associations of undertakings, concerted practices and abuses of dominant positions; national competition rules prohibiting other forms of unilateral conduct insofar as they are applied to undertakings other than gatekeepers or amount to imposing additional obligations on gatekeepers; Council Regulation (EC) No 139/200438 and national rules concerning merger control; Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 and Regulation (EU) …./.. of the European Parliament and of the Council39 ; Directive (EU) 2019/882. _________________ 38Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 of 20 January 2004 on the control of concentrations between undertakings (the EC Merger Regulation) (OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1). 39Regulation (EU) …/.. of the European Parliament and of the Council – proposal on a Single Market For Digital Services (Digital Services Act) and amending Directive 2000/31/EC.
Amendment 410 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article premier – paragraph 7
Article premier – paragraph 7
7. National authorities shall not take decisions against the spirit of the Regulation which would run counter to a decision adopted by the Commission on a proposal by the High-Level Group under this Regulation. The Commission and Member States shall work in close cooperation and coordination in their investigation, supervisory and enforcement actions.
Amendment 468 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 14
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 14
(14) ‘Ancillary service’ means services provided in the context of or together with core platform services, including payment services as defined in point 3 of Article 4 and technical services which support the provision of payment services as defined in Article 3(j) of Directive (EU) 2015/2366, fulfilment, parcel delivery services as defined in Article 2 (2) of Regulation (EU) No 2018/644, freight, identification or advertising services;
Amendment 488 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 23 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 23 a (new)
(23 a) "persons with disabilities" means persons within the meaning of Article 3 (1) of Directive (EU) 2019/882;
Amendment 498 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) it enjoys an entrenched and durable position in its operations or it is foreseeable that it will enjoy such a position in the near future.
Amendment 516 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point b – paragraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point b – paragraph 1
for the purpose of the first subparagraph, monthly active end users shall refer to the average number of monthly active end users throughout the largest part of the last financial year;
Amendment 562 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 2
Article 3 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 592 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Chapter III – title
Chapter III – title
III In respect of each of its core platform services identified pursuant to Article 3(7), aContestability of markets and limits to certain unfair practices of gatekeeper shall:s
Amendment 595 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
In respect of each of its core platform services and ancillary services identified pursuant to Article 3(7) and Article 2 (1) (14) respectively, a gatekeeper shall:
Amendment 607 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
(a a) Any multinational gatekeeper wishing to continue operating in the internal market must establish itself in the European Union and develop local jobs.
Amendment 608 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a b (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a b (new)
(a b) The creation of local jobs shall be used by the competent national authorities and the Commission in the procedures to determine whether the gatekeepers have fulfilled their obligations.
Amendment 634 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) refrain from preventing or restricting business users, end users or whistleblowers from raising issues with any relevant public authority relating to any practice of gatekeepers, and also refrain from identifying them;
Amendment 642 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) refrain from requiring business users to use, offer or interoperate with an identification service of the gatekeeper or with a specific payment service (Visa, Mastercard, payment service of the gatekeeper or other) in the context of services offered by the business users using the core platform services of that gatekeeper;
Amendment 676 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point g
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) provide advertisers and publishers to which it supplies advertising services, upon their request, withregularly publishes information concerning the price paid by the advertiser and publisher, as well as the amount or remuneration paid to the publisher, for the publishing of a given ad and for each of the relevant advertising services provided by the gatekeeper.
Amendment 695 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point g a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point g a (new)
(g a) not acquire directly or indirectly any undertaking in a killer acquisition.
Amendment 704 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point g b (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point g b (new)
(g b) refrain from retaliating against undertakings which submit complaints or comments to the competent authorities.
Amendment 706 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Gatekeepers shall report annually to the Commission the number of employees based in each Member State and the percentage of total global employees for each core platform service identified by this Regulation.
Amendment 713 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) refrain from using, in competition with business userdirectly or by any third party belonging to the same undertaking, in competition with business users and providers of ancillary services, any data not publicly available, which is generated through activities by those business users, including by the end users of these business users, of its core platform services or provided by those business users of its core platform services or by the end users of these business users;
Amendment 732 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) allow the installation and effective use of third party software applications or software application stores using, or interoperating with, operating systems of that gatekeeper and allow these software applications or software application stores to be accessed by means other than the core platform services of that gatekeeper. The gatekeeper shall not be prevented from taking proportionate measures to ensure that third party software applications or software application stores do not endanger the integrity of the hardware or operating system provided by the gatekeeper, without prejudice to the freedom of consumers, duly informed, to choose the software application or software application stores they prefer;
Amendment 750 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) refrain from treating more favourably in ranking services, both basic and ancillary, and products offered by the gatekeeper itself or by any third party belonging to the same undertaking compared to similar services or products of third party and apply fair and non- discriminatory conditions to such ranking;
Amendment 826 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point k a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point k a (new)
Amendment 859 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2
Article 7 – paragraph 2
2. Where the Commission finds that the measures that the gatekeeper intends to implement pursuant to paragraph 1, or has implemented, do not ensure effective compliance with the relevant obligations laid down in Article 6, it may by decision specify the measures that the gatekeeper concerned shall implement. The Commission shall adopt such a decision within sixthree months from the opening of proceedings pursuant to Article 18.
Amendment 873 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4
Article 7 – paragraph 4
4. In view of adopting the decision under paragraph 2, the Commission shall communicate its preliminary findings within threewo months from the opening of the proceedings. In the preliminary findings, the Commission shall explain the measures it considers to take or it considers that the provider of core platform services concerned should take in order to effectively address the preliminary findings.
Amendment 879 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 6 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. A public consultation allows interested businesses and individuals to contribute anonymously and to inform procedures.
Amendment 893 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission may, on a reasoned request by the gatekeeper, exceptionally suspend, in whole or in part, a specific obligation laid down in Articles 5 and 6 for a core platform service by decision adopted in accordance with the advisory procedure referred to in Article 32(4), where the gatekeeper demonstrates that compliance with that specific obligation would endanger, due to exceptional circumstances beyond the control of the gatekeeper, the economic viability of the operation of the gatekeeper in the Union, and only to the extent necessary to address such threat to its viabilita risk of bankruptcy. The Commission shall aim to adopt the suspension decision without delay and at the latest 3 months following receipt of a complete reasoned request.
Amendment 900 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2
Article 8 – paragraph 2
2. Where the suspension is granted pursuant to paragraph 1, the Commission shall review its suspension decision every yearsix months. Following such a review the Commission shall either lift the suspension or decide that the conditions of paragraph 1 continue to be met.
Amendment 901 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3
Article 8 – paragraph 3
Amendment 907 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a
Amendment 915 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Article 10 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission is empowered, on a proposal from the High-Level Group, to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 34 to update the obligations laid down in Articles 5 and 6 where, based on a market investigation pursuant to Article 17, it has identified the need for new obligations addressing practices that limit the contestability of core platform services or are unfair in the same way as the practices addressed by the obligations laid down in Articles 5 and 6.
Amendment 922 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) there is an imbalance of rights and obligations on business users or end users and the gatekeeper is obtaining an advantage from business users or end users that is disproportionate to the service provided by the gatekeeper to business users or end users; or
Amendment 928 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) the contestability of markets is weakened as a consequence of such a practice engaged in by gatekeepers, in particular where businesses operating in the digital market, including innovative players and European digital businesses or SMEs, are hindered.
Amendment 935 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 1
1. A gatekeeper shall ensure that the obligations of Articles 5 and 6 are fully and effectively complied with. While the obligations of Articles 5 and 6 apply in respect of core and ancillary platform services designated pursuant to Article 3, and to Article 2 (1) (14) their implementation shall not be undermined by any behaviour of the undertaking to which the gatekeeper belogatekeeper or any third party belonging to the same undertakings, regardless of whether this behaviour is of a contractual, commercial, technical or any other nature.
Amendment 957 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. A gatekeeper shall inform the Commission and the competent national authorities of any intended concentration within the meaning of Article 3 of Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 involving another provider of core platform services or of any other services provided in the digital sector irrespective of whether it is notifiable to a Union competition authority under Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 or to a competent national competition authority under national merger rules.
Amendment 976 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Within sixthree months after its designation pursuant to Article 3, a gatekeeper shall submit to the Commission an independently audited description of any techniques for profiling of consumers that the gatekeeper applies to or across its core platform services identified pursuant to Article 3. This description shall be updated at least annually.
Amendment 979 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1
Article 15 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission may conduct a market investigation, on which it shall cooperate with the competent national authorities, for the purpose of examining whether a provider of core platform services should be designated as a gatekeeper pursuant to Article 3(6), or in order to identify core platform services for a gatekeeper pursuant to Article 3(7). It shall endeavour to conclude its investigation by adopting a decision in accordance with the advisory procedure referred to in Article 32(4) within twelvesix months from the opening of the market investigation.
Amendment 987 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2
Article 15 – paragraph 2
2. In the course of a market investigation pursuant to paragraph 1, the Commission shall endeavour to communicate its preliminary findings to the provider of core platform services concerned within sixthree months from the opening of the investigation. In the preliminary findings, the Commission shall explain whether it considers, on a provisional basis, that the provider of core platform services should be designated as a gatekeeper pursuant to Article 3(6).
Amendment 995 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 4
Article 15 – paragraph 4
Amendment 1006 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 1
1. Where the market investigation shows that a gatekeeper has systematically infringed the obligations laid down in Articles 5 and 6 and has further strengthened or extended its gatekeeper position in relation to the characteristics under Article 3(1), the Commission may by decision adopted in accordance with the advisory procedure referred to in Article 32(4) impose on such gatekeeper any behavioural or structural remedies which are proportionate to the infringement committed and necessary to ensure compliance with this Regulation. The Commission shall conclude its investigation by adopting a decision within twelvesix months from the opening of the market investigation. This provision shall be without prejudice to third-party liability or proceedings under national law in the event of intentional non-compliance or gross negligence.
Amendment 1017 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2
Article 16 – paragraph 2
2. The Commission may only impose structural remedies pursuant to paragraph 1 either where there is no equally effective behavioural remedy or where any equally effective behavioural remedy would be more burdensome for the gatekeeper concerned than the structural remedy.
Amendment 1019 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 3
Article 16 – paragraph 3
3. A gatekeeper shall be deemed to have engaged in a systematic non- compliance with the obligations laid down in Articles 5 and 6, where the Commission has issued at least three non-compliance or fining decisions pursuant to Articles 25 and 26 respectively against a gatekeeper in relation to any of its core platform services within a period of five years prior to the adoption of the decision opening a market investigation in view of the possible adoption of a decision pursuant to this Article.
Amendment 1029 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 5
Article 16 – paragraph 5
5. The Commission shall communicate its objections to the gatekeeper concerned within sixthree months from the opening of the investigation. In its objections, the Commission shall explain whether it preliminarily considers that the conditions of paragraph 1 are met and which remedy or remedies it preliminarily considers necessary and proportionate.
Amendment 1036 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1
Article 17 – paragraph 1
The Commission may conduct a market investigation with the High-Level Group with the purpose of examining whether one or more services within the digital sector should be added to the list of core platform services or to detect types of practices that may limit the contestability of core platform services or may be unfair and which are not effectively addressed by this Regulation. It shall issue a public report at the latest within 124 months from the opening of the market investigation.
Amendment 1038 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 1 a (new)
A free advisory hub shall be set up within the Commission or the High-Level Group to respond informally and quickly to stakeholders’ questions on this legislation and provide guidance.
Amendment 1039 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Gatekeepers intending to introduce a new service or working method may make use of a fast-track procedure to receive, within three months, a preliminary opinion from the High-Level Group on whether the proposed new service or working method is likely to comply with the obligations set out in this Regulation.
Amendment 1040 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 c (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 1 c (new)
Administrative costs shall be invoiced. Depending on applications and administrative capacity, a schedule or a ceiling for applications per business may be laid down. This opinion shall not be binding on the courts.
Amendment 1045 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph -1 (new)
Article 18 – paragraph -1 (new)
-1. Each year, the European High- Level Group of Digital Regulators shall draw up the schedule of priority issues of great concern for investigations on the basis of complaints and available information on the development of European digital businesses.
Amendment 1047 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1
Article 18 – paragraph 1
Where the Commission, the European High-Level Group of Digital Regulators or a Member State intends to carry out proceedings in view of the possible adoption of decisions pursuant to Articles 7, 25 and 26, it shall adopt a decision opening a proceeding shall be published.
Amendment 1049 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 a (new)
Article 18 a (new)
Article 18a The Commission shall set up a mechanism allowing whistleblowers or any stakeholder to provide information on the conduct of undertakings and associations of undertakings that may be relevant for the purposes of monitoring, implementing and enforcing the rules laid down in this Regulation. The Commission and national authorities shall safeguard the anonymity of whistleblowers, assess the information provided and, where appropriate, take account of it in their deliberations.
Amendment 1055 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 6
Article 19 – paragraph 6
6. At the request of the Commission, the governments and authorities of the Member States shall provide the Commission with all necessary information to carry out the duties assigned to it by this Regulation. Competent national authorities or any stakeholder may also on their own initiative provide the Commission or the European High-Level Group of Digital Regulators with information to be taken into account in their deliberations.
Amendment 1061 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 21 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Inspectors authorised by the Commission or the High-Level Group may conduct inspections in a third country if data relevant for the purpose of the inspection, including data relating to European citizens or businesses, are stored, transmitted, processed or analysed in that third country.
Amendment 1062 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 21 – paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. If an inspection cannot be conducted in a third country, the gatekeeper's European data shall be repatriated to the European Union within 12 months.
Amendment 1077 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1
Article 24 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission may take the necessary actions, in close cooperation with the competent national authorities, to monitor the effective implementation and compliance with the obligations laid down in Articles 5 and 6 and the decisions taken pursuant to Articles 7, 16, 22 and 23.
Amendment 1092 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 25 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. An independent appeals board shall be set up so that administrative decisions can be challenged, with rulings on appeals to be issued within two months.
Amendment 1100 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. In the decision pursuant to Article 25, the Commission may impose on a gatekeeper fines not exceeding 120% of its total turnover in the preceding financial year where it finds that the gatekeeper, intentionally or negligently, fails to comply with:
Amendment 1102 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 26 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The Commission may by decision impose on undertakings and associations of undertakings fines not exceeding 15% of the total turnover in the preceding financial year where they intentionally or negligently:
Amendment 1108 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 4 a (new)
Article 26 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 4 a (new)
Access to the service concerned shall ultimately be suspended on European Union territory in the event of failure to pay.
Amendment 1109 #
Amendment 1111 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 a (new)
Article 27 a (new)
Article 27a Systematic non-compliance In the event of systematic non- compliance, the Commission may impose structural measures against a gatekeeper on a proposal from the High-Level Group.
Amendment 1112 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 b (new)
Article 27 b (new)
Article 27b Structural measures Where the Europe-based workforce accounts for less than 30% of the European share of worldwide turnover, the Commission, in cooperation with the Member States and after hearing the gatekeeper, shall impose the necessary behavioural, functional or structural measures to remedy the situation within two years.
Amendment 1113 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 c (new)
Article 27 c (new)
Article 27c In the event of systematic and intentional non-compliance or gross negligence, personal sanctions may be imposed on directors or managers, including a ban on entering the territory of a Member State.
Amendment 1114 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 d (new)
Article 27 d (new)
Article 27d In the event of systematic and intentional non-compliance or gross negligence, a fine of up to 15% of their previous year's income may be imposed on directors or managers responsible for the failing or failings concerned.
Amendment 1122 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 30 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Before adopting a decision pursuant to Article 7, Article 8(1), Article 9(1), Articles 15, 16, 22, 23, 25 and 26 and Article 27(2), the Commission shall give the gatekeeper or undertaking or association of undertakings concerned, and third parties affected, the opportunity of being heard on:
Amendment 1139 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 a (new)
Article 31 a (new)
Article 31a European High-Level Group of Digital Regulators 1. The Commission and Member States shall establish a European High-Level Group of Digital Regulators in the form of an Expert Group consisting of the representatives of competent authorities of all the Member States, the Commission, relevant Union bodies and other representatives of competent authorities in specific sectors, including data protection and electronic communications. 2. The group shall be composed of the heads of the relevant competent authorities and shall be assisted by a secretariat provided by the Commission. 3. The work of the High-Level Group may be organised in working groups and supported by digital market technology experts. 4. Rapporteurs shall be chosen from among the experts appointed by the Member States opting to take part. 5. The group shall be chaired by a representative of a Member State for a period of three years.
Amendment 1142 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 b (new)
Article 31 b (new)
Amendment 1147 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 1
Article 32 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission shallmay be assisted by the Digital Markets Advisory Committee. That Committee shall be a Committee within the meaning of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011.
Amendment 1158 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1
Article 33 – paragraph 1
1. When threre one or more Member States or the European High-Level Group of Digital Regulators request the Commission to open an investigation pursuant to Article 15 because they consider that there are reasonable grounds to suspect that a provider of core platform services should be designated as a gatekeeper, the Commission shall within four months examine, 16, 17 or 25, the Commission shall open a preliminary investigation and examine within three months, in close cooperation with the European High-Level Group of Digital Regulators and the Member State or States concerned, whether there are reasonable grounds to open such anan in- depth investigation.
Amendment 1169 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 2
Article 33 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall submit evidence in support of their requestFor businesses, SMEs and consumers, Member States shall designate an ambassador who can relay their complaints to gatekeepers and bring about rapid resolution of disagreements or refer them to the High-Level Group and the Commission, in the case of irregular practices, for more in-depth investigation and possible damages equivalent to three times the loss concerned.
Amendment 1188 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 38 – paragraph 1
Article 38 – paragraph 1
1. By DD/MM/YYYY, and subsequently every threewo years, the Commission shall evaluate this Regulation and report to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee.
Amendment 1190 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 38 – paragraph 2
Article 38 – paragraph 2
2. The evaluations shall establish whether additional rules, including regarding the list of core platform services laid down in point 2 of Article 2, the obligations laid down in Articles 5 and 6 and their enforcement, may be required to ensure that digital markets across the Union are contestable and fair and to what extent this Regulation is helping to develop the European digital market. Following the evaluations, the Commission shall take appropriate measures, which may include legislative proposals.
Amendment 189 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) Responsible and diligent behaviour by providers of intermediary services is essential for a safe, accessible, predictable and trusted online environment and for allowing Union citizens and other persons to exercise their fundamental rights guaranteed in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘Charter’), in particular the freedom of expression and information and the freedom to conduct a business, and the right to non- discrimination.
Amendment 196 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) This Regulation should apply to providers of certain information society services as defined in Directive (EU) 2015/1535 of the European Parliament and of the Council26 , that is, any service normalfrequently provided for remuneration, at a distance, by electronic means and at the individual request of a recipient. Specifically, this Regulation should apply to providers of intermediary services, and in particular intermediary services consisting of services known as ‘mere conduit’, ‘caching’ and ‘hosting’ services, given that the exponential growth of the use made of those services, mainly for legitimate and socially beneficial purposes of all kinds, has also increased their role in the intermediation and spread of unlawful or otherwise harmful information and activitiesillegal content. __________________ 26Directive (EU) 2015/1535 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 September 2015 laying down a procedure for the provision of information in the field of technical regulations and of rules on Information Society services (OJ L 241, 17.9.2015, p. 1).
Amendment 203 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) In order to ensure the effectiveness of the rules laid down in this Regulation and a level playing field within the internal market, those rules should apply to providers of intermediary services irrespective of their place of establishment or residence, in so far as they provide services in the Union, as evidenced by a substantial connection to the Union.
Amendment 205 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
Amendment 210 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) Such a substantial connection to the Union should be considered to exist where the service provider has an establishment in the Union or, in its absence, on the basis of the existence of a significant number of users in one or more Member States, or the targeting of activities towards one or more Member States. The targeting of activities towards one or more Member States can be determined on the basis of all relevant circumstances, including factors such as the use of a language or a currency generally used in that Member State, or the possibility of ordering products or services, or using a national top level domain. The targeting of activities towards a Member State could also be derived from the availability of an application in the relevant national application store, from the provision of local advertising or advertising in the language used in that Member State, or from the handling of customer relations such as by providing customer service in the language generally used in that Member State. A substantial connection should also be assumed where a service provider directs its activities to one or more Member State as set out in Article 17(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council27 . On the other hand, mere technical accessibility of a website from the Union cannot, on that ground alone, be considered as establishing a substantial connection to the Union. __________________ 27 Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (OJ L351, 20.12.2012, p.1).
Amendment 223 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) In order to achieve the objective of ensuring a safe, predictable and trusted online environment, for the purpose of this Regulation the concept of “‘illegal content”’ should be defined broadly and also covers information relating to illegal content, products, services and activities. In particular, that concept should be understood to refer to information, irrespective of its form, that under the applicable law is either itself illegal, such as illegal hate speech or terrorist content and unlawful discriminatory content, or that relates to activities that are illegal, such as the sharing of images depicting child sexual abuse, unlawful non- consensual sharing of private images, online stalking, the sale of non-compliant or counterfeit products, the non- authorised use of copyright protected material or activities involving infringements of consumer protection law. In this regard, it is immaterial whether the illegality of the information or activity results from Union law or from national law that is consistent with Union law and what the precise nature or subject matter is of the law in questionstrictly defined, with the term covering any activity stipulated or punishable by the applicable law of the Member State concerned.
Amendment 256 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
Amendment 279 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) In order to benefit from the exemption from liability for hosting services, the provider should, upon obtaining actual knowledge or awareness of illegal content, act expeditiously to remove or to disable access to that content. The removal or disabling of access should be undertaken in the observance of the principle of freedom of expression. The provider can obtain such actual knowledge or awareness through, in particular, its own-initiative investigations or notices submitted to it by individuals or entities in accordance with this Regulation in so far as those notices are sufficiently precise and adequately substantiated to allow a diligent economic operator to reasonably identify, assess and where appropriate act against the allegedly illegal content.Does not affect the English version.)
Amendment 280 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) In order to benefit from the exemption from liability for hosting services, the provider should, upon obtaining actual knowledge or awareness of illegal content, act expeditiously to remove or to disable access to that content act to remove or to disable access to the illegal content when such content is deemed to be illegal according to Union or Member State law. The removal or disabling of access should be undertaken in the observance of the principle of freedom of expression. The provider can obtain such actual knowledge or awareness throughf the illegal content, in particular, its own- initiative investigations or notices submitted to it by individuals or entities in accordance with this Regulation in so far as those notices are sufficiently precise and adequately substantiated to allow a diligentn economic operator to reasonably identify, assess and where appropriate act against the allegedly illegal content.
Amendment 283 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) In order to ensure the effective protection of consumers when engaging in intermediated commercial transactions online, certain providers of hosting services, namely, online platforms that allow consumers to conclude distance contracts with traders, should not be able to benefit from the exemption from liability for hosting service providers established in this Regulation, in so far as those online platforms present the relevant information relating to the transactions at issue in such a way that it leads consumers to believe that the information was provided by those online platforms themselves or by recipients of the service acting under their authority or control, and that those online platforms thus have knowledge of or control over the information, even if that may in reality not be the case. In that regard, is should be determined objectively, on the basis of all relevant circumstances, whether the presentation could lead to such a belief on the side of an average and reasonably well-informed consumer. Providers of hosting services which will be liable in this way should ensure they have the possibility of redress against the trader actually responsible if this is not provided for in the conditions of use of their services.
Amendment 286 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) In order to ensure the effective protection of consumers when engaging in intermediated commercial transactions online, certain providers of hosting services, namely, online platforms that allow consumers to conclude distance contracts with traders, should not be able to benefit from the exemption from liability for hosting service providers established in this Regulation, in so far as those online platforms present the relevant information relating to the transactions at issue in such a way that it leads consumers to believe that the information was provided by those online platforms themselves or by recipients of the service acting under their authority or control, and that those online platforms thus have knowledge of or control over the information, even if that may in reality not be the case. In that regard, is should be determined objectively, on the basis of all relevant circumstances, whether the presentation could lead to such a belief on the side of an average and reasonably well-informed consumer.
Amendment 290 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23 a (new)
Recital 23 a (new)
(23a) European consumers should be able to safely purchase products and services online, regardless of whether a product or service has been produced in the Union or not. Online platforms allowing distance contracts with third- country traders should establish, before approving that trader on their platform, that the third-country trader complies with the relevant Union or national law on product safety and product compliance. In addition, if the third- country trader does not provide an economic operator inside the Union liable for the product safety, online platforms should not be able to benefit from the exemption from liability for hosting service providers established in this Regulation.
Amendment 292 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) The exemptions from liability established in this Regulation should not affect the possibility of injunctions of different kinds against providers of intermediary services, even where they meet the conditions set out as part of those exemptions. Such injunctions could, in particular, consist of orders by courts or administrative authorities requiring the termination or prevention of any infringement, including the removal of illegal content specified in such orders, issued in compliance with Union law, or the disabling of access to it.Does not affect the English version.)
Amendment 303 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
Recital 25
(25) In order to create legal certainty and not to discourage activities aimed at detecting, identifying and acting against illegal content that providers of intermediary services may undertake on a voluntary basis, it should be clarified that the mere fact that providers undertake such activities does not lead to the unavailability of the exemptions from liability set out in this Regulation, provided those activities are carried out in good faith and in a diligent manner. In addition, it is appropriate to clarify that the mere fact that those providers take measures, in good faith, to comply with the requirements of Union law, including those set out in this Regulation as regards the implementation of their terms and conditions, should not lead to the unavailability of those exemptions from liability. Therefore, any such activities and measures that a given provider may have taken should not be taken into account when determining whether the provider can rely on an exemption from liability, in particular as regards whether the provider provides its service neutrally and can therefore fall within the scope of the relevant provision, without this rule however implying that the provider can necessarily rely thereDoes not affect the English version.)
Amendment 306 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26
Recital 26
(26) Whilst the rules in Chapter II of this Regulation concentrate on the exemption from liability of providers of intermediary services, it is important to recall that, despite the generally important role played by those providers, the problem of illegal content and activities online should not be dealt with by solely focusing on their liability and responsibilities. Where possible, third parties affected by illegal content transmitted or stored online should attempt to resolve conflicts relating to such content without involving the providers of intermediary services in question. Recipients of the service should be held liable, where the applicable rules of Union and national law determining such liability so provide, for the illegal content that they provide and may disseminate through intermediary services. Where appropriate, other actors, such as group moderators in closed online environments, in particular in the case of large groups, should also help to avoid the spread of illegal content online, in accordance with the applicable law. Furthermore, where it is necessary to involve information society services providers, including providers of intermediary services, any requests or court orders for such involvement should, as a general rule, be directed to the actor that has the technical and operational ability to act against specific items of illegal content, so as to prevent and minimise any possible negative effects for the availability and accessibility of information that is not illegal content.
Amendment 318 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) Providers of intermediary services should not be subject to a monitoring obligation with respect to obligations of a general nature. This does not concern monitoring obligations in a specific case and, in particular, does not affect orders by national authorities in accordance with national legislation, in accordance with the conditions established in this Regulation. Nothing in this Regulation should be construed as an imposition of a general monitoring obligation or active fact-finding obligation, or as a general obligation for providers to take proactive measures to relation to illegal content.Does not affect the English version.)
Amendment 326 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
Recital 29
(29) Depending on the legal system of each Member State and the field of law at issue, national judicial or administrative authorities may order providers of intermediary services to act against certain specific items of illegal content or to provide certain specific items of information. The national laws on the basis of which such orders are issued differ considerably and the orders are increasingly addressed in cross-border situations. In order to ensure that those orders can be complied with in an effective and efficient manner, so that the public authorities concerned can carry out their tasks and the providers are not subject to any disproportionate burdens, without unduly affecting the rights and legitimate interests of any third parties, it is necessary to set certain conditions that those orders should meet and certain complementary requirements relating to the processing of those orders.Does not affect the English version.)
Amendment 330 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
Recital 30
(30) Orders to act against illegal content or to provide information should be issued in compliance with Union law, in particular Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and the prohibition of general obligations to monitor information or to actively seek facts or circumstances indicating illegal activity laid down in this Regulation. The conditions and requirements laid down in this Regulation which apply to orders to act against illegal content are without prejudice to other Union acts providing for similar systems for acting against specific types of illegal content, such as Regulation (EU) …/…. [proposed Regulation addressing the dissemination of terrorist content online], or Regulation (EU) 2017/2394 that confers specific powers to order the provision of information on Member State consumer law enforcement authorities, whilst the conditions and requirements that apply to orders to provide information are without prejudice to other Union acts providing for similar relevant rules for specific sectors. Those conditions and requirements should be without prejudice to retention and preservation rules under applicable national law, in conformity with Union law and confidentiality requests by law enforcement authorities related to the non- disclosure of information.Does not affect the English version.)
Amendment 334 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
Recital 31
(31) The territorial scope of such orders to act against illegal content should be clearly set out on the basis of the applicable Union or national law enabling the issuance of the order and should not exceed what is strictly necessary to achieve its objectives. In that regard, the national judicial or administrative authority issuing the order should balance the objective that the order seeks to achieve, in accordance with the legal basis enabling its issuance, with the rights and legitimate interests of all third parties that may be affected by the order, in particular their fundamental rights under the Charter. In addition, where the court order referring to the specific information may have effects beyond the territory of the Member State of the authority concerned, the authority should assess whether the information at issue is likely to constitute illegal content in other Member States concerned and, where relevant, take account of the relevant rules of Union law or international law and the interests of international comity.
Amendment 340 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33
Recital 33
(33) Orders to act against illegal content and to provide information are subject to the rules safeguarding the competence of the Member State where the service provider addressed is established and laying down possible derogations from that competence in certain cases, set out in Article 3 of Directive 2000/31/EC, only if the conditions of that Article are met. Given that the orders in question relate to specific items of illegal content and information, respectively, where they are addressed to providers of intermediary services established in another Member State, they do not in principle restrict those providers’ freedom to provide their services across borders. Therefore, the rules set out in Article 3 of Directive 2000/31/EC, including those regarding the need to justify measures derogating from the competence of the Member State where the service provider is established on certain specified grounds and regarding the notification of such measures, do not apply in respect of those orders.Does not affect the English version.)
Amendment 348 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 34
Recital 34
(34) In order to achieve the objectives of this Regulation, and in particular to improve the functioning of the internal market and ensure a safe and transparent online environment, it is necessary clearly to establish a clear and balanced set of harmonised due diligence obligations forthe legal obligations which will apply to providers of intermediary services. Those obligations should aim in particular to guarantee different public policy objectives such as the safety and trust of the recipients of the service, including minors and vulnerable users, protect the relevant fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter, to ensure meaningful accountability of those providers and to empower recipients and other affected parties, whilst facilitating the necessary oversight by competent authorities.
Amendment 350 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35
Recital 35
Amendment 357 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36
Recital 36
(36) In order to facilitate smooth and efficient communications relating to matters covered by this Regulation, providers of intermediary services should be required to establish a single point of contact and to publish relevant information relating to their point of contact, including the languages to be used in such communications. The point of contact can also be used by trusted flaggers and by professional entities which are under a specific relationship with the provider of intermediary services. In contrast to the legal representative, the point of contact should serve operational purposes and should not necessarily have to have a physical location .
Amendment 364 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 38
Recital 38
(38) Whilst the freedom of contract of providers of intermediary services should in principle be respected, it is appropriate to set certain rules on the content, application and enforcement of the terms and conditions of those providers in the interests of transparency, the protection of recipients of the service and the avoidance of unfair or arbitrary outcomes. To this end, the use of algorithmic decision- making processes should be disclosed to users whenever they are employed.
Amendment 371 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 39
Recital 39
(39) To ensure an adequate level of transparency and accountability, providers of intermediary services should annually report, in accordance with the harmonised requirements contained in this Regulation, on the content moderation they engage in, including the measures taken as a result of the application and enforcement of their terms and conditions. However, so as to avoid disproportionate burdens, those transparency reporting obligations should not apply to providers that are micro- or small enterprises as defined in Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC40 . __________________ 40 Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC of 6 May 2003 concerning the definition of micro, small and medium- sized enterprises (OJ L 124, 20.5.2003, p. 36).
Amendment 382 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40
Recital 40
(40) Providers of hosting services play a particularly important role in tackling illegal content online, as they store information provided by and at the request of the recipients of the service and typically give other recipients access thereto, sometimes on a large scale. It is important that all providers of hosting services, regardless of their size, with the exception of those which play an architectural role, put in place user- friendly notice and action mechanisms that facilitate the notification of specific items of information that the notifying party considers to be illegal content to the provider of hosting services concerned ('notice'), pursuant to which that provider can decide whether or not it agrees with that assessment and wishes to remove or disable access to that content ('action'). Provided the requirements on notices are met, it should be possible for individuals or entities to notify multiple specific items of allegedly illegal content through a single notice. The obligation to put in place notice and action mechanisms should apply, for instance, to file storage and sharing services, web hosting services, advertising servers and paste bins, in as far as they qualify as providers of hosting services covered by this Regulation.
Amendment 386 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41
Recital 41
(41) The rules on such notice and action mechanisms should be harmonised at Union level, so as to provide for the timely, diligent and objective processing of notices on the basis of rules that are uniform, transparent and clear and that provide for robust safeguards to protect the right and legitimate interests of all affected parties, in particular their fundamental rights guaranteed by the Charter, irrespective of the Member State in which those parties are established or reside and of the field of law at issue. The fundamental rights include, as the case may be, the right to freedom of expression and information, the right to respect for private and family life, the right to protection of personal data, the right to non-discrimination and the right to an effective remedy of the recipients of the service; the freedom to conduct a business, including the freedom of contract, of service providers; as well as the right to human dignity, the rights of the child, the right to protection of property, including intellectual property, and the right to non- discrimination of parties affected by illegal content.Does not affect the English version.)
Amendment 393 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 42
Recital 42
(42) Where a hosting service provider decides to remove or disable information provided by a recipient of the service, for instance following receipt of a notice or acting on its own initiative, including through the use of automated means, that provider should inform the recipient of its decision, the reasons for its decision and the available redress possibilities to contest the decision, in view of the negative consequences that such decisions may have for the recipient, including as regards the exercise of its fundamental right to freedom of expression. That obligation should apply irrespective of the reasons for the decision, in particular whether the action has been taken because the information notified is considered to be illegal content or incompatible with the applicable terms and conditions. Available recourses to challenge the decision of the hosting service provider should always include judicial redress.
Amendment 399 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 43
Recital 43
(43) To avoid disproportionate burdens, the additional obligations imposed on online platforms under this Regulation should not apply to micro or small enterprises as defined in Recommendation 2003/361/EC of the Commission,41 with the exception of those which are owned or controlled by bodies established outside the European Union, unless their reach and impact is such that they meet the criteria to qualify as very large online platforms under this Regulation. The consolidation rules laid down in that Recommendation help ensure that any circumvention of those additional obligations is prevented. The exemption of micro- and small enterprises from those additional obligations should not be understood as affecting their ability to set up, on a voluntary basis, a system that complies with one or more of those obligations. __________________ 41 Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC of 6 May 2003 concerning the definition of micro, small and medium- sized enterprises (OJ L 124, 20.5.2003, p. 36).
Amendment 407 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 46
Recital 46
Amendment 420 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 47
Recital 47
(47) The misuse of services of online platforms by frequently providing manifestly illegal content or by frequently submitting manifestly unfounded notices or complaints under the mechanisms and systems, respectively, established under this Regulation undermines trust and harms the rights and legitimate interests of the parties concerned. Therefore, there is a need to put in place appropriate and proportionate safeguards against such misuse. Information should be considered to be manifestly illegal content and notices or complaints should be considered manifestly unfounded where it is evident to a layperson, without any substantive analysis, that the content is illegal respectively that the notices or complaints are unfounded. Under certain conditions, online platforms should temporarily suspend their relevant activities in respect of the person engaged in abusive behaviour. This is without prejudice to the freedom by online platforms to determine their terms and conditions and establish stricter measures in the case of manifestly illegal content related to serious crimes. For reasons of transparency, this possibility should be set out, clearly and in sufficiently detail, in the terms and conditions of the online platforms. Redress should always be open to the decisions taken in this regard by online platforms and they should be subject to oversight by the competent Digital Services Coordinator. The rules of this Regulation on misuse should not prevent online platforms from taking other measures to address the provision of illegal content by recipients of their service or other misuse of their services, in accordance with the applicable Union and national law. Those rules are without prejudice to any possibility to hold the persons engaged in misuse liable, including for damages, provided for in Union or national law.
Amendment 421 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 47
Recital 47
(47) The misuse of services of online platforms by frequently providing manifestly illegal content or by frequently submitting manifestly unfoundedillegal notices or complaints under the mechanisms and systems, respectively, established under this Regulation undermines trust and harms the rights and legitimate interests of the parties concerned. Therefore, there is a need to put in place appropriate and proportionate safeguards against such misuse. Information should be considered to be manifestly illegal content whenever it contravenes the law and notices or complaints should be considered manifestly unfounded where it is evident to a layperson, without any substantive analysis, that the content is illegal respectively that the notices or complaints are unfounded. Under certain conditions, online platforms should temporarily suspend their relevant activities in respect of the person engaged in abusive behaviour. This is without prejudice to the freedom by online platforms to determine their terms and conditions and establish strictWhere the platform decides to suspend accounts which concern measures in the case of manifestly illegal content related to serious crimes. For reasons of transparency, this possibility should be set out, clearly and in sufficiently detail, in the terms and conditionsatters of public interest, such as those belonging to political figures or candidates for election, it can act only ofn the online platformsbasis of a preliminary court injunction. Redress should always be open to the decisions taken in this regard by online platforms and they should be subject to oversight by the competent Digital Services Coordinator. The rules of this Regulation on misuse should not prevent online platforms from taking other measures to address the provision of illegal content by recipients of their service or other misuse of their services, in accordance with the applicable Union and national law. Those rules are without prejudice to any possibility to hold the persons engaged in misuse liable, including for damages, provided for in Union or national law.
Amendment 431 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 48
Recital 48
(48) An online platform may in some instances become aware, such as through a notice by a notifying party or through its own voluntary measures, of information relating to certain activity of a recipient of the service, such as the provision of certain types of illegal content, that reasonably justify, having regard to all relevant circumstances of which the online platform is aware, the suspicion that the recipient may have committed, may be committing or is likely to commit a serious criminal offence involving a threat to the life or safety of person, such as offences specified in Directive 2011/93/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council44 . In such instances, the online platform should inform without delay the competent law enforcement authorities of such suspicion, providing all relevant information available to it, including where relevant the content in question and an explanation of its suspicion. This Regulation does not provide the legal basis for profiling of recipients of the services with a view to the possible identification of criminal offences by online platforms. Online platforms should also respect other applicable rules of Union or national law for the protection of the rights and freedoms of individuals when informing law enforcement authorities. __________________ 44Directive 2011/93/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on combating the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and child pornography, and replacing Council Framework Decision 2004/68/JHA (OJ L 335, 17.12.2011, p. 1).Does not affect the English version.)
Amendment 432 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 48
Recital 48
(48) An online platform may in some instances become aware, such as through a notice by a notifying party or through its own voluntary measures, of information relating to certain activity of a recipient of the service, such as the provision of certain types of illegal content, that reasonably justify, having regard to all relevant circumstances of which the online platform is aware, the suspicion that the recipient may have committed, may be committing or is likely to commit a serious criminal offence involving a threat to the life or safety of person, such as offences specified in Directive 2011/93/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council44 . In such instances, the online platform should inform without delaypromptly inform the competent law enforcement authorities of such suspicion, providing all relevant information available to it, including where relevant the content in question and an explanation of its suspicion. This Regulation does not provide the legal basis for profiling of recipients of the services with a view to the possible identification of criminal offences by online platforms. Online platforms should also respect other applicable rules of Union or national law for the protection of the rights and freedoms of individuals when informing law enforcement authorities. __________________ 44Directive 2011/93/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on combating the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and child pornography, and replacing Council Framework Decision 2004/68/JHA (OJ L 335, 17.12.2011, p. 1).
Amendment 442 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 50
Recital 50
(50) To ensure an efficient and adequate application of that obligation, without imposing any disproportionate burdens, the online platforms covered should make reasonable efforts to verify the reliability of the information provided by the traders concerned, in particular by using freely available official online databases and online interfaces, such as national trade registers and the VAT Information Exchange System45 , or by requesting the traders concerned to provide trustworthy supporting documents, such as copies of identity documents, certified bank statements, company certificates and trade register certificates. They may also use other sources, available for use at a distance, which offer a similar degree of reliability for the purpose of complying with this obligation. However, the oOnline pPlatforms covered should not be required to engage in excessive or costly online fact-finding exercises or to carry out verifications on the spot. Nor should such online platforms, which have made the reasonable efforts required by this Regulation, be understood as guamay also ask for support from the Digital Services Coordinator in carrying out these specific obligations. If the trader is established outside the Union and does not cooperate or does not provide sufficient information for the verification of its compliance with the relevant Union or Member State law, this trader should not be admitted to operate and sell its products on the platform. If the trader is already on the platform and should not meet the above criteria, the platform should suspend that trader's account. The trader should be granteeingd the reliapossibility of the information towards consumer or other interested parties. Such oredress in the event of suspension of the business account. Online platforms should also design and organise their online interface in a way that enables traders to comply with their obligations under Union law, in particular the requirements set out in Articles 6 and 8 of Directive 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council46 , Article 7 of Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council47 and Article 3 of Directive 98/6/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council48 . __________________ 45 https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/vies/ vieshome.do?selectedLanguage=en 46Directive 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2011 on consumer rights, amending Council Directive 93/13/EEC and Directive 1999/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directive 85/577/EEC and Directive 97/7/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council 47Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair business-to- consumer commercial practices in the internal market and amending Council Directive 84/450/EEC, Directives 97/7/EC, 98/27/EC and 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (‘Unfair Commercial Practices Directive’) 48Directive 98/6/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 1998 on consumer protection in the indication of the prices of products offered to consumers
Amendment 451 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 51
Recital 51
(51) In view of the particular responsibilities and obligations of online platforms, they should be made subject to transparency reporting obligations, which apply in addition to the transparency reporting obligations applicable to all providers of intermediary services under this Regulation. For the purposes of determining whether online platforms may be very large online platforms that are subject to certain additional obligations under this Regulation, the transparency reporting obligations for online platforms should include certain obligations relating to the publication and communication of information on the average monthly active recipients of the service in the Union under the supervision of the Commission.
Amendment 458 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 52
Recital 52
(52) Online advertisement plays an important role in the online environment, including in relation to the provision of the services of online platforms. However, online advertisement can contribute to significant risks, ranging from advertisement that is itself illegal content, to contributing to financial incentives for the publication or amplification of illegal or otherwise harmful content and activities online, or the discriminatory display of advertising with an impact on the equal treatment and opportunities of citizens. In addition to the requirements resulting from Article 6 of Directive 2000/31/EC, online platforms should therefore be required to ensure that the recipients of the service have certain individualised information necessary for them to understand when and on whose behalf the advertisement is displayed. In addition, recipients of the service should have information on the main parameters used for determining that specific advertising is to be displayed to them, providing meaningful explanations of the logic used to that end, including when this is based on profiling. The requirements of this Regulation on the provision of information relating to advertisement is without prejudice to the application of the relevant provisions of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, in particular those regarding the right to object, automated individual decision-making, including profiling and specifically the need to obtain consent of the data subject prior to the processing of personal data for targeted advertising. Similarly, it is without prejudice to the provisions laid down in Directive 2002/58/EC in particular those regarding the storage of information in terminal equipment and the access to information stored therein.Does not affect the English version.)
Amendment 472 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 54
Recital 54
(54) Very large online platforms may cause societal risks, different in scope and impact from those caused by smaller platforms. Once the number of recipients of a platform reaches a significant share of the Union population, the systemic risks the platform poses have a disproportionately negative impact in the Union. Such significant reach should be considered to exist where the number of recipients exceeds an operational threshold set at 45 million, that is, a number equivalent to 10 % of the Union population and if the online platforms have an annual global turnover exceeding EUR 100 million. The operational threshold should be kept up to date through amendments enacted by delegated acts, where necessary. Such very large online platforms should therefore bear the highest standard of due diligence obligations, proportionate to their societal impact and means.
Amendment 473 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 56
Recital 56
(56) Very large online platforms are used in a way that strongly influences safety online, the shaping of public opinion and discourse, as well as on online trade. The way they design their services is generally optimised to benefit their often advertising-driven business models and can cause societal concerns. In the absence of effective regulation and enforcement, they can set the rules of the game, without effectively identifying and mitigating the risks and the societal and economic harm they can cause. Under this Regulation, very large online platforms should therefore assess, under the supervision of the Commission and the European Board for Digital Services, the systemic risks stemming from the functioning and use of their service, as well as by potential misuses by the recipients of the service, and take appropriate mitigating measures.
Amendment 479 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 57
Recital 57
(57) Three categories of systemic risks should be assessed in-depth. A first category concerns the risks associated with the misuse of their service through the dissemination of illegal content, such as the dissemination of child sexual abuse material or illegal hate speech, and the conduct of illegal activities, such as the sale of products or services prohibited by Union or national law, including counterfeit products. For example, and without prejudice to the personal responsibility of the recipient of the service of very large online platforms for possible illegality of his or her activity under the applicable law, such dissemination or activities may constitute a significant systematic risk where access to such content may be amplified through accounts with a particularly wide reach. A second category concerns the impact of the service on the exercise of fundamental rights, as protected by the Charter of Fundamental Rights, including the freedom of expression and information, the right to private life, the right to non-discrimination and the rights of the child. Such risks may arise, for example, in relation to the design of the algorithmic systems used by the very large online platform or the misuse of their service through the submission of abusive notices or other methods for silencing speech or hampering competition. A third category of risks concerns the intentional and, oftentimes, coordinated manipulation of the platform’s service, with a foreseeable impact on health, civic discourse, electoral processes, public security and protection of minors, having regard to the need to safeguard public order, protect privacy and fight fraudulent and deceptive commercial practices. Such risks may arise, for example, through the creation of fake accounts, the use of bots, and other automated or partially automated behaviours, which may lead to the rapid and widespread dissemination of information that is illegal content or incompatible with an online platform’s terms and conditions.
Amendment 485 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 58
Recital 58
(58) Very large online platforms should deploy the necessary means to diligently mitigate the systemic risks identified in the risk assessment. Very large online platforms should under such mitigating measures consider, for example, enhancing or otherwise adapting the design and functioning of their content moderation, algorithmic recommender systems and online interfaces, so that they discourage and limit the dissemination of illegal content, adapting their decision-making processes, or adapting their terms and conditions. They may also include corrective measures, such as discontinuing advertising revenue for specific content, or other actions, such as improving the visibility of authoritative information sources. Very large online platforms may reinforce their internal processes or supervision of any of their activities, in particular as regards the detection of systemic risks. They may also initiate or increase cooperation with trusted flaggers, organise training sessions and exchanges with trusted flagger organisations, and cooperate with other service providers, including by initiating or joining existing codes of conduct or other self-regulatory measures. Any measures adopted should respect the due diligence requirements of this Regulation and be effective and appropriate for mitigating the specific risks identified, in the interest of safeguarding public order, protecting privacy and fighting fraudulent and deceptive commercial practices, and should be proportionate in light of the very large online platform’s economic capacity and the need to avoid unnecessary restrictions on the use of their service, taking due account of potential negative effects on the fundamental rights of the recipients of the service.
Amendment 486 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 58
Recital 58
(58) Very large online platforms should deploy the necessary means to diligently mitigate the systemic risks identified in the risk assessment. Very large online platforms should under such mitigating measures consider, for example, enhancing or otherwise adapting the design and functioning of their content moderation, algorithmic recommender systems and online interfaces, so that they discourage and limit the dissemination of illegal content, or adapting their decision-making processes, or adapting their terms and conditions. They may also include corrective measures, such as discontinuing advertising revenue for specific content, or other actions, such as improving the visibility of authoritative information sources. Very large online platforms may reinforce their internal processes or supervision of any of their activities, in particular as regards the detection of systemic risks. They may also initiate or increase cooperation with trusted flaggers, organise training sessions and exchanges with trusted flagger organisations, and cooperate with other service providers, including by initiating or joining existing codes of conduct or other self-regulatory measures. Any measures adopted should respect the due diligence requirements of this Regulation and be effective and appropriate for mitigating the specific risks identified, in the interest of safeguarding public order, protecting privacy and fighting fraudulent and deceptive commercial practices, and should be proportionate in light of the very large online platform’s economic capacity and the need to avoid unnecessary restrictions on the use of their service, taking due account of potential negative effects on the fundamental rights of the recipients of the service.
Amendment 492 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 61
Recital 61
(61) The audit report should be substantiated, so as to give a meaningful account of the activities undertaken and the conclusions reached. It should help inform, and where appropriate suggest improvements to the measures taken by the very large online platform to comply with their obligations under this Regulation. The report should be transmitted to the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment and the Boardcoordinators, the Board and the Commission without delay, together with the risk assessment and the mitigation measures, as well as the platform’s plans for addressing the audit’s recommendations. The report should include an audit opinion based on the conclusions drawn from the audit evidence obtained. A positive opinion should be given where all evidence shows that the very large online platform complies with the obligations laid down by this Regulation or, where applicable, any commitments it has undertaken pursuant to a code of conduct or crisis protocol, in particular by identifying, evaluating and mitigating the systemic risks posed by its system and services. A positive opinion should be accompanied by comments where the auditor wishes to include remarks that do not have a substantial effect on the outcome of the audit. A negative opinion should be given where the auditor considers that the very large online platform does not comply with this Regulation or the commitments undertaken.
Amendment 497 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 62
Recital 62
(62) A core part of a very large online platform’s business is the manner in which information is prioritised and presented on its online interface to facilitate and optimise access to information for the recipients of the service. This is done, for example, by algorithmically suggesting, ranking and prioritising information, distinguishing through text or other visual representations, or otherwise curating information provided by recipients. Such recommender systems can have a significant impact on the ability of recipients to retrieve and interact with information online. They also play an important role in the amplification of certain messages, the viral dissemination of information and the stimulation of online behaviour. Consequently, very large online platforms should ensure that recipients are appropriately informed, and can influence the information presented to them. They should clearly present the main parameters for such recommender systems in an easily comprehensible manner to ensure that the recipients understand how information is prioritised for them. They should also ensure that the recipients enjoy alternative options for the main parameters, including options that are not based on profiling of the recipient. This option must be easily accessible and must correspond to a predefined parameter profile.
Amendment 505 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 64
Recital 64
(64) In order to appropriately supervise the compliance of very large online platforms with the obligations laid down by this Regulation, the Digital Services Coordinators of establishmentthe Member States, the Board or the Commission may require access to or reporting of specific data. Such a requirement may include, for example, the data necessary to assess the risks and possible harms brought about by the platform’s systems, data on the accuracy, functioning and testing of algorithmic systems for content moderation, recommender systems or advertising systems, or data on processes and outputs of content moderation or of internal complaint-handling systems within the meaning of this Regulation. Investigations by researchers on the evolution and severity of online systemic risks are particularly important for bridging information asymmetries and establishing a resilient system of risk mitigation, informing online platforms, Digital Services Coordinators, other competent authorities, the Commission and the public. This Regulation therefore provides a framework for compelling access to data from very large online platforms to vetted researchers. All requirements for access to data under that framework should be proportionate and appropriately protect the rights and legitimate interests, including trade secrets and other confidential information, of the platform and any other parties concerned, including the recipients of the service.
Amendment 512 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 66
Recital 66
(66) To facilitate the effective and consistent application of the obligations in this Regulation that may require implementation through technological means, it is important to promote voluntary industry standards covering certain technical procedures, where the industry can help develop standardised means to comply with this Regulation, such as allowing the submission of notices, including through application programming interfaces, or about the interoperability of advertisement repositories. Such standardsIn order to be properly distributed, such standards must be supported by a high quality level monitored by the public authority. They could in particular be useful for relatively small providers of intermediary services. The standards could distinguish between different types of illegal content or different types of intermediary services, as appropriate.
Amendment 515 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 67
Recital 67
(67) The Commission and the Board should encourage the drawing-up of codes of conduct to contribute to the application of this Regulation. While the implementation of codes of conduct should be measurable and subject to public oversight, this should not impair the voluntary nature of such codes and the freedom of interested parties to decide whether to participate. In certain circumstances, it is important that very large online platforms cooperate in the drawing-up and adhere to specific codes of conduct. Nothing in this Regulation prevents other service providers from adhering to the same standards of due diligence, adopting best practices and benefitting from the guidance provided by the Commission and the Board, by participating in the same codes of conduct.
Amendment 518 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 68
Recital 68
Amendment 521 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 68
Recital 68
(68) It is appropriate that this Regulation identify certain areas of consideration for such codes of conduct. In particular, risk mitigation measures concerning specific types of illegal content, for example sharing of images depicting child sexual abuse or terrorist content, should be explored via self- and co-regulatory agreements. Another area for consideration is the possible negative impacts of systemic risks on society and democracy, such as disinformation or manipulative and abusive activities. This includes coordinated operations aimed at amplifying information, including disinformation, such as the use of bots or fake accounts for the creation of fake or misleading information, sometimes with a purpose of obtaining economic gain, which are particularly harmful for vulnerable recipients of the service, such as children. In relation to such areas, adherence to and compliance with a given code of conduct by a very large online platform may be considered as an appropriate risk mitigating measure. The refusal without proper explanations by an online platform of the Commission’s invitation to participate in the application of such a code of conduct could be taken into account, where relevant, when determining whether the online platform has infringed the obligations laid down by this Regulation.
Amendment 523 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 69
Recital 69
Amendment 526 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 69
Recital 69
(69) The rules on codes of conduct under this Regulation could serve as a basis for already established self-regulatory efforts at Union level, including the Product Safety Pledge, the Memorandum of Understanding against counterfeit goods, the Code of Conduct against illegal hate speech as well as the Code of practice on disinformation. In particular for the latter, the Commission will issue guidance for strengthening the Code of practice on disinformation as announced in the European Democracy Action Plan.
Amendment 531 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 71
Recital 71
Amendment 537 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 74
Recital 74
(74) The Digital Services Coordinator, as well as other competent authorities designated under this Regulation, play a crucial role in ensuring the effectiveness of the rights and obligations laid down in this Regulation and the achievement of its objectives. Accordingly, it is necessary to ensure that those authorities act in complete independence from private and public bodies, without the obligation or possibility to seek or receive instructions, including from the government, and without prejudice to the specific duties to cooperate with other competent authorities, the Digital Services Coordinators, the Board, the Member States and the Commission. On the other hand, the independence of these authorities should not mean that they cannot be subject, in accordance with national constitutions and without endangering the achievement of the objectives of this Regulation, to national control or monitoring mechanisms regarding their financial expenditure or to judicial review, or that they should not have the possibility to consult other national authorities, including law enforcement authorities or crisis management authorities, where appropriate.
Amendment 540 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 76
Recital 76
(76) In the absence of a general requirement for providers of intermediary services to ensure a physical presence within the territory of one of the Member States, there is a need to ensure clarity under which Member State's jurisdiction those providers fall for the purposes of enforcing the rules laid down in Chapters III and IV by the national competent authorities. A provider should be under the jurisdiction of the Member State where its main establishment is located, that is, where the provider has its head office or registered office within which the principal financial functions and operational control are exercised, without this identification serving as a presumption of recognition of establishment for tax purposes. In respect of providers that do not have an establishment in the Union but that offer services in the Union and therefore fall within the scope of this Regulation, the Member State where those providers appointed their legal representative should have jurisdiction, considering the function of legal representatives under this Regulation. In the interest of the effective application of this Regulation, all Member States should, however, have jurisdiction in respect of providers that failed to designate a legal representative, provided that the principle of ne bis in idem is respected. To that aim, each Member State that exercises jurisdiction in respect of such providers should, without undue delay, inform all other Member States of the measures they have taken in the exercise of that jurisdiction.
Amendment 547 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 84
Recital 84
(84) The Digital Services Coordinator should regularly publish a report on the activities carried out under this Regulation. Given that the Digital Services Coordinator is also made aware of orders to take action against illegal content or to provide information regulated by this Regulation through the common information sharing system, the Digital Services Coordinator should include in its annual report the number and categories of these orders addressed to providers of intermediary services issued by judicial and administrative authorities in its Member State.Does not affect the English version.)
Amendment 550 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 85
Recital 85
(85) Where a Digital Services Coordinator requests another Digital Services Coordinator to take action, the requesting Digital Services Coordinator, or the Board in case it issued a recommendation to assess issues involving more than three Member States, should be able to refer the matter to the Commission in case of any disagreement as to the assessments or the measures taken or proposed or a failure to adopt any measures. The Commission, on the basis of the information made available by the concerned authorities, should accordingly be able to request the competent Digital Services Coordinator to re-assess the matter and take the necessary measures to ensure compliance within a defined and reasonable time period. This possibility is without prejudice to the Commission’s general duty to oversee the application of, and where necessary enforce, Union law under the control of the Court of Justice of the European Union in accordance with the Treaties. A failure by the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment to take any measures pursuant to such a request may also lead to the Board’s or the Commission’s intervention under Section 3 of Chapter IV of this Regulation, where the suspected infringer is a very large online platform.
Amendment 558 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 89
Recital 89
Amendment 563 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 90
Recital 90
(90) For that purpose, tThe Board should be able to adopt opinions, requests and recommendations addressed to Digital Services Coordinators or other competent national authorities. While not legally binding, the decision to deviate therefrom should be properly explained and could be taken into account by the Commission in assessing the compliance of the Member State concerned with this Regulation.
Amendment 568 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 91
Recital 91
(91) The Board should bring together the representatives of the Digital Services Coordinators and possible other competent authorities under the chairmanship of the Commission, with a view to ensuring an careful assessment of matters submitted to it in a fully European dimension. In view of possible cross-cutting elements that may be of relevance for other regulatory frameworks at Union level, the Board should be allowed to cooperate with other Union bodies, offices, agencies and advisory groups with responsibilities in fields such as equality, including equality between women and men, and non- discrimination, data protection, electronic communications, audiovisual services, detection and investigation of frauds against the EU budget as regards custom duties, or consumer protection, as necessary for the performance of its tasks.
Amendment 576 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 97
Recital 97
(97) The Commission should reBoard should have full decision-makin free to decide whether or not it wishes to intervene in any of the situations where it is empowered to do so under this Regulatg powers in the investigation and enforcement procedures set out in this Regulation. The Commission, which shall provide the Board with all the technical assistance at its disposal, should have full powers of enforcement concerning the Board’s decisions. Once the Commission, on the instructions of the Board, initiated the proceedings, the Digital Services Coordinators of establishment concerned should be precluded from exercising their investigatory and enforcement powers in respect of the relevant conduct of the very large online platform concerned, so as to avoid duplication, inconsistencies and risks from the viewpoint of the principle of ne bis in idem. However, in the interest of effectiveness, those Digital Services Coordinators should not be precluded from exercising their powers either to assist the Commission, at its request or that of the Board, in the performance of its supervisory tasks, or in respect of other conduct, including conduct by the same very large online platform that is suspected to constitute a new infringement. Those Digital Services Coordinators, as well as the Board and other Digital Services Coordinators where relevant, should provide the Commission with all necessary information and assistance to allow it to perform its tasks effectively, whilst conversely the Commission should keep them informed on the exercise of its powers, including, as appropriate. In that regard, the Commission should, where appropriate, take account of any relevant assessments carried out by the Board or by the Digital Services Coordinators concerned and of any relevant evidence and information gathered by them, without prejudice to the Commission’s powers and responsibility to carry out additional investigations as necess, those occasions when it exercises them autonomously in order to submit proposals to the Boaryd.
Amendment 580 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 98
Recital 98
(98) In view of both the particular challenges that may arise in seeking to ensure compliance by very large online platforms and the importance of doing so effectively, considering their size and impact and the harms that they may cause, the Commission should, on the initiation of the relevant procedure at the decision of the Board, have strong investigative and enforcement powers to allow it to investigate, enforce and monitor certain of the rules laid down in this Regulation, in full respect of the principle of proportionality and the rights and interests of the affected parties.
Amendment 583 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 98
Recital 98
(98) In view of both the particular challenges that may arise in seeking to ensure compliance by very large online platforms and the importance of doing so effectively, considering their size and impact and the harms that they may cause, the Commission should have strong investigative and enforcement powers to allow it to investigate, enforce and monitor certain of the rules laid down in this Regulation, in full respect of the principle of proportionality and the rights and interests of the affected parties.
Amendment 584 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 99
Recital 99
(99) In particular, the Commission should have access to any relevant documents, data and information necessaryThe Commission, to open and conduct investigations and to monitor the compliance with the relevant obligations laid down in this Rregulation, irrespective of who possesses the documents, data or information in question, and regardless of their form or format, their storage medium, or the precise place where they are stored. The Commission should be able to directly require that the very large online platform concerned or relevant third parties, or than individuals, provide any relevant evidence, data and information. In addition, the Commission should be able to request any relevant information from any public authority, body or agency within the Member State, or from any natural person or legal person for the purpose of this Regulation. The Commission should be empowered to require access to, and explanations relating to, data-bases and algorithms of relevant persons, and to interview, with their consent, any persons who may be in possession of useful information and to record the statements made. The Commission should also be empowered to undertake such inspections as are necessary to enforce the relevant provisions of this Regulation. Those investigatory powers aim to complement the Commission’s possibility to ask Digital Services Coordinators and other Member States’ authorities for assistance, for instance by providing information or in the exercise of those powers
Amendment 600 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point a
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) a framework for the possible conditional exemption from liability of providers of intermediary services;
Amendment 602 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point b
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) rules on specific due diligence obligations tailored to certain specific categories of providers of intermediary services;
Amendment 611 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) set out uniform rules for a safe, accessible, predictable and trusted online environment, where fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter are effectively protected.
Amendment 629 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 5 – point b a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 5 – point b a (new)
(ba) Directive (EU) 2019/882
Amendment 653 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point d – introductory part
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point d – introductory part
(d) ‘to offer services in the Union’ means enabling legal or natural persons in one or more Member States to use the services of the provider of information society services which has a substantial connection to the Union; such a substantial connection is deemed to exist where the provider has an establishment in the Union; in the absence of such an establishment, the assessment of a substantial connection is based on specific factual criteria, such as:.
Amendment 655 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point d – introductory part
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point d – introductory part
(d) ‘to offer services in the Union’ means enabling legal or natural persons in one or more Member States to use the services of the provider of information society services which has a substantial connection to the Union; such a substantial connection is deemed to exist where the provider has an establishment in the Union; in the absence of such an establishment, the assessment of a substantial connection is based on specific factual criteria, such as:
Amendment 656 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point d – indent 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point d – indent 1
Amendment 658 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point d – indent 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point d – indent 1
Amendment 663 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point d – indent 2
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point d – indent 2
Amendment 685 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) ‘illegal content’ means any information,, which, in itself or by its reference to an or activity, including the sale of products or provision of services which is not in compliance with Union law or the law of a Member State, irrespective of the precise subject matter or nature of that law;criminal, administrative or civil legal framework of a Member State.
Amendment 687 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) ‘illegal content’ means any information,which, in itself or by its reference to an activity, including the sale of products or provision of services is not in compliance with Union law or the law of a Member State, irrespective of the precise subject matter or nature of that law;Does not affect the English version.)
Amendment 727 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point p
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point p
(p) ‘content moderation’ means the activities undertaken by providers of intermediary services aimed at detecting, identifying and addressing illegal content or information incompatible with their terms and conditions, provided by recipients of the service, including measures taken that affect the availability, visibility and accessibility of that illegal content or that information, such as demotion, disabling of access to, or removal thereof, or the recipients’ ability to provide that information, such as the termination or suspension of a recipient’s account;
Amendment 732 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point q
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point q
(q) ‘terms and conditions’ means all terms and conditions or specifications, irrespective of their name or form, which govern the contractual relationship between the provider of intermediary services and the recipients of the services. Providers of online services must not impose requirements in their online conditions which exceed what is stipulated in the national regulations of the country where the service is provided.
Amendment 739 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point q a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point q a (new)
(qa) "persons with disabilities" means person within the meaning of Article 3(1) of Directive(EU) 2019/882;
Amendment 749 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Where an information society service is provided that consists of the transmission in a communication network of information provided by a recipient of the service, or the provision of access to a communication network, the service provider shall not in principle be liable for the information transmitted, on condition that the provider:
Amendment 751 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Where an information society service is provided that consists of the transmission in a communication network of information provided by a recipient of the service, the service provider shall not in principle be liable for the automatic, intermediate and temporary storage of that information, performed for the sole purpose of making more efficient the information's onward transmission to other recipients of the service upon their request, on condition that:
Amendment 755 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Where an information society service is provided that consists of the storage of information provided by a recipient of the service the service provider shall not in principle be liable for the information stored at the request of a recipient of the service on condition that the provider:
Amendment 757 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) dDoes not have actual knowledge of illegal activity or illegal content and, as regards claims for damages, is not aware of facts or circumstances from which the illegal activity or illegal content is apparent; oraffect the English version.)
Amendment 759 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) upon obtaining such knowledge or awareness, acts expeditiously, acts to remove or to disable access to the illegal content if the content or activity is to be deemed illegal under Article 2 (g).
Amendment 762 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) upon obtaining such knowledge or awareness, acts expeditiously to remove or to disable access to the illegal content.Does not affect the English version.)
Amendment 767 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3
Article 5 – paragraph 3
3. Paragraph 1 shall not apply with respect to liability under consumer protection law of online platforms allowing consumers to conclude distance contracts with traders, where such an online platform presents the specific item of information or otherwise enables the specific transaction at issue in a way that would lead an average and reasonably well-informed consumer to believe that the information, or the product or service that is the object of the transaction, is provided either by the online platform itself or by a recipient of the service who is acting under its authority or control. In addition, the liability exemption in paragraph 1 shall not apply in case an online platform allows consumers to conclude distance contracts with third-country traders when there is no economic operator inside the Union liable for the product safety on behalf of that trader.
Amendment 768 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3
Article 5 – paragraph 3
3. Paragraph 1 shall not apply with respect to liability under consumer protection law of online platforms allowing consumers to conclude distance contracts with traders, where such an online platform presents the specific item of information or otherwise enables the specific transaction at issue in a way that would lead an average and reasonably well-informed consumer to believe that the information, or the product or service that is the object of the transaction, is provided either by the online platform itself or by a recipient of the service who is acting under its authority or control. A procedure for redress shall be provided for the online platform against the trader who is actually responsible.
Amendment 788 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Amendment 796 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 1
Amendment 799 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – title
Article 8 – title
Amendment 807 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 1
Amendment 817 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent 1
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent 1
Amendment 822 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent 2
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent 2
Amendment 826 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent 3 a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent 3 a (new)
— precise details concerning the identity or identification of the recipients specifically concerned by the order;
Amendment 899 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Article 10 – paragraph 1
1. Providers of intermediary services shall establish a single point of contact allowing for direct communication, by electronic means and by telephone, with Member States’ authorities, the Commission and the Board referred to in Article 47 for the application of this Regulation.
Amendment 904 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2
Article 10 – paragraph 2
2. Providers of intermediary services shall make public, in a clear and user- friendly manner, the information necessary to easily identify and communicate with their single points of contact.
Amendment 923 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 1
1. Providers of intermediary services shall include information on any restrictions that they impose in relation to the use of their service in respect of information provided by the recipients of the service, in their terms and conditions. That information shall include information on any policies, procedures, measures and tools used for the purpose of content moderation, including algorithmic decision-making and human review. It shall be set out in clear and unambiguous language and shall be publicly available in an easily accessible formatThe use of algorithmic decision-making processes shall be notified to users whenever they are applied. The users shall be able, where appropriate, to switch easily from interaction with the algorithmic system to human interaction. The information shall be set out in clear and unambiguous language and shall be publicly available in an easily accessible format. Providers of intermediary services shall list the restrictions in relation to the use of their service for the dissemination of content deemed illegal under Union or Member State law in a clear and user- friendly manner, and differentiate the list from the general conditions for the use of their service so as to make the user aware of what is deemed illegal under the law and what is subject to the terms and conditions for the use of the service.
Amendment 930 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 1
1. Providers of intermediary services shall include information on any restrictions that they impose in relation to the use of their service in respect of information provided by the recipients of the service, in their terms and conditions. That information shall include information on any policies, procedures, measures and tools used for the purpose of content moderation, including algorithmic decision-making and human review. It shall be specifically presented to users when they subscribe to the service, set out in clear and unambiguous language and shall be publicly available in an easily accessible format.
Amendment 953 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The online conditions of online service providers may not require more than what is required by the regulations of the country in which the service is provided.
Amendment 982 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the number of orders received from Member States’ authorities, categorised by the type of illegal content concerned, including orders issued in accordance with Articles 8 and 9, and the average time needed for taking the action specified in those orders;Does not affect the English version.)
Amendment 984 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the number of notices submitted in accordance with Article 14, categorised by the type of alleged illegal content concerned, any action taken pursuant to the notices by differentiating whether the action was taken on the basis of the law or the terms and conditions of the provider, and the average time needed for taking the action;
Amendment 991 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) the number of complaints received through the internal complaint-handling system referred to in Article 17, the basis for those complaints, decisions taken in respect of those complaints, measures and tools used for the purpose of content moderation, including the impact of algorithmic decision-making compared to human review, the average time needed for taking those decisions and the number of instances where those decisions were reversed.
Amendment 1031 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1
Article 14 – paragraph 1
Amendment 1032 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The mechanisms referred to in paragraph 1 shall be such as to facilitate the submission of sufficiently precise and adequately substantiated notices, on the basis of which a diligentn economic operator can identify the illegality of the content in quesestablish, in a diligent manner and without discrimination, whether the notice concerns illegal content as defined in Article 2(g) of these Regulations. To that end, the providers shall take the necessary measures to enable and facilitate the submission of notices containing all of the following elements:
Amendment 1037 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) an explanation of the reasons why the individual or entity considers the information in question to be illegal content. The possibility of identifying, on the basis of a list drawn up in agreement with the Digital Service Coordinator, the type of illegal content to which the individual or entity presumes the reported content below, to should also be foreseen;
Amendment 1040 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) an explanation of the reasons why the individual or entity considers the information in question to be illegal content;Does not affect the English version.)
Amendment 1048 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) a clear indication of the electronic location of that information, in particular the exact URL or URLs, and, where necessary, additional information enabling the identification of the illegal content;Does not affect the English version.)
Amendment 1053 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3
Article 14 – paragraph 3
Amendment 1106 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) whether the decision entails either the removal of, or the disabling of access to, the information and, where relevant, the territorial scope of the disabling of access and the duration;
Amendment 1110 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) where applicable, information on the use made of automated means in taking the decision, including where the decision was taken in respect of content detected or identified using automated means;
Amendment 1113 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – point d
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – point d
(d) where the decision concerns allegedly illegal contentcontent deemed to be illegal, a reference to the legal ground relied on and explanations as to why the information is considered to be illegal content on that ground;
Amendment 1114 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – point e
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – point e
Amendment 1117 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 4
Article 15 – paragraph 4
Amendment 1140 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 1
This Section shall not apply to online platforms that qualify as micro or small enterprises within the meaning of the Annex to Recommendation 2003/361/EC, with the exception of those owned or controlled by bodies outside the Union.
Amendment 1147 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Online platforms shall provide recipients of the service, for a period of at least six months following the decision referred to in this paragraph, the access to an effective internal complaint-handling system, which enables the complaints to be lodged electronically and free of charge, against the following decisions taken by the online platform on the ground that the information provided by the recipients is illegal content or incompatible with its terms and conditions:
Amendment 1148 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Online platforms shall provide recipients of the service, for a period of at least six months following the decision referred to in this paragraph, the access to an effective and user-friendly internal complaint-handling system, which enables the complaints to be lodged electronically and free of charge, against the following decisions taken by the online platform on the ground that the information provided by the recipients is illegal content or incompatible with its terms and conditions:
Amendment 1174 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Internal complaint-handling services concerning recipients established in the European Union shall be established in the European Union.
Amendment 1176 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2
Article 17 – paragraph 2
2. Online platforms shall ensure that their internal complaint-handling systems are easy to access, user-friendly and enable and facilitate the submission of sufficiently precise and adequately substantiated complaints. The complainant shall be able to enter free written explanations in addition to the pre-established complaint options.
Amendment 1184 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 3
Article 17 – paragraph 3
3. Online platforms shall handle complaints submitted through their internal complaint-handling system in a timely, diligent and objective manner. Where a complaint contains sufficient grounds for the online platform to consider that the information to which the complaint relates is not illegal and is not incompatible with its terms and conditions, or contains information indicating that the complainant’s conduct does not warrant the suspension or termination of the service or the account, it shall reverse its decision referred to in paragraph 1 without undue delay.
Amendment 1185 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 3
Article 17 – paragraph 3
3. Online platforms shall handle complaints submitted through their internal complaint-handling system in a timely, diligent and objectiveobjective and transparent manner. Where a complaint contains sufficient grounds for the online platform to consider that the information to which the complaint relates is not illegal and is not incompatible with its terms and conditions, or contains information indicating that the complainant’s conduct does not warrant the suspension or termination of the service or the account, it shall reverse its decision referred to in paragraph 1 without undue delay.
Amendment 1187 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 4
Article 17 – paragraph 4
4. Online platforms shall promptly inform complainants without undue delay of the decision they have taken in respect of the information to which the complaint relates and shall inform complainants of the possibility of out-of-court dispute settlement provided for in Article 18 and other available redress possibilities.
Amendment 1196 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 5
Article 17 – paragraph 5
5. Online platforms shall ensure that the decisions, referred to in paragraph 4, are not solely taken on the basis of automated means.
Amendment 1198 #
Amendment 1217 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) it has the necessary expertise in relation to the issues arising in one or more particular areas of illegal content, or in relation to the application and enforcement of terms and conditions of one or more types of online platforms, allowing the body to contribute effectively to the settlement of a dispute;Does not affect the English version.)
Amendment 1224 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point c
(c) the dispute settlement is easily accessible, including for persons with disabilities, through electronic communication technology;
Amendment 1229 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point d
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point d
(d) it is capable of settling dispute in a swift, efficient, accessible for persons with disabilities, and cost-effective manner and in at least one official language of the Union and at least in the language of the recipient to whom the decision referred to in Article 17 is addressed;
Amendment 1238 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point e
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point e
(e) the dispute settlement takes place in accordance with clear and fairtransparent rules of procedure.
Amendment 1258 #
Amendment 1281 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) it carries out its activities for the purposes of submitting notices in a timely, diligent and objective manner.;
Amendment 1283 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
(ca) it neither expresses nor relays a political or partisan position, nor represents an economic interest, with the exception of consumer protection and defence organisations and environmental organisations.
Amendment 1319 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1
Article 20 – paragraph 1
1. Online platforms shall suspend, for a reasonablespecified period of time and after having issued a prior warning, the provision of their services to recipients of the service that frequently provide manifestly illegal content that has been duly declared illegal as defined in Article 2(g). The online platform may request support from the Digital Service Coordinator to establish the frequency for which account suspension is deemed necessary and to set the duration of the suspension.
Amendment 1326 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 20 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Online platforms shall not activate the notice and action mechanism described in Article 14 if the intended recipients are elected officials or candidates for election during electoral campaigns.
Amendment 1327 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 2
Article 20 – paragraph 2
2. Online platforms shall suspend, for a reasonable period of time and after having issued a prior warning, the processing of notices and complaints submitted through the notice and action mechanisms and internal complaints- handling systems referred to in Articles 14 and 17, respectively, by individuals or entities or by complainants, including trusted flaggers, that frequently submit notices or complaints that are manifestly unfounded. If individuals, entities or complainants, including trusted flaggers, continue to submit notices or complaints which are manifestly unfounded or prove to be unfounded following the imposition of a measure suspending the processing of notices and complaints, online platforms shall suspend the provision of their services to those recipients for a reasonable period of time, after having issued a prior warning.
Amendment 1335 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 3 – point a
Article 20 – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) the absolute numbers of items of manifestly illegal content or manifestly unfounded notices or complaints, submitted in the past year;
Amendment 1341 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 20 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
The assessment must be carried out by qualified staff provided with dedicated training on the applicable legal framework.
Amendment 1357 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 21 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Where an online trading platform has information which might suggest that a criminal offence of the nature of counterfeiting or fraud has taken place, is taking place or is likely to take place, it shall inform the law enforcement and judiciary services of the Member State concerned of its suspicion without delay and shall provide all the relevant information which is available. It shall also be able to expedite internal enquiries and, depending on their outcome, to withdraw the notice(s) in question. It shall transmit the details and the outcome of such an enquiry to the above-mentioned services of the Member State concerned.
Amendment 1359 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Where the online platform cannot identify with reasonable certainty the Member State concerned, it shall inform without undue delay the law enforcement authorities of the Member State in which it is established or has its legal representative or inform Europol.
Amendment 1360 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Where the online platform cannot identify with reasonable certainty the Member State concerned, it shall inform the law enforcement authorities of the Member State in which it is established or has its legal representative and may alsor inform Europol.
Amendment 1374 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Where an online platform allows consumers to conclude distance contracts with traders, it shall ensure that traders can only use its services to promote messages on or to offer products or services to consumers located in the Union if, prior to the use of its services, the online platform has obtained the following information:
Amendment 1384 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) the bank account details of the trader, where the trader is a natural person;
Amendment 1394 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) a self-certification by the trader committing to only offerthat products or services thatprovided comply with the applicable rules of Union lawrelevant Union or national law on product safety and product compliance.
Amendment 1401 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 2
Article 22 – paragraph 2
2. The online platform shall, upon receiving that information, make reasonable efforts to assessassess, with the support of the Digital Service Coordinator if needed, whether the information referred to in points (a), (d) and (e) of paragraph 1 is reliable through the use of any freely accessible official online database or online interface made available by a Member States or the Union or through requests to the trader to provide supporting documents from reliable sourcesand official sources. Online platforms allowing distance contracts with third-country traders shall establish that the third-country trader complies with the relevant Union or national law on product safety and product compliance before giving them access its services offered in the Union and, where appropriate, with the support of the Digital service Coordinator. The Digital Service Coordinator may request support from market surveillance or customs authorities to assess the information provided by the trader.
Amendment 1430 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 4
Article 22 – paragraph 4
4. The online platform shall store the information obtained pursuant to paragraph 1 and 2 in a secure manner for the duration of their contractual relationship with the trader concerned. They shall subsequently, asking the trader to notify any changes and confirm the information held by the online platform once a year. After the contractual relationship has ended, the online platform shall delete the information.
Amendment 1433 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 4
Article 22 – paragraph 4
4. The online platform shall store the information obtained pursuant to paragraph 1 and 2 in a secure manner for the duration of their contractual relationship with the trader concerned. They shall subsequently delete the information, where necessary following the expiry of its legal retention period.
Amendment 1469 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 23 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the number of suspensions imposed pursuant to Article 20, distinguishing between suspensions enacted for the provision of manifestly illegal content, the submission of manifestly unfounded notices and the submission of manifestly unfounded complaints;
Amendment 1474 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 2
Article 23 – paragraph 2
2. Online platforms shall publish, at least once every sixtwelve months, information on the average monthly active recipients of the service in each Member State, calculated as an average over the period of the past sixtwelve months, in accordance with the methodology laid down in the delegated acts adopted pursuant to Article 25(2).
Amendment 1477 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 3
Article 23 – paragraph 3
3. Online platforms shall communicate to the Digital Services Coordinators of establishmentthe Member States, upon itstheir request, the information referred to in paragraph 2, updated to the moment of such request. Thate Digital Services Coordinators may require the online platform to provide additional information as regards the calculation referred to in that paragraph, including explanations and substantiation in respect of the data used. That information shall not include personal data.
Amendment 1491 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 24 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the natural or legal person on whose behalf the advertisement is displayed, as well as their nationality;
Amendment 1499 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 24 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Special attention shall be given to recipients of the service who are minors. When advertising is addressed to minors, online platforms shall indicate in a clear, easy and unambiguous manner that such advertising targets this group of recipients.
Amendment 1530 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 1
Article 25 – paragraph 1
1. This Section shall apply to online platforms which provide their services to a number of average monthly active recipients of the service in the Union equal to or higher than 45 million, calculated in accordance with the methodology set out in the delegated acts referred to in paragraph 3. , and whose annual global turnover is equal to or greater than EUR 100 million.
Amendment 1536 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 3
Article 25 – paragraph 3
3. The Commission shall adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 69, after consulting the Board, to lay down a specific methodology for calculating the number of average monthly active recipients of the service in the Union, for the purposes of paragraph 1. The methodology shall specify, in particular, how to determine the Union’s population and criteria to determine the average monthly active recipients of the service in the Union, taking into account different accessibility features.
Amendment 1546 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Very large online platforms shall identify, analyse and assess, from the date of application referred to in the second subparagraph of Article 25(4), at least once a year thereafter, any significant systemic risks stemming from the functioning and use made of their services in the Union. This risk assessment shall be specific to their services and shall include the following systemic risks, including where they result from a voluntary action taken by the platform on the basis of its technological, social or economic model:
Amendment 1559 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the dissemination of illegal content through their services;Does not affect the English version.)
Amendment 1583 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
The Board shall approve the report.
Amendment 1589 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 2
Article 26 – paragraph 2
2. When conducting risk assessments, very large online platforms shall take into account, in particular, how their content moderation systems, recommender systems and systems for selecting and displaying advertisement influence any of the systemic risks referred to in paragraph 1, including the potentially rapid and wide dissemination of illegal content and of information that is incompatible with their terms and conditions.
Amendment 1592 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 2
Article 26 – paragraph 2
2. When conducting risk assessments, very large online platforms shall also take into account, in particular, how their content moderation systems, recommender systems and systems for selecting and displaying advertisement influence any of the systemic risks referred to in paragraph 1, including the potentially rapid and wide dissemination of illegal content and of information that is incompatible with their terms and conditions.
Amendment 1603 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Very large online platforms shall, in collaboration with the Commission, put in place reasonable, proportionate and effective mitigation measures, tailored to the specific systemic risks identified pursuant to Article 26. Such measures may include, where applicable:
Amendment 1610 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) adapting content moderation or recommender systems, their decision- making processes, the features or functioning of their services, or their terms and conditions;
Amendment 1611 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) adaptchecking content moderation or recommender systems, their decision- making processes, the features or functioning of their services, or their terms and conditions;
Amendment 1617 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point d
Amendment 1620 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point e
Amendment 1633 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 27 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The Board, in cooperation with the Commission, shall publish comprehensive reports, once a year, which shall include the following:
Amendment 1662 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) any commitments undertaken pursuant to the codes of conduct referred to in Articles 35 and 36 and the crisis protocolsfor online advertising referred to in Article 376.
Amendment 1668 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 28 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) have proven expertise in the area of risk management, technical competence and capabilities certified by qualified and accredited certification body;
Amendment 1670 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 28 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) have proven objectivity and professional ethics, based in particular on adherence to codes of practice or appropriate standards.
Amendment 1723 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 30 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) the identity and nationality of the natural or legal person on whose behalf the advertisement is displayed;
Amendment 1751 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 1
Article 31 – paragraph 1
1. Very large online platforms shall provide the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment, the Digital Services Coordinator of destination or the Commission, upon their reasoned request and within a reasonable period, specified in the request, access to data that are necessary to monitor and assess compliance with this Regulation. That Digital Services Coordinator and the Commission shall only use that data for those purposes.
Amendment 1756 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 2
Article 31 – paragraph 2
2. Upon a reasoned request from the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment, the Digital Services Coordinator of destination or the Commission, very large online platforms shall, within a reasonable period, as specified in the request, provide access to data to vetted researchers who meet the requirements in paragraphs 4 of this Article, for the sole purpose of conducting research that contributes to the identification and understanding of systemic risks as set out in Article 26(1).
Amendment 1766 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 4
Article 31 – paragraph 4
4. In order to be vetted by the Digital Services Coordinators, researchers shall be affiliated with European academic institutions, be independent from commercial interests, have proven records of expertise in the fields related to the risks investigated or related research methodologies, and shall commit and be in a capacity to preserve the specific data security and confidentiality requirements corresponding to each request.
Amendment 1772 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 5
Article 31 – paragraph 5
5. The Commission shall, after consulting the Board, adopt delegated acts laying down the technical conditions under which very large online platforms are to share data pursuant to paragraphs 1 and 2 and the purposes for which the data may be used. Those delegated acts shall lay down the specific conditions under which such sharing of data with vetted researchers can take place in compliance with Regulation (EU) 2016/679, taking into account the rights and interests of the very large online platforms and the recipients of the service concerned, including the protection of confidential information, in particular trade secrets, and maintaining the security of their service.
Amendment 1776 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 6 – introductory part
Article 31 – paragraph 6 – introductory part
6. Within 15 days following receipt of a request as referred to in paragraph 1 and 2, a very large online platform may request the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment, the Digital Services Coordinator of destination or the Commission, as applicable, to amend the request, where it considers that it is unable to give access to the data requested because one of following two reasons:
Amendment 1782 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 6 – point b
Article 31 – paragraph 6 – point b
(b) giving access to the data will lead to significant vulnerabilities for the security of its service or the protection of recipients’ confidential information, in particularcluding trade secrets.
Amendment 1785 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 2
Article 31 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 2
The Digital Services Coordinator of establishment, the Digital Services Coordinator of destination or the Commission shall decide upon the request for amendment within 15 days and communicate to the very large online platform its decision and, where relevant, the amended request and the new time period to comply with the request.
Amendment 1792 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 3 – point a
Article 32 – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) cooperating with the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment, the Digital Services Coordinator of destination and the Commission for the purpose of this Regulation;
Amendment 1794 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 5
Article 32 – paragraph 5
5. Very large online platforms shall communicate the name and contact details of the compliance officer to the Digital Services Coordinator of establishments and the Commission.
Amendment 1814 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 34 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The Board, in cooperation with the Commission, shall support and promote the development and implementation of voluntary industry standards set by relevant European and international standardisation bodies at least for the following:
Amendment 1818 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 34 – paragraph 1 – point b
Amendment 1836 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 34 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Amendment 1837 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 2
Article 34 – paragraph 2
2. The Board, in cooperation with the Commission, shall support the update of the standards in the light of technological developments and the behaviour of the recipients of the services in question.
Amendment 1843 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35
Article 35
Amendment 1852 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 2
Article 35 – paragraph 2
2. Where significant systemic risk within the meaning of Article 26(1) emerge and concern several very large online platforms, the Commission may inv, in agreement witeh the very largBoard, may invite online platforms concerned, other very large online platforms, other online platforms and other providers of intermediary services, as appropriate, as well as civil society organisations and other interested parties, to participate in the drawing up of codes of conduct, including by setting out commitments to take specific risk mitigation measures, as well as a regular reporting framework on any measures taken and their outcomes.
Amendment 1895 #
Amendment 1916 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 38 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 38 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Member States shall ensure that their Digital Services Coordinators are informed by the relevant national, local and regional authorities on the diversity of platform sectors and issues covered by this Regulation;
Amendment 1922 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 2
Article 39 – paragraph 2
Amendment 1923 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 3
Article 39 – paragraph 3
Amendment 1925 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 3
Article 39 – paragraph 3
3. Paragraph 2 is without prejudice to the tasks of Digital Services Coordinators within the system of supervision and enforcement provided for in this Regulation and the cooperation with other competent authorities in accordance with Article 38(2). Paragraph 2 shall not prevent supervision of the authorities concerned in accordance with national constitutional law.
Amendment 1929 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 40 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The Member State in which an event which calls into question the service provider takes place or in which the natural or legal person who is the recipient of the service resides, shall also have jurisdiction for the purposes of Chapters III and IV of this Regulation.
Amendment 1932 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 3
Article 40 – paragraph 3
3. Where a provider of intermediary services fails to appoint a legal representative in accordance with Article 11, all Member States shall have jurisdiction for the purposes of Chapters III and IV. Where a Member State decides to exercise jurisdiction under this paragraph, it shall inform all other Member States and ensure. Where a number of Member States decide to exercise jurisdiction with regard to the same service provider, they shall coordinate their actions, where necessary via the Board, ensuring that the principle of ne bis in idem is respected.
Amendment 1934 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 3
Article 40 – paragraph 3
3. Where a provider of intermediary services fails to appoint a legal representative in accordance with Article 11, all Member States shall have jurisdiction for the purposes of Chapters III and IV. Where a Member State decides to exercise jurisdiction under this paragraph, it shall inform all other Member States andto ensure that the principle of ne bis in idem is respected.
Amendment 1937 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 4
Article 40 – paragraph 4
Amendment 1950 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 41 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) require the management body of the providers, within a reasonable time period, to examine the situation, adopt and submit an action plan setting out the necessary measures to terminate the infringement, ensure that the provider takes those measures, and report on the measures taken within a specific period;
Amendment 1952 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 41 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) where the Digital Services Coordinator considers that the provider has not sufficiently complied with the requirements of the first indent, that the infringement persists and causes serious harm, and that the infringement entails a serious criminal offence involving a threat to the life or safety of persons, request the competent judicial authority of that Member State to order the temporary restriction of access of recipients of the service concerned by the infringement or, only where that is not technically feasible, to the online interface of the provider of intermediary services on which the infringement takes place.
Amendment 1956 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 2
Article 42 – paragraph 2
2. Penalties shall be effective, proportionate and dissuasive. Member States shall notify the Commission and the Board of those rules and of those measures and shall notify ithem, without delay, of any subsequent amendments affecting them.
Amendment 1958 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 3
Article 42 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall ensure that the maximum amount of penalties imposed for a failure to comply with the obligations laid down in this Regulation shall not exceed 6 % of the annual income or the global annual turnover of the provider of intermediary services concerned. Penalties for the supply of incorrect, incomplete or misleading information, failure to reply or rectify incorrect, incomplete or misleading information and to submit to an on-site inspection shall not exceed 1 % of the annual income or the global annual turnover of the provider concerned.
Amendment 1961 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 4
Article 42 – paragraph 4
4. Member States shall ensure that the maximum amount of a periodic penalty payment shall not exceed 5 % of the average daily global turnover of the provider of intermediary services concerned in the preceding financial year per day, calculated from the date specified in the decision concerned.
Amendment 1966 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 1
Article 43 – paragraph 1
Recipients of the service shall have the right to lodge a complaint against providers of intermediary services alleging an infringement of this Regulation with the Digital Services Coordinator of the Member State where the recipient resides or is established. The Digital Services Coordinator shall assess the complaint and, where appropriate, transmit it to the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment. Where the complaint falls under the responsibility of another competent authority in its Member State, the Digital Service Coordinator receiving the complaint shall transmit it to that authority, pursuant to Article 40(2).
Amendment 1977 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 44 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) the number and subject matter of orders to act against illegal content and orders to provide information issued in accordance with Articles 8 and 9 by any national judicial or administrative authority of the Member State of the Digital Services Coordinator concerned;Does not affect the English version.)
Amendment 2001 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 5
Article 45 – paragraph 5
5. Where the Digital Services Coordinator that sent the request, or, where appropriate, the Board, did not receive a reply within the time period laid down in paragraph 4 or where it does not agree with the assessment of the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment, it may refer the matter to the CommissionBoard, providing all relevant information. That information shall include at least the request or recommendation sent to the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment, any additional information provided pursuant to paragraph 3 and the communication referred to in paragraph 4. The Board shall resend the request set out in paragraph 1 to the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment. The Digital Services Coordinator of establishment shall assess the request and transmit its reply in accordance with the conditions set out in paragraphs 3 and 4. If the Board, having drawn up a request involving at least three Member States or a request pursuant to the first subparagraph, has not received a reply by the deadline set out in paragraph 4, or if it does not agree with the assessment of the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment, it shall adopt a decision and shall transmit instructions to the Commission concerning the measures to be taken on the basis of that decision.
Amendment 2005 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 6
Article 45 – paragraph 6
6. The Commission shall assess the matter within three months following the referral of the matter pursuant to paragraph 5, after having consulted the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment and, unless it referred the matter itself, the Boardcarry out the instructions received pursuant to paragraph 5 without delay.
Amendment 2009 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 7
Article 45 – paragraph 7
Amendment 2024 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 2
Article 46 – paragraph 2
2. Where a Digital Services Coordinator of establishment has reasons to suspect that a very large online platform infringed this Regulation, it may request the CommissionBoard to take the necessary investigatory and enforcement measures to ensure compliance with this Regulation in accordance with Section 3. Such a request shall contain all information listed in Article 45(2) and set out the reasons for requesting the Commisan intervention, on which the Board shall act by vote, transmitting the conclusions to intervenethe Commission.
Amendment 2029 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 1
Article 47 – paragraph 1
1. An independent advisory group of Digital Services Coordinators on the supervision of providers of intermediary service body comprising the Digital Services Coordinators named ‘European Board for Digital Services’ (the ‘Board’) is established.
Amendment 2033 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 47 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The Board shall advise the Digital Services Coordinators and the Commission in accordance with this Regulation to achieve the following objectives:work together with the Commission to ensure the monitoring of providers of intermediary services and the application of this Regulation.
Amendment 2036 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 47 – paragraph 2 – point a
Amendment 2040 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 47 – paragraph 2 – point b
Amendment 2043 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 47 – paragraph 2 – point c
Amendment 2046 #
Amendment 2051 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 1
Article 48 – paragraph 1
1. The Board shall be composed of the Digital Services Coordinators, who shall be represented by high-level officials. Where provided for by national law, other competent authorities entrusted with specific operational responsibilities for the application and enforcement of this Regulation alongside the Digital Services Coordinator shall participate in the Board. Other national authorities may be invited to the meetings, where the issues discussed are of relevance for them. The meeting is deemed valid when at least two third of the eligible members are present.
Amendment 2052 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 1
Article 48 – paragraph 1
1. The Board shall be composed of the Digital Services Coordinators, who shall be represented by high-level officials. Where provided for by national law, other competent authorities entrusted with specific operational responsibilities for the application and enforcement of this Regulation alongside the Digital Services Coordinator shall participate in the Board. Other national authorities may be invited to the meetings, where the issues discussed are of relevance for them.
Amendment 2057 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 48 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
The Board shall adopt all its acts by simplequalified majority.
Amendment 2060 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 3
Article 48 – paragraph 3
3. The Board shall be chaired by the Commission. The Commission shall convene the meetings and prepare the agenda in accordance the tasks of the Board pursuant to this Regulation and with its rules of procedure, which shall provide the secretariat and administrative and analytical support for the Board’s activities under this Regulation. The Board member representing the Member State which holds the Council Presidency shall convene the meetings and prepare the agenda in coordination with the Commission.
Amendment 2061 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 48 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. The Board shall adopt its rules of procedure.
Amendment 2063 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 4
Article 48 – paragraph 4
Amendment 2068 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 6
Article 48 – paragraph 6
Amendment 2085 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 49 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 49 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) advise the Commission to take the measures referred to indecide on the measures to be taken under Articles 51 and, where requested by the Commission, adopt opinions on draft Commission measures concerning very large online platforms in accordance with, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59 and 60 of this Regulation;.
Amendment 2091 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 49 – paragraph 2
Article 49 – paragraph 2
Amendment 2097 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 50 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
The Digital Services Coordinator of the Member State concerned acting on its own initiative, the Commission acting on its own initiative, or the Board acting on its own initiative or upon request of at least three Digital Services Coordinators of destination, may, where it has reasons to suspect that a very large online platform infringed any of those provisions, recommend the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment to investigate the suspected infringement with a view to that Digital Services Coordinator adopting such a decision within a reasonable time period.
Amendment 2101 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 2
Article 50 – paragraph 2
2. When communicating the decision referred to in the first subparagraph of paragraph 1 to the very large online platform concerned, the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment shall request it to draw up and communicate to the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment, the Digital Services Coordinator of the Member State concerned, the Commission and the Board, within one month from that decision, an action plan, specifying how that platform intends to terminate or remedy the infringement. The measures set out in the action plan may include, where appropriate, participation in a code of conduct as provided for in Article 35.
Amendment 2103 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 2
Article 50 – paragraph 2
2. When communicating the decision referred to in the first subparagraph of paragraph 1 to the very large online platform concerned, the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment shall request it to draw up and communicate to the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment, the Commission and the Board, within one month from that decision, an action plan, specifying how that platform intends to terminate or remedy the infringement. The measures set out in the action plan may includerecommend, where appropriate, participation in a code of conduct as provided for in Article 35.
Amendment 2106 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 50 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Where the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment has concerns on the ability of the measures to terminate or remedy the infringement, it may request the very large online platform concerned to subject itself to an additional, independent audit to assess the effectiveness ofat the Board reconsider those measures in terminating or remedying the infringement. In that case, that platform shall send the audit report to that Digital Services Coordinator, the Commission and the Board within four months from the decision referred to in the first subparagraph. When requesting such an additional audit, the Digital Services Coordinator may specify a particular audit organisation that is to carry out the audit, at the expense of the platform concerned, selected on the basis of criteria set out in Article 28(2)atter. The Board shall adopt a decision, in the light of which it may or may not exercise the powers set out in Articles 51, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59 and 60.
Amendment 2108 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 4
Article 50 – paragraph 4
Amendment 2116 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 51 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 51 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The Commission, acting either upon the Board’s recommendainstructions or on its own initiative after consulting the Board, may initiate proceedings in view of the possible adoption of decisions pursuant to Articles 58 and 59 in respect of the relevant conduct by the very large online platform that: is suspected of infringing one of the provisions of this Regulation.
Amendment 2121 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 51 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 51 – paragraph 1 – point a
Amendment 2122 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 51 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 51 – paragraph 1 – point b
Amendment 2125 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 51 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 51 – paragraph 1 – point c
Amendment 2127 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 51 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 51 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Where the Commission decides to initiate proceedings pursuant to paragraph 1, it shall notify all Digital Services Coordinators, the Board and the very large online platform concerned. If the Commission decides not to initiate proceedings pursuant to paragraph 1, it shall inform the Board in writing of its reasons.
Amendment 2129 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 51 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 51 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Where the Commission initiates or decides to initiate proceedings pursuant to paragraph 1, it shall notify all Digital Services Coordinators, the Board and the very large online platform concerned.
Amendment 2133 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 51 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 51 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 2136 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 51 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 51 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. The Digital Services Coordinator referred to in Articles 45(7), 46(2) and 50(1), as applicable, shall, without undue delay upon being informed, transmit to the Commission:
Amendment 2143 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 52 – paragraph 1
Article 52 – paragraph 1
1. In order to carry out the tasks assigned to it under this Section, the Commission may by simple request or by decision require the very large online platforms concerned, as well as any other persons acting for purposes related to their trade, business, craft or profession that may be reasonably be aware of information relating to the suspected infringement or the infringement, as applicable, including organisations performing the audits referred to in Articles 28 and 50(3), to provide such information within a reasonable time period.
Amendment 2147 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 52 – paragraph 3
Article 52 – paragraph 3
3. Where the Commission requires the very large online platform concerned or other person referred to in Article 52(1) to supply information by decision, it shall state the legal basis and the purpose of the request, specify what information is required and set the time period within which it is to be provided. It shall also indicate the penalties provided for in Article 59 and indicate or impose the periodic penalty payments provided for in Article 60. It shall further indicate the right to have the decision adversely affecting it which was taken under this Article reviewed by the Court of Justice of the European Union.
Amendment 2165 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 55 – paragraph 1
Article 55 – paragraph 1
1. In the context of proceedings which may lead to the adoption of a decision of non-compliance pursuant to Article 58(1), where there is an urgency due to the risk of serious damage for the recipients of the service, the Commission may, by decision, and after consulting the Board, order interim measures against the very large online platform concerned on the basis of a prima facie finding of an infringement.
Amendment 2166 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 55 – paragraph 1
Article 55 – paragraph 1
1. In the context of proceedings which may lead to the adoption of a decision of non-compliance pursuant to Article 58(1), where there is an urgency due to the risk of serious damage for the recipients of the service, the Commission and the Board may, by decision, order interim measures against the very large online platform concerned on the basis of a prima facie finding of an infringement.
Amendment 2171 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – paragraph 1
Article 56 – paragraph 1
1. If, during proceedings under this Section, the very large online platform concerned offers commitments to ensure compliance with the relevant provisions of this Regulation, the Commission may, by decision and after consulting the Board, make those commitments binding on the very large online platform concerned and declare that there are no further grounds for action.
Amendment 2172 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – paragraph 1
Article 56 – paragraph 1
1. If, during proceedings under this Section, the very large online platform concerned offers commitments to ensure compliance with the relevant provisions of this Regulation, the Commission may bysubmit to the Board a decision makeing those commitments binding on the very large online platform concerned and declareing that there are no further grounds for action.
Amendment 2174 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 56 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The Commission may, upon requestinstruction by the Board or on its own initiative, reopen the proceedings:
Amendment 2176 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – paragraph 3
Article 56 – paragraph 3
3. Where the Commission considers that the commitments offered by the very large online platform concerned are unable to ensure effective compliance with the relevant provisions of this Regulation, it shall reject those commitments in a reasoned decision, in agreement with the Board, when concluding the proceedings.
Amendment 2177 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – paragraph 3
Article 56 – paragraph 3
3. Where the Commission considers that the commitments offered by the very large online platform concerned are unable to ensure effective compliance with the relevant provisions of this Regulation, it shall submit to the Board a decision to reject those commitments in a reasoned decision when concluding the proceedings.
Amendment 2181 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 1
Article 57 – paragraph 1
1. For the purposes of carrying out the tasks assigned to it under this Section, the Commission may take the necessary actions to monitor the effective implementation and compliance with this Regulation by the very large online platform concerned. The Commission and the Board may also order that platform to provide access to, and explanations relating to, its databases and algorithms.
Amendment 2187 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 58 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 58 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The Commission shall adopt a non- compliance decision, after consulting the Board, where it finds that the very large online platform concerned does not comply with one or more of the following:
Amendment 2190 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 58 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 58 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The CommissionBoard shall adopt a non- compliance decision where it finds that the very large online platform concerned does not comply with one or more of the following:
Amendment 2194 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 58 – paragraph 2
Article 58 – paragraph 2
2. Before adopting the decision pursuant to paragraph 1, the CommissionBoard shall communicate its preliminary findings to the very large online platform concerned. In the preliminary findings, the CommissionBoard shall explain the measures that it considers taking, or that it considers that the very large online platform concerned should take, in order to effectively address the preliminary findings.
Amendment 2197 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 58 – paragraph 3
Article 58 – paragraph 3
3. In the decision adopted pursuant to paragraph 1 the CommissionBoard shall order the very large online platform concerned to take the necessary measures to ensure compliance with the decision pursuant to paragraph 1 within a reasonable time period and to provide information on the measures that that platform intends to take to comply with the decision.
Amendment 2199 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 58 – paragraph 4
Article 58 – paragraph 4
4. The very large online platform concerned shall provide the Board and the Commission with a description of the measures it has taken to ensure compliance with the decision pursuant to paragraph 1 upon their implementation.
Amendment 2202 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 58 – paragraph 5
Article 58 – paragraph 5
5. Where the Board, on its own initiative or on a proposal by the Commission find, deems that the conditions of paragraph 1 are not met, it shall close the investigation by a decision.
Amendment 2203 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 58 – paragraph 5
Article 58 – paragraph 5
5. Where the Commission finds that the conditions of paragraph 1 are not met, it shall close the investigation by a decision approved by the Board.
Amendment 2210 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 59 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 59 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. In the decision pursuant to Article 58, the CommissionBoard may impose on the very large online platform concerned fines not exceeding 6 % of its totglobal turnover in the preceding financial year where it finds that that platform, intentionally or negligently:
Amendment 2215 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 59 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 59 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The CommissionBoard may by decision impose on the very large online platform concerned or other person referred to in Article 52(1) fines not exceeding 1 % of the totglobal turnover in the preceding financial year, where they intentionally or negligently:
Amendment 2219 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 59 – paragraph 3
Article 59 – paragraph 3
3. Before adopting the decision pursuant to paragraph 2, the Commission shall communicate its preliminary findings to the very large online platform concerned or other person referred to in Article 52(1) and to the Board.
Amendment 2222 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 59 – paragraph 3
Article 59 – paragraph 3
3. Before adopting the decision pursuant to paragraph 2, the CommissionBoard shall communicate its preliminary findings to the very large online platform concerned or other person referred to in Article 52(1).
Amendment 2224 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 59 – paragraph 4
Article 59 – paragraph 4
4. In fixing the amount of the fine, the CommissionBoard shall have regard to the nature, gravity, duration and recurrence of the infringement and, for fines imposed pursuant to paragraph 2, the delay caused to the proceedings.
Amendment 2227 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 60 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 60 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The CommissionBoard may, by decision, impose on the very large online platform concerned or other person referred to in Article 52(1), as applicable, periodic penalty payments not exceeding 5 % of the average daily global turnover in the preceding financial year per day, calculated from the date appointed by the decision, in order to compel them to:
Amendment 2229 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 60 – paragraph 2
Article 60 – paragraph 2
Amendment 2233 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 61 – paragraph 3 – point a
Article 61 – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) requests for information by the Commission, the Board or by a Digital Services Coordinator;
Amendment 2237 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 61 – paragraph 4
Article 61 – paragraph 4
4. Each interruption shall start time running afresh. However, the limitation period for the imposition of fines or periodic penalty payments shall expire at the latest on the day on which a period equal to twice the limitation period has elapsed without the Commission having imposed a fine or a periodic penalty payment. That period shall be extended by the time during which the limitation period is suspended pursuant to paragraph 5.
Amendment 2240 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 61 – paragraph 5
Article 61 – paragraph 5
5. The limitation period for the imposition of fines or periodic penalty payments shall be suspended for as long as the decision of the CommissionBoard is the subject of proceedings pending before the Court of Justice of the European Union.
Amendment 2241 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 62
Article 62
Amendment 2242 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 62 – title
Article 62 – title
Amendment 2243 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 62 – paragraph 1
Article 62 – paragraph 1
1. The power of the Commission to enforce decisions taken pursuant to Articles 59enalties decided upon shall be enforceable immediately and 60 shall be subject to a limitation period of five yearsenforced without delay by the Commission.
Amendment 2246 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 63 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 63 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Before adopting a decision pursuant to Articles 58(1), 59 or 60, the CommissionBoard shall give the very large online platform concerned or other person referred to in Article 52(1) the opportunity of being heard on:
Amendment 2249 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 63 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 63 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) preliminary findings of the CommissionBoard, including any matter to which the CommissionBoard has taken objections; and
Amendment 2251 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 63 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 63 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) measures that the CommissionBoard may intend to take in view of the preliminary findings referred to point (a).
Amendment 2253 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 63 – paragraph 2
Article 63 – paragraph 2
2. The very large online platform concerned or other person referred to in Article 52(1) may submit their observations on the CommissionBoard’s preliminary findings within a reasonable time period set by the CommissionBoard in its preliminary findings, which may not be less than 14 days.
Amendment 2255 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 63 – paragraph 3
Article 63 – paragraph 3
3. The CommissionBoard shall base its decisions only on objections on which the parties concerned have been able to comment.
Amendment 2256 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 63 – paragraph 4
Article 63 – paragraph 4
4. The rights of defence of the parties concerned shall be fully respected in the proceedings. They shall be entitled to have access to the Board’s and the Commission's file under the terms of a negotiated disclosure, subject to the legitimate interest of the very large online platform concerned or other person referred to in Article 52(1) in the protection of their business secrets. The right of access to the file shall not extend to confidential information and internal documents of the Commission, the Board or Member States’ authorities. In particular, the right of access shall not extend to correspondence between the Commission, the Board and those authorities. Nothing in this paragraph shall prevent the Commission or the Board from disclosing and using information necessary to prove an infringement.
Amendment 2260 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 64 – paragraph 1
Article 64 – paragraph 1
1. The CommissionBoard shall publish the decisions it adopts pursuant to Articles 55(1), 56(1), 58, 59 and 60. Such publication shall state the names of the parties and the main content of the decision, including any penalties imposed.
Amendment 2262 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 65 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 65 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Where all powers pursuant to this Article to bring about the cessation of an infringement of this Regulation have been exhausted, the infringement persists and causes serious harm which cannot be avoided through the exercise of other powers available under Union or national law, the Commission or the Board may request the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment of the very large online platform concerned to act pursuant to Article 41(3).
Amendment 2263 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 65 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 65 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Prior to making such request to the Digital Services Coordinator, the Commission or the Board shall invite interested parties to submit written observations within a time period that shall not be less than two weeks, describing the measures ithey intends to request and identifying the intended addressee or addressees thereof.
Amendment 2265 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 65 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 65 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Prior to making such request to the Digital Services Coordinator, the Commission shall invite interested parties to submit written observations within a time period that shall not be less than two weeks, describing14 days, the measures it intends to request and identifying the intended addressee or addressees thereof.
Amendment 2266 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 65 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 65 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Where the coherent application of this Regulation so requires, the Commission or the Board, acting on its own initiative, may submit written observations to the competent judicial authority referred to Article 41(3). With the permission of the judicial authority in question, ithey may also make oral observations.
Amendment 2268 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 65 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 65 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
For the purpose of the preparation of itstheir observations only, the Commission or the Board may request that judicial authority to transmit or ensure the transmission to ithem of any documents necessary for the assessment of the case.
Amendment 2280 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 68 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Without prejudice to Directive 2020/XX/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council, recipients of intermediary services shall have the right to mandate a body, organisation or association to exercise the rights referred to in Articles 17, 18 and 19 on their behalf, provided the body, organisation or association meets all of the following conditions: __________________ 52 [Reference] 52
Amendment 2285 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 69 – paragraph 4
Article 69 – paragraph 4
4. As soon as it adopts a delegated act, the Commission shall notify it simultaneously to the European Parliament and to the Council, the Council, the Board and the Digital Services Coordinators.
Amendment 2287 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 70 – paragraph 1
Article 70 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission shall be assisted by the Digital Services Committee. That Committee shall be a Committee within the meaning of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011Digital Services Committee shall be assisted by the Commission in all its work and prerogatives.
Amendment 2288 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 70 – paragraph 2
Article 70 – paragraph 2
Amendment 104 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 46
Recital 46
(46) To further address key supply chain risks and assist entities operating in sectors covered by this Directive to appropriately manage supply chain and supplier related cybersecurity risks, the Cooperation Group involving relevant national authorities, in cooperation with the Commission and, ENISA and the affected essential and important entities, should carry out coordinated sectoral supply chain risk assessments, as was already done for 5G networks following Recommendation (EU) 2019/534 on Cybersecurity of 5G networks21 , with the aim of identifying per sector which are the critical ICT services, systems or products, relevant threats and vulnerabilities. __________________ 21Commission Recommendation (EU) 2019/534 of 26 March 2019 Cybersecurity of 5G networks (OJ L 88, 29.3.2019, p. 42).
Amendment 105 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 47
Recital 47
(47) The supply chain risk assessments, in light of the features of the sector concerned, should take into account both technical and, where relevantjustified by the criticality of the sector, non- technical factors including those defined in Recommendation (EU) 2019/534, in the EU wide coordinated risk assessment of 5G networks security and in the EU Toolbox on 5G cybersecurity agreed by the Cooperation Group. These assessments should be evidence-based and their results clearly defined. To identify the supply chains that should be subject to a coordinated risk assessment, the following criteria should be taken into account: (i) the extent to which essential and important entities use and rely on specific critical ICT services, systems or products; (ii) the relevance of specific critical ICT services, systems or products for performing critical or sensitive functions, including the processing of personal data; (iii) the availability of alternative ICT services, systems or products; (iv) the resilience of the overall supply chain of ICT services, systems or products against disruptive events and (v) for emerging ICT services, systems or products, their potential future significance for the entities’ activities.
Amendment 126 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 70
Recital 70
(70) In order to strengthen the supervisory powers and actions that help ensure effective compliance and to achieve a common high level of security within the digital sector throughout the Union, this Directive should provide for a minimum list of supervisory actions and means through which competent authorities may supervise essential and important entities. In addition, this Directive should establish a differentiation of supervisory regime between essential and important entities with a view to ensuring a fair balance of obligations for both entities and competent authorities. Thus, essential entities should be subject to a fully-fledged supervisory regime (ex-ante and ex-post), while important entities should be subject to a light supervisory regime, ex-post only. For the latter, this means that important entities should not document systematically compliance with cybersecurity risk management requirements, while competent authorities should implement a reactive ex -post approach to supervision and, hence, not have a general obligation to supervise those entities, except where there is a manifest breach of obligations, in particular where such entities cause risk for users or other services included in the scope of this Directive.
Amendment 128 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 76
Recital 76
(76) In order to further strengthen the effectiveness and dissuasiveness of the penalties applicable to infringements of obligations laid down pursuant to this Directive, the competent authorities should be empowered to apply sanctions consisting of the suspension of a certification or authorisation concerning part or all thethe implicated services provided by an essential entity and the imposition of a temporary ban from the exercise of managerial functions by a natural person. Given their severity and impact on the entities’ activities and ultimately on their consumers, such sanctions should only be applied proportionally to the severity of the infringement and taking account of the specific circumstances of each case, including the intentional or negligent character of the infringement, actions taken to prevent or mitigate the damage and/or losses suffered. Such sanctions should only be applied as ultima ratio, meaning only after the other relevant enforcement actions laid down by this Directive have been exhausted, and only for the time until the entities to which they apply take the necessary action to remedy the deficiencies or comply with the requirements of the competent authority for which such sanctions were applied. The imposition of such sanctions shall be subject to appropriate procedural safeguards in accordance with the general principles of Union law and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, including effective judicial protection, due process, presumption of innocence and right of defence.
Amendment 133 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1
1. This Directive applies to public and private entities of a type referred to as essential entities in Annex I and as important entities in Annex II. Entities and subsectors that fall within the scope of this Directive shall be provided with clear and concise definitions with respect to their designations. This Directive does not apply to entities that Member States unequivocally identify as non-critical, including where they are of types referred to in Annex I and Annex II. This Directive does not apply to entities that qualify as micro and small enterprises within the meaning of Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC.28, without prejudice to their voluntary involvement. __________________ 28 Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC of 6 May 2003 concerning the definition of micro, small and medium- sized enterprises (OJ L 124, 20.5.2003, p. 36).
Amendment 148 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 26 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 26 a (new)
(26a) 'non-critical entity' means any entity of a type referred to in Annex I and Annex II which, regardless of its size and resources, has no critical function within a specific sector or type of service provided and has a low level of dependency from other sectors or types of services.
Amendment 149 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) a governance framework to achieve those objectives and priorities, including the policies referred to in paragraph 2 and the roles and responsibilities of public bodies and entities as well as other relevant actors, in particular those entrusted with specific SMEs support. The governance framework shall clearly outline how cooperation and coordination is organised between relevant national authorities designated under this Directive;
Amendment 161 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – point h
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – point h
(h) a policy addressing specific needs of SMEs in fulfilling the provisions laid down by this Directive, in particular those excluded from the scope of this Directive, in relation to guidance and support in improving their resilience to cybersecurity threats. and encouraging, through dedicated support, their proactive adoption of suitable cybersecurity measures;
Amendment 172 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 1
1. Each Member State shall designate one of its CSIRTs as referred to in Article 9 as a coordinator for the purpose of coordinated vulnerability disclosure. The process of coordinated vulnerability disclosure shall be coherent with internationally recognised standards on vulnerability handling and disclosure. The designated CSIRT shall act as a trusted intermediary, facilitating, where necessary, the interaction between the reporting entity and the manufacturer or provider of ICT products or ICT services. Where the reported vulnerability concerns multiple manufacturers or providers of ICT products or ICT services across the Union, the designated CSIRT of each Member State concerned shall cooperate with the CSIRT network.
Amendment 174 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 2
2. ENISA shall develop and maintain a European vulnerability registry. To that end, ENISA shall establish and maintain the appropriate information systems, policies and procedures, as well as the necessary technical and organisational measures for the security of the registry, with a view in particular to enabling important and essential entities and their suppliers of network and information systems to disclose and register vulnerabilities present in ICT products or ICT services, as well as to provide access to the information on vulnerabilities contained in the registry to all interested parties. ENISA shall clarify the terms of work and use of registry, including procedures for reporting, use and storage of the vulnerability information. The registry shall, in particular, include information describing the vulnerability, the affected ICT product or ICT services and the severity of the vulnerability in terms of the circumstances under which it may be exploited, the availability of related patches and, in the absence of available patches, guidance addressed to users of vulnerable products and services as to how the risks resulting from disclosed vulnerabilities may be mitigated.
Amendment 177 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 1
1. Each Member State shall designate one or more competent authorities responsible for the management of large- scale incidents and crises. Where a Member State designates more than one competent authority, it should clearly indicate which of these competent authorities would serve as the main point of contact during a large-scale incident or crisis. Member States shall ensure that competent authorities have adequate resources to perform, in an effective and efficient manner, the tasks assigned to them.
Amendment 186 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point f a (new)
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point f a (new)
(fa) providing practical and operational guidance to essential and important entities in cybersecurity response and prevention activities, including in particular dedicated technical support to SMEs;
Amendment 206 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 1
Article 18 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that essential and important entities shall take appropriate and proportionate technical and organisational measures to manage the risks posed to the security of network and information systems which those entities use in the provision of their services. These measures shall be adopted following a risk-based assessment that takes the utmost account of the level of criticality of the concerned entities. Having regard to the state of the art, those measures shall ensure a level of security of network and information systems appropriate to the risk presented and shall not undermine valid security offering mechanisms already in place.
Amendment 221 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 19 – paragraph 1
Article 19 – paragraph 1
1. The Cooperation Group, in cooperation with the Commission and ENISA, and after having consulted the affected essential and important entities, may carry out coordinated security risk assessments of specific critical ICT services, systems or products supply chains, taking into account technical and, where relevant, non-technical risk factorjustified by the level of criticality of the sector, non-technical risk factors. Risk assessments should follow a balanced and non-discriminatory approach to ensure competitive and harmonised internal market, with coordinated Member State approaches.
Amendment 223 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 19 – paragraph 2
Article 19 – paragraph 2
2. The Commission, after consulting with the Cooperation Group and, ENISA and the affected essential and important entities, shall identify the specific critical ICT services, systems or products that may be subject to the coordinated risk assessment referred to in paragraph 1.
Amendment 224 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 19 a (new)
Article 19 a (new)
Article 19a When the Cooperation Group includes non-technical risk factors in its supply chain risk assessments, it shall ensure that those factors are evidence-based, clearly defined and that their interpretation is aligned across the Union to the greatest extent possible. Member States shall ensure that any affected party has clear and lawful means to raise concerns, challenge and object to the final decision taken as a result of the supply chain assessments referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article.
Amendment 231 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 20 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 20 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Member States shall ensure that essential and important entities may notify, without undue delay where feasible or through periodic threat analysis reports, the competent authorities or the CSIRT of any significant cyber threat that those entities identify that could have potentially resulted in a significant incidentwithin the meaning of Article 2(8) of Regulation (EU) 2019/881.
Amendment 237 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 20 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 20 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) without undue delay and in any event winot later thian 724 hours after having become aware of the incident, an initial notification, which, where applicable and possible, shall indicate whether the incident is presumably caused by unlawful or malicious action;
Amendment 242 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 20 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point c – introductory part
Article 20 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point c – introductory part
(c) a final report not later than onetwo months after the submission of the report under point (a), including at least the following:
Amendment 280 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 26 – paragraph 5
Article 26 – paragraph 5
5. In compliance with Union law, ENISA shall support the establishment of cybersecurity information-sharing arrangements referred to in paragraph 2 by providing best practices and guidance with the aim of promoting the cross-border exchange of information at Union level between the relevant entities.
Amendment 109 #
2020/0353(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) The European Green Deal24 is Europe’s growth strategy that aims to transform the Union into a fair and prosperous society, with a modern, resource-efficient and competitive economy where there are no net emissions of greenhouse gases in 2050 and where economic growth is decoupled from resource use. A shift from the use of fossil fuels in vehicles to electromobility is one of the prerequisites for reaching the climate neutrality goal in 2050. In order for the Union’'s product policies to contribute to lowering carbon emissions on a global level, it needs to be ensured that products marketed and sold in the Union are sourced and manufactured in a sustainable manner and if possible in the Union. _________________ 24Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the European Council, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, The European Green Deal (COM (2019) 640 final).
Amendment 119 #
2020/0353(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19 a (new)
Recital 19 a (new)
(19a) Substituting scarce raw materials with cheaper and more widely available materials is crucial to reducing the Union’s dependence on third countries in the long term, to decreasing the impact of battery production on the environment, to creating more jobs in the Union and to reducing costs. It is therefore vital that the Union and the Member States step up support for European companies' research and development initiatives concerning the substitution of such materials.
Amendment 120 #
2020/0353(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) Batteries placed on the Union market should be durable and highly performant. It is therefore necessary to set out performance and durability parameters for portable batteries of general use as well as for rechargeable industrial batteries and electric vehicle batteries. For electric vehicle batteries, the informal UNECE Working Group on Electric Vehicles and the Environment is developing in-vehicle durability requirements, so this Regulation is refraining from setting additional durability requirements. On the other hand, in the area of batteries for energy storage, existing measurement methods to test battery performance and durability are not considered sufficiently precise and representative to enable introducing minimum requirements. The introduction of minimum requirements related to performance and durability of these batteries should be accompanied by available adequate harmonised standards or common specifications.
Amendment 126 #
2020/0353(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
Recital 25
(25) Some non-rechargeable batteries of general use may imply an inefficient use of resources and energy. Other non- rechargeable batteries are the most practical option for certain devices (such as smoke detectors). Whether rechargeable or not, batteries of general use should meet the minimum performance standards. Objective requirements regarding the performance and durability of such batteries of general use should be established in order to ensure that fewer low performing non- rechargeable portable batteries of general use are placed or kept on the market, in particular, where, based on a life cycle assessment, the alternative use of rechargeable batteries would result in overall environmental benefits.
Amendment 130 #
2020/0353(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26 a (new)
Recital 26 a (new)
(26a) Interoperability of chargers within specific categories of products could reduce unnecessary waste and costs for the benefit of consumers and other end- users. It should therefore be possible to recharge batteries for products such as electric vehicles and light means of transport, as well as batteries for IT and telecommunications equipment, such as mobile phones, and electric or electronic tools, such as gardening tools, by making use of common chargers that allow interoperability within each category of products. This Regulation should therefore include provisions concerning that area.
Amendment 135 #
2020/0353(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) In order to provide end users with transparent, reliable and clear information about batteries and their main characteristics, and waste batteries, to enable the end users to make informed decisions when buying and discarding batteries and to enable waste operators to appropriately treat waste batteries, batteries should be labelled. Batteries should be labelled with all the necessary information concerning their main characteristics, including their capacity and content of certain hazardous substances and the main recyclable substances. To ensure the availability of information over time, that information should also be made available by means of QR codes.
Amendment 138 #
2020/0353(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
Recital 29
(29) Information about the performance of batteries is essential to ensure that end- users as consumers are well and timely informed and in particular that they have a common basis to compare different batteries before making their purchase. Therefore, portable batteries of general use and automotive batteries should be marked with a label containing the information on their minimum average durguaranteed minimum performance, guaranteed minimum duration, average lifespan and the standard deviation when used in specific applications. Additionally, it is important to guide the end-user to discard waste batteries in an appropriate way.
Amendment 141 #
2020/0353(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29 a (new)
Recital 29 a (new)
(29a) The sell-by date, after which batteries of general use should no longer be sold, shall be clearly indicated.
Amendment 156 #
2020/0353(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 42
Recital 42
(42) Since the services offered by notified bodies in a Member State might relate to batteries made available on the market throughout the Union, it is appropriate to give the other Member States and the Commission the opportunity to audit and raise objections concerning a notified body. In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of this Regulation, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission in order to request the notifying authority to take corrective action in case a notified body does not meet or no longer meets the requirements of this Regulation.
Amendment 159 #
2020/0353(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 44
Recital 44
(44) Prior to taking a final decision on whether the battery can be granted a conformity certificate, the economic operator that wishes to place a battery on the market should be allowed to complement once the documentation on the battery.Does not affect the English version.)
Amendment 174 #
2020/0353(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 61 a (new)
Recital 61 a (new)
(61a) Fair competition must be established and only those who comply with EU rules shall have access to the market. The Commission shall limit access to the European market for companies known to have undignified working conditions, use child labour or release large quantities of waste in deep water.
Amendment 194 #
2020/0353(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 99
Recital 99
(99) Public procurement constitutes an important sector with regard to reducing the impacts on the environment of human activities and to stimulate market transformation towards more sustainable products. Contracting authorities, as defined in Directive 2014/24/EU63 of the European Parliament and of the Council63 and Directive 2014/25/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council64, and contracting entities as defined in Directive 2014/25/EU should take account of the environmental impacts when procuring batteries or products containing batteries, in order to promote and stimulateencourage more local and European stakeholders to join the market for clean and energy-efficient mobility and energy-storage and thus contribute to the environment, climate and energy policy objectives of the Union. _________________ 63Directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on public procurement and repealing Directive 2004/18/EC (OJ L 94, 28.3.2014, p. 65). 64 Directive 2014/25/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on procurement by entities operating in the water, energy, transport and postal services sectors and repealing Directive 2004/17/EC (OJ L 94, 28.3.2014, p. 243).
Amendment 196 #
2020/0353(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 105
Recital 105
Amendment 198 #
2020/0353(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 105 a (new)
Recital 105 a (new)
(105a) If a Member State identifies a compliant battery that poses a serious and urgent risk to human health, the safety of goods or the environment, the Commission should inform the other Member States and adopt immediately applicable implementing acts.
Amendment 202 #
2020/0353(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article premier – paragraph 2
Article premier – paragraph 2
2. This Regulation shall apply to all batteries, namely portable batteries, in particular batteries for light means of transport, automotive batteries, electric vehicle batteries and industrial batteries, regardless of their shape, volume, weight, design, material composition, use or purpose. It shall also apply to batteries incorporated in or added to other products.
Amendment 215 #
2020/0353(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 36
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 36
(36) ‘supply chain due diligence’ means the obligations, with regard to social and environmental risks, of the economic operator which places a rechargeable industrial battery or an electric-vehicle battery on the market, in relation to its management system, risk management, third party verifications by notified bodies and disclosure of information with a view to identifying and addressing actual and potential risks linked to the sourcing, processing and trading of the raw materials required for battery manufacturing;
Amendment 225 #
2020/0353(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall not, for reasons relating to sustainability, safety, labelling and information requirements of batteries or management of waste batteries covered by this Regulation, prohibit, restrict or impede the making available on the market or the putting into service of batteries that comply with this Regulation if they pose no risk.
Amendment 226 #
2020/0353(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. If an authority of a Member State identifies a battery that is labelled 'compliant' but actually poses a serious and urgent risk to human health, the safety of goods or the environment, it shall take the requisite measures to eliminate the risk and shall immediately inform the Commission. The Commission shall inform the other Member States and adopt immediately applicable implementing acts.
Amendment 245 #
2020/0353(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. From [12 months after entry into force of the Regulation], rechargeable industrial batteries and, electric vehicle batteries with internal storage and a capacity above 2 kWh and batteries for light means of transport shall be accompanied by a technical documentation containing values for the electrochemical performance and durability parameters laid down in Part A of Annex IV.
Amendment 278 #
2020/0353(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
(b a) Batteries made for mass consumption must be easily replaceable. The exemption laid down in 2(b) shall only be applicable as of 1 January 2026.
Amendment 303 #
2020/0353(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 14 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Portable batteries of general use (for bicycles, for example) and automotive batteries shall be marked with a label containing the information on their guaranteed minimum performance, guaranteed minimum durability, average lifespan and the standard deviation when used in specific applications. The label must indicate if the battery is produced or recycled in the Union. It must also instruct end-users on how to dispose of batteries.
Amendment 347 #
2020/0353(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 5
Article 20 – paragraph 5
5. Member States shall build upon existing mechanisms to ensure correct application of the regime governing the CE marking and shall take appropriate action, carrying out audits and imposing sanctions, in the event of improper use of that marking.
Amendment 485 #
2020/0353(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 65 – paragraph 3
Article 65 – paragraph 3
3. The battery passport shall be linked to the information about the basic characteristics of each battery type and model stored in the data sources of the System established pursuant to Article 64. The economic operator that places an industrial battery or an electric vehicle battery on the market shall ensure that the data included in the battery passport is accurate, complete and up-to-date. It shall specify whether the battery is recycled in the EU.
Amendment 598 #
2020/0353(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex X – point 2 – point d
Annex X – point 2 – point d
(d) biodiversity; including waste released in deep water;
Amendment 600 #
2020/0353(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex X – point 2 – point g
Annex X – point 2 – point g
(g) labour rights, including child labour and labour in undignified conditions;
Amendment 162 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) It is necessary to improve the conditions for data sharing in the internal market, by creating a harmonised framework for data exchanges. Sector- specific legislation can develop, adapt and propose new and complementary elements, depending on the specificities of the sector, such as the envisaged legislation on the European health data space25 and on access to vehicle data. Moreover, certain sectors of the economy are already regulated by sector-specific Union law that include rules relating to cross-border or Union wide sharing or access to data26 . This Regulation is therefore without prejudice to Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council27, and in particular the implementation of this Regulation shall not prevent cross border transfers of data in accordance with Chapter V of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 from taking place, Directive (EU) 2016/680 of the European Parliament and of the Council28, Directive (EU) 2016/943 of the European Parliament and of the Council29, Regulation (EU) 2018/1807 of the European Parliament and of the Council30, Regulation (EC) No 223/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council31, Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council32, Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council33, Directive (EU) 2019/790 of the European Parliament and of the Council34, Directive 2004/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council35, Directive (EU) 2019/1024 of the European Parliament and of the Council36, as well as Regulation 2018/858/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council37, Directive 2010/40/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council38 and Delegated Regulations adopted on its basis, and any other sector-specific Union legislation that organises the access to and re-use of data. This Regulation should be without prejudice to the access and use of data for the purpose of international cooperation in the context of prevention, investigation, detection or prosecution of criminal offences or the execution of criminal penalties. A horizontal regime for the re-use of certain categories of protected data held by public sector bodies, the provision of data sharing services and of services based on data altruism in the Union should be established. Specific characteristics of different sectors may require the design of sectoral data-based systems, while building on the requirements of this Regulation. Where a sector-specific Union legal act requires public sector bodies, providers of data sharing services or registered entities providing data altruism services to comply with specific additional technical, administrative or organisational requirements, including through an authorisation or certification regime, those provisions of that sector-specific Union legal act should also apply. __________________ 25 See: Annexes to the Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on Commission Work Programme 2021 (COM(2020) 690 final). 26For example, Directive 2011/24/EU in the context of the European Health Data Space, and relevant transport legislation such as Directive 2010/40/EU, Regulation 2019/1239 and Regulation (EU) 2020/1056, in the context of the European Mobility Data Space. 27Regulation (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) 28 Directive (EU) 2016/680 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 by competent authorities for the purposes of the prevention, investigation, detection or prosecution of criminal offences or the execution of criminal penalties, and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Council Framework Decision 2008/977/JHA. (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p.89) 29Directive (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) 30 Regulation (EU) 2018/1807 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 November 2018 on a framework for the free flow of non-personal data in the European Union. (OJ L 303, 28.11.2018, p. 59) 31Regulation (EC) No 223/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2009 on European statistics and repealing Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1101/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the transmission of data subject to statistical confidentiality to the Statistical Office of the European Communities, Council Regulation (EC) No 322/97 on Community Statistics, and Council Decision 89/382/EEC, Euratom establishing a Committee on the Statistical Programmes of the European Communities. (OJ L 87, 31.03.2009, p. 164) 32Directive 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, 17.07.2000, p. 1) 33Directive 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) 34 Directive (EU) 2019/790 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 April 2019 on copyright and related rights in the Digital Single Market and amending Directives 96/9/EC and 2001/29/EC. (OJ L 130, 17.5.2019, p. 92) 35Directive 2004/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the enforcement of intellectual property rights. (OJ L 157, 30.4.2004). 36Directive (EU) 2019/1024 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 on open data and the re-use of public sector information. (OJ L 172, 26.6.2019, p. 56). 37 Regulation (EU) 2018/858 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2018 on the approval and market surveillance of motor vehicles and their trailers, and of systems, components and separate technical units intended for such vehicles, amending Regulations (EC) No 715/2007 and (EC) No 595/2009 and repealing Directive 2007/46/EC (OJ L 151, 14.6.2018). 38 Directive 2010/40/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 July 2010 on the framework for the deployment of Intelligent Transport Systems in the field of road transport and for interfaces with other modes of transport. (OJ L 207, 6.8.2010, p. 1)
Amendment 170 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7 a (new)
Recital 7 a (new)
(7a) It highlights the importance of processing the personal data of EU citizens in the European Union if at all possible.
Amendment 171 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7 b (new)
Recital 7 b (new)
(7b) The development of a European industrial and technological base calls for the introduction of a European preference for local or European production in public procurement of digital data in the European Union.
Amendment 172 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8 a (new)
Recital 8 a (new)
(8a) Some personal data, such as health or children’s data, are by their very nature unique. The anonymisation of such data should be guaranteed and storage or analysis thereof outside the European Union should not be authorised.
Amendment 184 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14 a (new)
Recital 14 a (new)
(14a) Protected data of EU citizens or companies held by a public-sector body of a Member State may not be shared for transmission to third countries or processed outside the European Union by another Member State.
Amendment 185 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14 b (new)
Recital 14 b (new)
(14b) A public-sector body in a Member State may not be required to share protected data of EU citizens or companies that it holds.
Amendment 188 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15 a (new)
Recital 15 a (new)
(15a) Companies which are located in third countries and which have experienced significant security breaches involving protected or personal data of European origin for which they were responsible in the 10 years prior to their request will be deemed not to offer appropriate safeguards to obtain data of European origin.
Amendment 189 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15 b (new)
Recital 15 b (new)
(15b) A third country which has not penalised a significant security lapse on the part of a firm processing personal or protected data of European origin will be deemed not to offer appropriate safeguards.
Amendment 190 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15 c (new)
Recital 15 c (new)
(15c) Third countries engaging in economic espionage against EU companies cannot be deemed to offer appropriate safeguards regarding the processing by their companies of protected data of European origin.
Amendment 191 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16 a (new)
Recital 16 a (new)
(16a) To ensure the proper enforcement of such obligations, the re-user located in a third country or another Member State should also authorise any inspection deemed necessary by the public-sector body which authorised re-use.
Amendment 192 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16 b (new)
Recital 16 b (new)
(16b) A Member State should be able to require cloud providers and digital undertakings operating in the European Union, whether located in the European Union or in a third country, to grant access to any relevant personal data linked to terrorism, even if they are stored in a third country.
Amendment 193 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
Amendment 232 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 a (new)
(1a) In order to foster the development of local and European data market players in a sector monopolised by global giants, a public-sector body may require a company that has exceeded the thresholds laid down in the forthcoming legislation on digital services and digital markets to outsource at least 51% of the jobs concerned to a local company as a condition of access to its public data.
Amendment 234 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3
Article 4 – paragraph 3
(3) Such exclusive right shall be granted in the context of a relevant service or concession contract in compliance with applicable Union and national public procurement and concession award rules, or, in the case of a contract of a value for which neither Union nor national public procurement and concession award rules are applicable, in compliance with the principles of transparency, equal treatment and non-discrimination on grounds of nationality. vis-à-vis any European Union company. A company which does not process public data in the European Union and takes advantage of tax havens may not request access to the public data of a Member State.
Amendment 235 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 4
Article 4 – paragraph 4
(4) In all cases not covered by paragraph 3 and where the general interest purpose cannot be fulfilled without granting an exclusive right, the principles of transparency, equal treatment and non- discrimination on grounds of nationality shall apply vis-à-vis any European Union company. A company which does not process public data in the European Union and takes advantage of tax havens may not request access to the public data of a Member State.
Amendment 236 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 4 a (new)
(4a) A company which does not process public data in the European Union and takes advantage of tax havens may not require a Member State or a European Union body to grant it access to public data.
Amendment 237 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 4 b (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 4 b (new)
(4b) The contracting authority may, in particular, invite the domestic operators who submit the highest bids to fall into line with the price offered by the foreign tenderer (and, if the first domestic operator refuses, it may turn to the second and then the third domestic operator in the ranking of tenderers), thereby creating an incentive for the operator wishing to win the contract to adjust its price.
Amendment 270 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 4 a (new)
(4a) Public-sector bodies may set thresholds in the calculation in order to foster re-use of data and innovation while securing a greater contribution from global digital actors.
Amendment 271 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 5
Article 6 – paragraph 5
(5) Fees shall be derived from the costs related to the production of the data, to the processing of requests for re- use of the categories of data referred to in Article 3 (1) and a percentage of the profits generated through the commercial re-use of the data. The methodology for calculating fees shall be published in advance.
Amendment 272 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 5 a (new)
(5a) The Member State may use the cost of producing the data to establish a fair fee to offset the initial or recurrent public investment. The European Union shall use the fees to cover the sums it has invested to produce these data.
Amendment 273 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 5 b (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 5 b (new)
(5b) In making the calculation, the Member State may take account of the way the data are used and the company’s tax contribution in order to reduce the fee.
Amendment 296 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 6 – point h a (new)
Article 10 – paragraph 6 – point h a (new)
(ha) the place of data processing and the number of jobs to be created in the European Union;
Amendment 297 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 6 – point h b (new)
Article 10 – paragraph 6 – point h b (new)
(hb) the turnover and taxes paid in the Member State in the previous year, except in the case of an SME.
Amendment 318 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – point a a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – point a a (new)
(aa) impose a state compensation obligation on the entity re-using the data in the event of a breach of data anonymity.
Amendment 319 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – point b a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – point b a (new)
(ba) exclude the provider from access to new public data in that Member State for a specified period of time.
Amendment 320 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 a (new)
Article 14 a (new)
Amendment 380 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
(ea) report annually the percentage of data shared in accordance with this Regulation which are processed inside and outside the European Union; report on job creation in the data-processing sector by Member State.
Amendment 385 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 2
Article 30 – paragraph 2
(2) AnyNo judgment of a court or tribunal and anyno decision of an administrative authority of a third country requiring a public sector body, a natural or legal person to which the right to re-use data was granted under Chapter 2, a data sharing provider or entity entered in the register of recognised data altruism organisations to transfer from or give access to non- personal data subject to this Regulation in the Union may only be recognised or enforceable in any manner if based on an international agreement, such as a mutual legal assistance treaty, in force between the requesting third country and the Union or any such agreement between the requesting third country and a Member State concluded before [the entry into force of this Regulation].
Amendment 386 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 30 – paragraph 2 a (new)
(2a) Deplores the fact that the Commission does not provide for any specific protection of Europeans with critical economic responsibilities against third-country laws such as the US Cloud Act; that legislation enables third-country law enforcement authorities to access data in the context of criminal investigations which may be prompted by economic competition considerations; as in the Alstom case, the strategic impact of such cases may be significant for European companies;
Amendment 387 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 3
Article 30 – paragraph 3
Amendment 388 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 3 – point a
Article 30 – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) where the third-country system requires the reasons and proportionality of the decision to be set out, and it requires the court order or the decision, as the case may be, to be specific in character, for instance by establishing a sufficient link to certain suspected persons, or and their criminal infringements;
Amendment 389 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 3 – point b
Article 30 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) the reasoned objection of the addressee is subject to a review by a competent court in the third-countrya Member State; and
Amendment 390 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 1
Article 32 – paragraph 1
By [four years after the data of application of this Regulation], the Commission shall carry out an evaluation of this Regulation, and submit a report on its main findings to the European Parliament and to the Council as well as to the European Economic and Social Committee. Member States shall provide the Commission with the information necessary for the preparation of that report. Reciprocity of access to data located in third countries vis-à-vis Member States shall be assessed. Third countries which do not offer effective reciprocity shall be excluded from all access to data hosted in the European Union.
Amendment 8 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1 a (new)
Recital 1 a (new)
(1a) Public health falls, as a matter of principle under the responsibility of the Member States, which are free to organise and deliver their health-care services in whatever manner they wish, as well as to procure medical devices, medicines, vaccines and health products, and to devise policies for cooperation and sharing of best practice, information and medical equipment, however they see fit.
Amendment 9 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) In light of the lessons learnt during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, such as systemic weaknesses in the supply chain of certain medical devices and medicines in Europe, in particular dependence on China and India, and in order to facilitate adequate Union-wide preparedness and response to all cross- border threats to health, the legal framework for epidemiological surveillance, monitoring, early warning of, and combating serious cross-border threats to health, as set out in Decision No 1082/2013/EU, needs to be broadened with regard to additional reporting requirements and analysis on health systems indicators, and cooperation by Member States with the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC). Moreover, in order to ensure effective Union response to novel cross- border threats to health, the legal framework to combat serious cross-border threats to health should enable to immediately adopt case definitions for the surveillance of novel threats and should provide for the establishment of a network of EU reference laboratories and a network to support monitoring of disease outbreaks that are relevant to substances of human origin. The capacity for contact tracing should be strengthened via the creation of an automated system, using modern technologies.
Amendment 17 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) The protection of human health is a matter which has a cross-cutting dimension and is relevant to numerous Union policies and activities. In order to achieve a high level of human health protection, and to avoid any overlap of activities, duplication or conflicting actions, the Commission, in liaison with the Member States and in full compliance with the principle of subsidiarity, should ensure coordination and exchange of information between the mechanisms and structures established under this Regulation, and other mechanisms and structures established at Union level and under the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community (the Euratom Treaty), the activities of which are relevant to the preparedness and response planning, monitoring, early warning of, and combating serious cross-border threats to health. In particular, the Commission should ensure that relevant information from the various rapid alert and information systems at Union level and under the Euratom Treaty is gathered and communicated to the Member States through the Early Warning and Response System (‘EWRS’) set up by Decision No 2119/98/EC.
Amendment 18 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) Preparedness and response planning are essential elements for effective monitoring, early warning of and combatting serious cross-border threats to health. As such, a Union health crisis and pandemic preparedness plan needs to be established by the Commission and approved by the HSC. This should be coupled with updates to Member States’ preparedness and response plans so as to ensure they are compatible within the regional level structures. To support Member States in this endeavour, targeted training and knowledge exchange activities for healthcare staff and public health staff should be provided knowledge and necessary skills should be provided by the Commission and Union Agencies. To ensure the putting into operation and the running of these plans, the Commission should be able to ask Member States to conduct stress tests, exercises and in-action and after-action reviews with Member States. These plans should be coordinated, be functional and updated, and have sufficient resources for their operationalisation. Following stress tests and reviews of the plans, corrective actions should be implemented and the Commission should be kept informed of all updates.
Amendment 21 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) To this end, Member States should provide the Commission with an update on the latest situation with regard to their preparedness and response planning and implementation at national level. Information provided by the Member States should include the elements that Member States are obliged to report to the World Health Organization (WHO) in the context of the International Health Regulations (IHR)15. In turn, the Commission should report to the European Parliament and to the Council on the state of play and progress with preparedness, response planning and implementation at Union level, including on corrective actions, every 2 years to ensure that there is consistency between national preparedness and response plans are adequate. In order to support the assessment of these plans, EU audits in Member States should be conducted, in coordination with the ECDC and Union agencies. Such planning should include in particular adequate preparedness of critical sectors of society, such as energy, transport, communication or civil protection, which rely, in a crisis situation, on well-prepared gender-sensitive public health systems that are also in turn dependent on the functioning of those sectors and on maintenance of essential services at an adequate level. In the event of a serious cross-border threat to health originating from a zoonotic infection, it is important to ensure the interoperability between health and veterinary sectors for preparedness and response planning. __________________ International Health Regulation (IHR, 2005), https://www.who.int/ihr/publications/9789 241596664/en/
Amendment 24 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8 a (new)
Recital 8 a (new)
(8a) This regulation should draw on lessons learned from the COVID-19 pandemic to assess whether an EU coordination mandate is needed, particularly in view of the difficulties encountered in the European Commission’s negotiation of contracts for centralised procurement of vaccines as when as during their delivery. Such lessons should lead to the incorporation into negotiating mandates of provisions on negotiators’ qualifications, terms and conditions and deadlines for delivery, as well as the benefits or sanctions applicable in the event of diligence or default.
Amendment 31 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) As serious cross-border threats to health are not limited to Union borders, joint procurement of medical countermeasures should be extended to include European Free Trade Association States and Union candidate countries, in accordance with the applicable Union legislation. The Joint Procurement Agreement, determining the practical arrangements governing the joint procurement procedure established under Article 5 of Decision No 1082/2013/EU, should also be adapted to include an exclusivity clause regarding negotiation and procurement for participating countries in a joint procurement procedure, to allow for better coordination within the EU. This exclusivity clause should nevertheless ensure that Member States who wish to be able to negotiate other contracts with different suppliers are free to do, so to be insulated from the eventuality of lateness or other failure affecting the joint procedure. The Commission should ensure coordination and information exchange between the entities organizing any action under different mechanisms established under this Regulation and other relevant Union structures related to procurement and stockpiling of medical countermeasures, such as the strategic rescEU reserve under Decision No 1313/2013/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council16. __________________ 16Decision No 1313/2013/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 on a Union Civil Protection Mechanism (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 924).
Amendment 35 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9 a (new)
Recital 9 a (new)
(9a) As the purpose of joint procurement was to ensure the swift provision of medical countermeasures to EU Member States in a highly competitive market, participation in this mechanism should be restricted to EU Member States only, as otherwise demand would outstrip supply and place too great a strain on suppliers’ capacity to cover orders.
Amendment 43 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9 b (new)
Recital 9 b (new)
(9b) For the same reason, the joint ordering of medical countermeasures by the European Union should be reserved for the priority use of the Member States participating in this mechanism, in preference over those not taking part, and should rule out any redistribution outside the European Union.
Amendment 65 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) The recognition of public health emergency situations and the legal effects of this recognition provided by Decision No 1082/2013/EU should be broadened. To this end, this Regulation should allow for the Commission to formally recognise a public health emergency at Union level. In order to recognise such an emergency situation, the Commission should establish an independent advisory committee that will provide expertise on whether a threat constitutes a public health emergency at Union level, and advise on public health response measures and on the termination of this emergency recognition. The advisory committee should consist of independent experts, selected by the Commission from the fields of expertise and experience most relevant to the specific threat that is occurring, representatives of the ECDC, of the EMA, and of other Union bodies or agencies as observers. Recognition of a public health emergency at Union level will provide the basis for introducing operational public health measures for medical products and medical devices, flexible mechanisms to develop, procure, manage and deploy medical countermeasures as well as the activation of support from the ECDC to mobilise and deploy outbreak assistance teams, known as ‘EU Health Task Force’. In accordance with the limits set by the Treaties, none of these mechanisms should be binding on Member States, but they should make it easier for the Union and the Member States to coordinate and adopt measures at the European level.
Amendment 67 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) The occurrence of an event that corresponds to serious cross-border threats to health and is likely to have Union-wide consequences should requireallow the Member States concerned to take particular control or contact-tracing measures in a coordinated manner in order to identify people already contaminated and those persons exposed to risk. Such cooperation could require the exchange of personal data through the system, including sensitive information related to health and information about confirmed or suspected human cases of the disease, between those Member States directly involved in the contact-tracing measures. The exchange of personal data concerning health by the Member States has to comply with Article 9(2)(i) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council18. __________________ 18Regulation (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 68 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) Since the objectives of this Regulation cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States due to the cross-border dimension of serious threats to health but can be better achieved at Union level, the Union may adopt measures, itext apply only to voluntary cooperation by the Member States and to organisation at the level of the Union institutions, bodies and offices and agencies alone, issuing a regulation is not the right way to achieve them in a meaningful manner. In accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Artic, it is preferable, since the repeale,d this Regulation does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve those objext is a decision, to replace it with another decision or a directives.
Amendment 70 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
Recital 25
(25) In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of this Regulation, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission to adopt implementing acts in relation totext, the Commission should be able to propose decisions or recommendations establishing: templates to be used when providing the information on preparedness and response planning; organisation of the training activities for health care and public health staff; the establishment and update of a list of communicable diseases and related special health issues subject to the network of epidemiological surveillance and the procedures for the operation of such a network; the adoption of case definitions for those communicable diseases and special health issues covered by the epidemiological surveillance network and, where necessary, for other serious cross- border threats to health subject to ad hoc monitoring; the procedures for the operation of the EWRS; the functioning of the surveillance platform; the designation of EU reference laboratories to provide support to national reference laboratories; the procedures for the information exchange on and the coordination of the responses of the Member States; the recognition of situations of public health emergency at Union level and the termination of such a recognition and procedures necessary to ensure that the operation of the EWRS and the processing of data are in accordance with the data protection legislation. These definitions apply only within the above- mentioned European-level framework and shall not replace the national-level definitions used by the Member States.
Amendment 71 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26
Recital 26
Amendment 74 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27
Recital 27
Amendment 75 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) In order to ascertain the state of implementation of the national preparedness plans and their coherence with the Union plan, 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 CommissCommission should also be able to propose decisions or recommendations in respect of procedures, standards and criteria for the audits aimed at the assessment of preparedness and response planning at national level. 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 201621. In particular, to ensure equal participation in the preparation of delegatedthese 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 delegatedthese acts. __________________ 21 OJ L 123, 12.5.2016, p. 1.
Amendment 77 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c
Amendment 78 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point d
Amendment 79 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 6
Article 2 – paragraph 6
6. Member States shall retain the right to maintain or introduce additional arrangements, procedures and measures for their national systems in the fields covered by this Regulation, including arrangements provided for in existing or future bilateral or multilateral agreements or conventions, on condition that such additional arrangements, procedures and measures do not impair the application of this Regulation. They shall also have the right not to comply with the Commission’s decisions, recommendations and guidelines.
Amendment 85 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 4 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. As far as possible, the group shall adopt its guidance or opinions by consensus. These decisions shall not be binding.
Amendment 88 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3 – point e
Article 5 – paragraph 3 – point e
Amendment 89 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3 – point f
Article 5 – paragraph 3 – point f
Amendment 90 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3 – point g
Article 5 – paragraph 3 – point g
Amendment 96 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 1
1. When preparing national preparedness and response plans each Member State shall coordinate withinform the Commission in order to reach consistency withand the HSC in order to ensure that the Union preparedness and response plan, also inform without delay the Commission and the HSC of any substantial revision of the national plan is kept suitably up to date.
Amendment 98 #
Amendment 102 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b – point iii
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b – point iii
(iii) resources: including financial resources for emergency preparedness and contingency funding for response; logistics mechanisms, means of national production and essential supplies for health; and dedicated, trained and equipped human resources for emergencies; and
Amendment 105 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2
Article 8 – paragraph 2
Amendment 107 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The Commission and the Member States shallthat wish to do so may, in complement to HSC’s monitoring role, work together within ithe HSC to coordinate their efforts to develop, strengthen and maintain their capacities for the monitoring, early warning and assessment of, and response to serious cross-border threats to health.
Amendment 112 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission and any Member States which so desire may engage in a joint procurement procedure conducted pursuant to Article 165(2) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 of the European Parliament and of the Council29 with a view to the advance purchase of medical countermeasures for serious cross-border threats to health. In this context, the Commission shall make use of the services of negotiators who can demonstrate practical expertise in contract logistics and public procurement, both public and private, in similar volumes and conditions. These negotiators shall be approved by the representatives of the participating Member States. __________________ 29Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 July 2018 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union, amending Regulations (EU) No 1296/2013, (EU) No 1301/2013, (EU) No 1303/2013, (EU) No 1304/2013, (EU) No 1309/2013, (EU) No 1316/2013, (EU) No 223/2014, (EU) No 283/2014, and Decision No 541/2014/EU and repealing Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 (OJ L 193, 30.7.2018, p. 1).
Amendment 116 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) participation in the joint procurement procedure ishall be open to all Members States, European Free Trade Association (EFTA) States and Union candidate countries in accordance with Article 165(2) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046;
Amendment 118 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) the rights and obligations of Members States, EFTA States and Union candidate countri States not participating in the joint procedurement shall b are respected, in particular those relating to the protection and improvement of human health;
Amendment 121 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) Member States, EFTA States and Union candidate countries participating in a specific joint procurement shall procure the medical countermeasure in question through that procedure and not through other channels, and shall not run parallel negotiation processes for that product;
Amendment 128 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point d
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point d
(d) the joint procurement shall not affect the internal market, shall not constitute discrimination or a restriction of trade and shall not cause distortion of competition. It shall enable, among other things, the negotiation and procurement by Member States of medical countermeasures from suppliers other than the specific supplier chosen for the joint procedure in which they are participants;
Amendment 136 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point e
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point e
(e) the joint procurement shall not have any direct financial impact on the budget of Member States, EFTA States and Union candidate countries not participating in the joint procurement.
Amendment 143 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Member States’ ability to hold strategic reserves shall be guaranteed, as well as their capacity to direct the use of these reserves solely for the benefit of their nationals and nationals of other Member States residing on their territory. Member States shall remain free to decide whether or not to share the use of these reserves.
Amendment 155 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 10
Article 13 – paragraph 10
10. On duly justified imperative grounds of urgency related to the severity or novelty of a serious cross-border threat to health or to the rapidity of its spread among the Member States, the Commission may adopt immediately applicable implementing acts in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 27(3)propose decisions or recommendations for the adoption of case definitions, procedures and indicators for surveillance in Member States in the case of a threat referred to in points (i) and (ii) of point (a) of Article 2(1). The indicators mentioned above shall also support the assessment of capacity for diagnosis, prevention and treatment.
Amendment 157 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) enable the automated collection of surveillance and laboratory data, make use of information from electronic health records, with the consent of the patients concerned and in strict compliance with personal data protection rules, as well as media monitoring, media monitoring, and apply artificial intelligence for data validation, analysis and automated reporting;
Amendment 160 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 6 – point d
Article 14 – paragraph 6 – point d
Amendment 161 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 1
1. A network of Member States’ services supportenabling transfusion, transplantation and medically assisted reproduction, when authorised in national law, is established to allow for the continuous and rapid access to sero- epidemiological data, including assessment of donor population exposure and immunity, and to monitor, assess and help address disease outbreaks that are relevant to substances of human origin.
Amendment 162 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1
Article 18 – paragraph 1
1. The EWRS shall enable the Commission and the competent authorities responsible at national level to be in permanent communication for the purposes of preparedness, early warning and response, alerting, assessing public health risks and determinsuggesting the measures that may be required to protect public health.
Amendment 163 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Following an alert notification pursuant to Article 19, on a request from the Commission or a Member State and on the basis of the available information, including the information referred to in Article 19 and the risk assessments referred to in Article 20, Member States shall coordinate within the HSC and in liaison with the Commission:
Amendment 168 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 25 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. It shall have no effect on the activation and functioning of health emergency arrangements under Member States’ legislation, where they exist.
Amendment 49 #
2020/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) The exchanges of digital information through EU CSW-CERTEX should cover Union non-customs formalities laid down in Union legislation that customs authorities are entrusted to enforce. Those formalities impose different obligations for the import, export or transit of certain goods, and their verification through customs controls is fundamentally important to the effective functioning of the EU Single Window Environment for Customs. EU CSW-CERTEX should cover digitalised regulatory formalities laid down in Union legislation and managed by partner competent authorities in electronic Union non-customs systems, storing the relevant information from all Member States required for goods clearance. It is therefore appropriate to identify the Union non-customs formalities which should be subject to digital cooperation through EU CSW-CERTEX. In particular, EU CSW- CERTEX should initially cover sanitary and phytosanitary requirements, rules regulating the import of organic products, environmental requirements in relation to fluorinated greenhouse gases and ozone depleting substances, and formalities related to the import of cultural goods. EU CSW-CERTEX should integrate other non-customs formalities as soon as the appropriate technical and functional specifications are in place.
Amendment 56 #
2020/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) Any processing of personal data in EU CSW-CERTEX shall be conducted in an appropriately safe and secure environment with a view to preventing unauthorised disclosure and alteration. To that end, suitable organisational and technical cybersecurity measures should be adopted, including and deploying in particular encryption measures. Furthermore, any processing of personal data should facilitate information sharing between the national environments for customs and Union non- customs systems without any storing of data. It should also transform data, where necessary and taking into account the need to respect confidentiality, to enable information exchange between both digital domains. The information technology facilities used for data transformation should be located in the Union.
Amendment 60 #
2020/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10 a (new)
Recital 10 a (new)
(10a) The processing of personal data within the framework of this Regulation by competent authorities should comply with Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council. The processing of personal data by the Commission within the framework of this Regulation should comply with Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Amendment 62 #
2020/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) The increased digitalisation of customs and Union non-customs regulatory formalities applicable to international trade has opened up new opportunities for Member States to improve the digital cooperation between customs and partner competent authorities. In pursuit of those priorities, several Member States have started to develop frameworks for national single window environments for customs. Those initiatives differ substantially depending on the level of existing customs information technology architecture, priorities and cost structures. It is therefore necessary to require Member States to establish and operate national single window environments for customs for Union non-customs formalities covered by EU CSW-CERTEX. Those environments should constitute the national components of the EU Single Window Environment for Customs, enabling safe and secure electronic information sharing and collaboration between customs, partner competent authorities and economic operators to ensure compliance with and efficient enforcement of customs legislation and Union non-customs formalities covered by EU CSW-CERTEX. In lineorder to realise an effective and uniform application of this Regulation, the Commission shall provide guidance concerning common technical and functional specifications for the integration of the relevant non-customs formalities within thise national single window environments for customs. As a result, national single windows should also be interoperable between each other in order to cater for the validation of formalities which, although issued by national administrations, are valid throughout the Union. . In line with these objectives, the national single window environments for customs should enable the automated verification by customs authorities of formalities in respect of which data is transmitted from the respective Union non-customs system through EU CSW-CERTEX. The national single window environments for customs should also allow partner competent authorities to monitor and control the quantities of authorised goods (‘quantity management’) that have been released by customs through the Union. This should be ensured by providing the necessary clearance information to the Union non- customs systems through EU CSW- CERTEX. In practical terms, quantity management at Union level is necessary to enable a better enforcement of non- customs regulatory formalities by automatically and consistently monitoring the consumption of authorised quantities for the release of goods, avoiding their overuse or mishandling.
Amendment 66 #
2020/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) To further simplify goods clearance processes for economic operators and to reduce administrative burdens, the national single window environments for customs should become a single channel to communicate with customs and partner competent authorities. Adequate support and information on the processes and technical requirements related to the use of such single channel should be provided to economic operators via easily accessible and user-friendly national websites. The Union non- customs formalities subject to this additional facilitation measure are a subset of the overarching formalities covered by EU CSW-CERTEX. The Commission should identify those formalities progressively by assessing the fulfilment of a set of criteria relevant to trade facilitation, taking into account their legal and technical feasibility. In order to further enhance trade facilitation, it should be possible to use the national single window environments for customs as a platform for coordinating controls between customs authorities and partner competent authorities in line with Article 47(1) of Regulation (EU) No 952/2013.
Amendment 80 #
2020/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26
Recital 26
(26) The Commission should regularly monitor the functioning of the EU Single Window Environment for Customs to evaluate the performance of EU CSW- CERTEX and to ensure the efficient enforcement of Union non-customs formalities covered by EU CSW-CERTEX, in particular with the view to integrate other non-customs formalities. The Commission should submit regular assessment reports on the functioning of the EU Single Window Environment for Customs to the European Parliament and to the Council. Those reports should take stock of progress, identify areas for improvement and propose recommendations for the future in light of progress made towards an improved digital collaboration between customs and partner competent authorities involved in goods clearance to ensure simplified processes for economic operators and the efficient enforcement of Union non-customs formalities.
Amendment 99 #
2020/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Processing of personal data shall be conducted in a safe and secure environment by means of appropriate organizational and technical cybersecurity measures. Processing of personal data may take place in EU CSW- CERTEX only for the following purposes:
Amendment 103 #
2020/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 1
1. The Member States shall establish national single window environments for customs. Each Member State shall be responsible for the development, integration and operation of its single window environment for customs, including the safeguard of security and integrity of network and information systems in place. Member States shall ensure interoperability with EU CSW- CERTEX as well as with other national single window environments.
Amendment 106 #
2020/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Amendment 109 #
2020/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2
Article 8 – paragraph 2
2. The national single window environments for customs shall enable the interoperable and secure exchange of information and cooperation by electronic means between customs authorities, partner competent authorities and economic operators for the purposes of compliance with and efficient enforcement of customs legislation and the Union non- customs formalities listed in the Annex.
Amendment 110 #
2020/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point c
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point c
(c) provide a single communication channel for economic operators to lodge standardized information to fulfil the relevant customs formalities and Union non-customs formalities subject to additional digital cooperation in accordance with Article 12.
Amendment 114 #
2020/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. The processing of personal data within the national single window environments for customs shall take place in a safe and secure manner by means of appropriate organizational and technical cybersecurity measures, as well as in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2016/679 separately from the processing operations referred to in Article 6 of this Regulation.
Amendment 118 #
2020/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. For each of the Union non-customs formalities listed in the Annex, EU CSW- CERTEX shall enable information to be exchanged in a secure and interoperable manner between the national single window environments for customs and the relevant Union non-customs systems for the following purposes:
Amendment 122 #
2020/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) allowing economic operators to submit the relevantrough a single point of entry the relevant standardized information required for the fulfilment of the applicable customs formalities and Union non-customs formalities;
Amendment 142 #
2020/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 3
Article 24 – paragraph 3
Article 8(3), point (c), Article 11, Article 13(1), (2) and (3), Article 14 and Article 15(1) and (2) shall apply from 1 January 203129.
Amendment 2 #
2019/2213(BUD)
Draft opinion
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas Article 8 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union states that ‘in all its activities, the Union shall aim to eliminate inequalities and promote equality between men and women’, thus stipulating that gender equality must be incorporated into all EU policies; whilst respecting the differences between men and women and their mutual complementarity;
Amendment 7 #
2019/2213(BUD)
Draft opinion
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas inequality is a growing problem in the EU, notably on account of the increasing Islamisation of EU societies, and whereas an increasing percentage of the EU budget must be spent on developing social rights and access to public welfare services, with a specific focus on improving gender equality, including for LGBTI persons, and the situation of women and girls;
Amendment 8 #
2019/2213(BUD)
Draft opinion
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas inequality is a growing problem in the EU, and whereas an increasing percentage of the EU budget must be spent on developing social rights and access to public welfare services, with a specific focus on improving gender equality, including for LGBTI persons, and the situation of women and girls;
Amendment 13 #
2019/2213(BUD)
Draft opinion
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas women remain under- representedthere are fewer women in leadership positions and they devote more time than men to unpaid housework and care; which constitutes a positive contribution to the stability of both the children and the family, and whereas the status of the stay-at-home mother should be recognised, in particular by specific parental allowances and registration of credits for pension rights;
Amendment 17 #
2019/2213(BUD)
Draft opinion
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas women who so wish should be able to take up leadership positions on the same terms as men and receive the same pay for the same work;
Amendment 24 #
2019/2213(BUD)
Draft opinion
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas, given its negative influence on the status of women in our European society, signs of Islamist separatism must be opposed in all activities funded by the European Union;
Amendment 25 #
2019/2213(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses that gender budgeting must become an integral part of the budgetary procedure at all of its stages and in all budget lines, so that budgetary expenditure becomes an effective tool for promoting gender equality; calls for gender mainstreaming to be consistently implemented in all EU programmes, financial instruments and the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI)e importance of championing gender equality while respecting the differences between men and women and how they complement one another; calls for any support for the so-called gender theory, which seeks to deny any difference between men and women, to be banned from receiving any financing from EU funds;
Amendment 32 #
2019/2213(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Gender theory shall not be an allocation criterion for the EU budget;
Amendment 35 #
2019/2213(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Reaffirms its requestCalls for more investment to uphold the rights of women and girls; calls for budgetary allocations to support women’s economic independence through EU programmes and funds, such as COSME, Horizon 2020 and the EFSIincluding for a determined fight against acts of violence and discrimination suffered by women , especially those endured because of social customs and standards that are foreign to European civilisation;
Amendment 43 #
2019/2213(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls for greater synergies between the instruments available to advance gender equality and improve the work-life balance; reiterates the need for greater efforts to support the most vulnerable women, includingand particularly women with disabilities, and single mothers and migrant, ethnic minority and sexual minority women;
Amendment 48 #
2019/2213(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Calls for a European preference in the EU budget: EU women with disabilities and single mothers should be given priority over migrant women who do not have EU citizenship;
Amendment 54 #
2019/2213(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls for spending on gender equality to be traced and for proper indicators and a dedicated methodology to be established, particularly as regards the fight against gender-based discrimination, violence, sexual harassment and women’s; reiterates that strict observance of the laws and sovereignty of Member States shall govern spending tied to access to sexual and reproductive health and rights;
Amendment 59 #
2019/2213(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. All men taking part in an action funded from the EU budget shall undertake to agree that women may lead the action or the meeting concerned and to never refuse to shake the hand of a woman or to sit next to a woman;
Amendment 61 #
2019/2213(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Anyone involved in an action funded from the EU budget shall agree to take part without any ostentatious religious signs where the action takes place;
Amendment 64 #
2019/2213(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. CWith Brexit and the resultant drop in the EU budget in mind, calls for the EU to increasemaintain the budget allocation for civil society organisations that promote women’s rights in Europe and the Global South, provided these organisations abide by the laws of Member States and show respect for their sovereignty;
Amendment 69 #
2019/2213(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. A not-for-profit non-governmental organisation may not receive EU funding if a significant number of its employees or volunteers have been convicted of living off immoral earnings or of sexual abuse in the previous year;
Amendment 73 #
2019/2213(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. To avoid misuse, a not-for-profit non-governmental organisation in receipt of EU funding may not pay any of its employees, with the exception of doctors, a salary in excess of EUR 5 000 per month;
Amendment 76 #
2019/2213(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. RecCalls the important role played by the European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE), and the need for a consolidated budget for collecting data and acquiring expertise in the area of gender equality; calls for EIGE’s budget, staffor all policies directed towards women to have the following goals: - to combat acts of violence and inequalities stemming from social standards decreed by social, religious and community groups ill-disposed towards the respect shown women that is characteristic of European civilisation, - equal pay for men and women for equal work and equal skills, - to fight domestic violence, - to recognise the status of establishment plan and independence to be kept stable.y-at-home mothers, in particular by specific parental allowances and registration of credits for pension rights;
Amendment 5 #
2019/2204(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the 2016 Commission evaluation concluded that the objectives of the Defence Procurement Directive had only been achieved partially, since it allowed for an initial increase in competition, transparency and non- discrimination in the EU’s defence procurement market, but much more progress in Member States’ consistent use of the directive was needed to fully achieve those objectives fullyshowing a preference for local or European manufacturing in defence procurement;
Amendment 6 #
2019/2204(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas following the military stances adopted by Erdoğan recently, Turkey is no longer a reliable ally in the fields of defence and security like other NATO members;
Amendment 8 #
2019/2204(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
Ea. whereas the EPRS report (p. 111) states that: ‘American FMS sales (foreign military sales) for the period 2016-2018 accounted for USD 55 billion or 32 % of the total defence procurement expenditure for all EU countries’; whereas Greece purchased 30 F-16 (FMS) in the midst of the Greek euro crisis of 2009-2010;
Amendment 11 #
2019/2204(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)
Recital G a (new)
Ga. whereas there is a need to protect and strengthen European subcontractors and manufacturers of critical components or systems in light of the predatory approach of third country undertakings;
Amendment 21 #
2019/2204(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Recalls in particular that the development of a European defence technological and industrial base requires the establishment of a European preference for local or European production in defence procurement in Europe;
Amendment 23 #
2019/2204(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Considers that too many Member States source mainly from third countries to meet their defence needs;
Amendment 27 #
2019/2204(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Believes, in this regard, that the Commission should take a more proactive role in monitoring the G2G exclusions used by the Member States in their awarding of contracts outside the scope of the Defence Procurement Directive, and should not be mainly reliant on received complaints filed by the industry;
Amendment 29 #
2019/2204(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Considers that when a contracting authority authorises economic operators from countries outside the European Union or the European Economic Area to participate in a procedure for the award of defence or security contracts, this authorisation must take into account, inter alia, the requirements of security of information and supply, the safeguarding of defence and state security interests, the interest in developing the European defence technological and industrial base and the requirements of reciprocity;
Amendment 30 #
2019/2204(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Deplores the use of G2G exclusions to allow for FMS acquisitions on a very large scale from third country partners and the distortions of competition suffered by European actors;
Amendment 33 #
2019/2204(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Considers that there is still a strong need to focus on the effective implementation of the Defence Procurement Directive, considers that, for that to happen, the Member States should focus on ensuring equal treatment of suppliers of hardware manufactured in Europe, transparency and competition and that the Commission should focus on providing the Member States with further guidelines on the application of the provisions laid down in the directive;
Amendment 34 #
2019/2204(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Stresses the need for coherence between the implementation of Directive 2009/81 and the European Defence Fund; as such, calls for tenders financed by ‘European’ funds should be reserved for European solutions;
Amendment 39 #
2019/2204(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Wishes, on the other hand, for the exclusion be made more flexible for defence and security cooperation so as to allow for the participation of an additional Member State in a project, even after the R&D phase, and for it to be expanded to cover other forms of cooperation, such as cross-purchases between two Member States and government-to-government markets between Member States, and for user clubs to be created for solutions developed and conceived under the leadership of European industry;
Amendment 40 #
2019/2204(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Considers that the Commission should clarify the conditions for the application of the government-to- government exclusion in order to avoid anti-competitive practices organised by third countries, such as foreign military sales (FMS), which lead to unfair competition and seriously hamper the capabilities of Member States’ companies; calls also for the guidance note on ‘government-to-government’ exclusion to cover new forms of procurement such as the Global-FMS concept;
Amendment 41 #
2019/2204(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 c (new)
Paragraph 5 c (new)
5c. Calls for greater transparency on the advantages offered by the direct and indirect compensation negotiated by third countries in the European Union;
Amendment 49 #
2019/2204(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Recalls that the export of defence- related products, both within the Union and to non-EU countries, must remain at the sole discretion of the Member States.
Amendment 58 #
2019/2204(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Calls on the Commission to introduce a quicker simplified preliminary procedure in the first phase of the infringement procedure (administrative letter requesting explanations) in the event of a clear distortion of competition detrimental to a European company, and to be bold in enforcing the directives, including, where necessary, by making use of infringement procedures;
Amendment 66 #
2019/2204(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21a. Recalls the strategic nature of supply chain security and reaffirms the importance of provisions concerning subcontracting aimed at dramatically limiting the risks associated with supply chains being open or interrupted;
Amendment 71 #
2019/2204(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Considers that better implementation of the directives is critical in order to attain the overarching objective of improving the functioning of the internal market for defence products and of contributing to the establishment of an open EDEM; prioritising European or locally produced hardware;
Amendment 72 #
2019/2204(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)
Paragraph 25 a (new)
25a. Recalls the need to strengthen Member States’ strategic autonomy and technological sovereignty by reducing technological and industrial dependencies and by better controlling foreign subsidies and foreign direct investment in Europe, in order to protect critical European companies against attempts by third countries to control them;
Amendment 41 #
2019/2190(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses that due to the COVID-19 crisis, it is of paramount importance for the protection of EU citizens that the safety of all products needed to tackle the emergency is the highest, especially for medical and protective equipment, including and in particular products from outside the EU; calls, therefore, on the Commission and Member States to strengthen their coordinated actions within the product safety framework;
Amendment 56 #
2019/2190(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Points out the need to adapt product safety rules to the digital world; asks the Commission to address the challenges of emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI), the internet of things (IoT) and robotics in its revision of the General Product Safety Directive (GPSD), and to identify and close gaps within existing legislation such as the Machinery Directive and Radio Equipment Directive, whileensuring coherence among all the different initiatives and avoiding duplicating legislation;
Amendment 62 #
2019/2190(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on the Commission to redefine the term ‘product’ as part of the revision of the GPSD so that it reflects the complexity of emerging technologies, including stand-alone software and software or updates which entail substantial modification to the productsoftware or to how the device on which it operates is used, leading to a de facto new product;
Amendment 68 #
2019/2190(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Proposes that the issue of changing the certification period for evolutionary products be resolved by considering compliance reviews, with certification and warranty, which would be renewed over time during the lifetime of the product; suggests that the proper conduct of these reviews should be duly notified to consumers when purchasing the product, for example by means of a form to be signed, without prejudice to the legal liability applicable in the event of a refusal to sign; stresses that these reviews must enable monitoring of how the evolving system is developing and of the safeguarding of its security over time; considers that the issue of certification standards should be considered in the Commission text; calls for the decision about whether the reviews should be entrusted to the manufacturer, the national regulatory authority, third-party certifiers, or more than one of these together should be left to the Member States; also calls for clarity on what the consequences of a lack of monitoring would be;
Amendment 91 #
2019/2190(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Encourages the Commission to develop measures, such as risk-based assessment schemes and conformity assessment mechanisms, where they do not yet exist, to ensure the safety and security of products with embedded emerging technologies, and to provide support to micro and SMEs to reduce the burden such measures can create;
Amendment 107 #
2019/2190(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Asks the Commission and the Member States to take account of the autonomous self-learning behaviour of AI throughout a product’s lifetime; calls for human oversight and effective checks on high-risk AI products to ensure trust and product safety;
Amendment 113 #
2019/2190(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Encourages economic operatomerging technologies' providers to integrate safety mechanisms in emerging technologies, including self-repair mechanisms, to prevent the upload of unsafe software, raise awareness of safety problems of their products, and ensure safety throughout their lifecycle;
Amendment 119 #
2019/2190(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to enhance connectivity infrastructure, including 5G, in order to improve the safety of connected products while keeping citizens' health as the greater good;
Amendment 122 #
2019/2190(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Stresses that these infrastructures must themselves be subject to thorough, renewed security controls, as they form the framework in which connected products would be likely to exercise their capabilities even as these evolve; calls for particular vigilance with regard to possible back doors in the networks deployed; recommends that the Commission and the Member States give priority to European operators in matters of deployment;
Amendment 135 #
2019/2190(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Calls on the Commission to speed up its efforts to develop a European cybersecurity certification schemes for AI, IoT and robotics products, and to assess whether to create mandatory certification schemes for specific consumer products that can be quickly updated to adapt to current risks without hindering innovation;
Amendment 153 #
2019/2190(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Encourages Member States to increase the resources and expertise of their market surveillance authorities, to enhance cooperation among them, including particular at cross-border level, improve the efficiency and effectiveness of checks, especially where freight traffic is high such as in ports, and properly staff custom authorities so as to be able to identify unsafe products, in particular from third countries, track their origin and prevent and stop their circulation in the internal market;
Amendment 178 #
2019/2190(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Stresses that products directly purchased by consumers from non-EU economic operators must be subject to effective controls on their quality, origin and compliance to the EU regulatory framework; calls on market surveillance authorities to undertake adequate checks on these products and to keep the ICSMS system updated;
Amendment 184 #
2019/2190(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. European consumers have noticed that dangerous products more often come from non-European countries. Products from certain non-EU countries should therefore be subject to controls by the national authorities and the Commission as a matter of priority.
Amendment 199 #
2019/2190(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Urges the Commission to improve and increase, at European and international level, cooperation between consumer protection, market surveillance and customs authorities so as to enable the swift transfer of information on unsafe products;
Amendment 244 #
2019/2190(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Asks the Commission to evaluate the necessity of requiring online platforms to put in place effective and appropriate safeguards to tackle the appearance of advertisements for unsafe products and to block misleading advertisements of these products;
Amendment 261 #
2019/2190(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Emphasises that traceability along the supply chain is key to improving the safety and quality of products, since clear and reliable information on products empowers consumers, including persons with disabilities, to make informed choices, and allows market surveillance authorities to carry out their activities; asks the Commission to update the rules for the traceability requirements of non- harmonised products accordingly;
Amendment 264 #
2019/2190(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28 a (new)
Paragraph 28 a (new)
28a. Stresses that the lack of EU mandatory rules on origin labelling of products and their main components generates uncertainty to consumers who are often misled by the packaging itself; points out that an EU effective and binding traceability system would ensure a higher level of consumer safety for all products placed on the EU market;
Amendment 266 #
2019/2190(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28 a (new)
Paragraph 28 a (new)
28a. Stresses that product traceability throughout the supply chain is essential for informing consumers about the social and environmental safety and the impact of products and their production;
Amendment 9 #
2019/2188(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that the gender pay gap in the 28 EU Member States stands at 15.7 %, that women are more affected by atypical and flexible contracts (zero-hour contracts, temporary work, part-time work, etc.) than men, and that women - particularly unmarried or single mothers - are more likely to experience poverty and fall into the category of the poorest workers as a result of these low-security contracts;
Amendment 12 #
2019/2188(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Notes that the personal and professional objectives of women and men are often different, and that for the majority of posts efforts to achieve equal representation are counterproductive, as women and men do not always have the same aspirations, certain occupations attracting a majority of women or a majority of men;
Amendment 17 #
2019/2188(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that, following the global economic and financial crisis in 2008, in- work poverty in the EU increased from 8 % to 10 %, and that the current unprecedented global COVID-19 pandemic will have even greater economic and financial consequences, which will have a direct impact in terms of increasing poverty, especially among women and the other most vulnerable groups in society, as its effects will be felt most keenly by workers in the service sector, the self- employed, temporary and seasonal workers, etc., among whom a higher proportion are women, and people who, by virtue of their tasks, are more directly exposed to risks, particularly carers and law enforcement officials;
Amendment 18 #
2019/2188(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that, following the global economic and financial crisis in 2008, in- work poverty in the EU increased from 8 % to 10 %, and that the current unprecedented global COVID-19 pandemic will have even greater economic and financial consequences, which will have a direct impact in terms of increasing poverty, especially among women - particularly unmarried or single mothers - and the other most vulnerable groups in society, as its effects will be felt most keenly by workers in the service sector, the self- employed, temporary and seasonal workers, etc., among whom a higher proportion are women;
Amendment 35 #
2019/2188(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes that, although poverty rates among women vary considerably from one Member State to another, the risk of poverty in the risk groups to which older women, single women and single mothers, homosexual, bisexual and transgender women and women with disabilities belong is the same;
Amendment 47 #
2019/2188(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Notes with concern that poverty among women increases with age, with the gender pension gap remaining at around 39 %; calls for the vital role played by mothers in bringing up their children to be accorded greater recognition, particularly in terms of the amount of old age pension they receive;
Amendment 49 #
2019/2188(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Notes with concern that poverty among women increases with age, with the gender pension gap remaining at around 39 %; calls for surviving spouses to be able to draw the pension previously paid to their spouse;
Amendment 57 #
2019/2188(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses that female poverty is a multifaceted problem directly influenced by unequal access to property, career breaks due to the raising and care of children, caring for sick and dependent persons, and segregation in education and, subsequently, in the labour market, due to the growing influence of Islamic law in political, social and societal terms, which means that women account for the largest share of low-paid workers;
Amendment 60 #
2019/2188(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses that female poverty is a multifaceted problem directly influenced by unequal access to property, necessary career breaks due to the raising and care of children, but also caring for sick and dependent persons, and segregation in education and, subsequently, in the labour market, which means that women account for the largest share of low-paid workers;
Amendment 67 #
2019/2188(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Stresses that women are often on the front line in the COVID-19 crisis, which will lead to recognition and appreciation of the crucial role played by women in all segments of our societies;
Amendment 84 #
2019/2188(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Commission to come forward as soon as possible with proposals to close the gender pay gap., without forgetting that subsidiarity makes social policies a matter for the Member States, which enjoy sovereignty in this regard;
Amendment 87 #
2019/2188(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Commission to come forward as soon as possible with proposals to close the gender pay gap. in cases where the work done and the skills brought to it are the same;
Amendment 42 #
2019/2169(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas structures and stereotypes throughout the worldand the increasing application of Islamic law in a large number of countries and segments of societies perpetuate inequality throughout the world, and whereas overcoming these structures and stereotypes will advance gender equality; whereas a strong women’s rights movement is needed to uphold democratic values, fundamental rights and women’s rights in particular, and whereas threats to women’s rights also represent threats to democracy;
Amendment 48 #
2019/2169(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
Amendment 55 #
2019/2169(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas European countries, in view of their spiritual and civilisational heritage, have a duty to defend equality between men and women, while preserving their respective differences and original features, which constitutes an essential foundation for the development of individuals; whereas in this connection all so-called gender theories, as well as any desire to make the gender identity of individuals indeterminate should be rejected and resisted;
Amendment 63 #
2019/2169(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas violence against women in all its forms is a violation of human rights and one of the biggest obstacles to achieving gender equality; whereas a life free from violence is a prerequisite for equality; whereas disinformation campaigns on gender equality also focus on the issue of violence against women, as has been seen in relation to the Istanbul Convention;
Amendment 72 #
2019/2169(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
Amendment 84 #
2019/2169(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
Ea. whereas men and women, who play complementary roles in maintaining families, should be able to benefit from measures designed to ensure that the task of educating children takes place under the best possible conditions; whereas also the educational role played by mothers in particular during childhood should be recognised, valued and benefit as far as possible from appropriate financial and fiscal provisions;
Amendment 91 #
2019/2169(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
Amendment 105 #
2019/2169(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas poverty in Europe disproportionately affects women, in particular single mothers, women with disabilities, and the elderly, migrant and ethnic minority women;
Amendment 112 #
2019/2169(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
Amendment 127 #
2019/2169(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
I. whereas access to comprehensive and age-appropriate information, and to sex and relationship education, as well as access to sexual and reproductive healthcare, are essential to achieving gender equality;
Amendment 151 #
2019/2169(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K a (new)
Recital K a (new)
Amendment 152 #
2019/2169(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K b (new)
Recital K b (new)
Kb. whereas the personal and professional objectives of women and men are often different, and whereas for the majority of posts efforts to achieve equal representation are counterproductive, as women and men do not have the same aspirations, with some occupations attracting a majority of women or a majority of men;
Amendment 156 #
2019/2169(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
Amendment 165 #
2019/2169(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 171 #
2019/2169(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The main objectives of gender equality policies are: - to combat violence and inequality caused in particular by social standards dictated by religious and community groups hostile towards the respect to shown women that is inherent in European civilisation; - equal pay for men and women for equal work and equal skills; - economic support for mothers and pregnant women; - to increase pension rights for women who have raised their children; - to fight domestic violence;
Amendment 172 #
2019/2169(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
Amendment 182 #
2019/2169(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Demands that equality between men and women be an essential element of Union policies, while deeply respecting mutual differences and complementarities between men and women, and calls to this end for European funds to be used to target specific actions to support citizens and not just to promote ideological campaigns, whose sole objective is to develop new gender models;
Amendment 195 #
2019/2169(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Amendment 208 #
2019/2169(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Calls for violence against women to be punished with the most severe criminal penalties; insists that a ban be imposed under press laws on the use of the term 'honour crime' employed in some European societies to describe the murder of young girls who refuse to bow to the demands of Islamic law;
Amendment 211 #
2019/2169(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the plan to table an additional recommendation on the prevention of harmful practices, and to launch an EU network on the prevention of both gender-based and domestic violence; requests that the definitions and goals of the Istanbul Convention be applied and that women’s rights and civil society organisations be involved on a continuous basisdeclares resolutely that the application of Islamic law today constitutes the most important factor increasing violence against women in the world, including in the Member States of the European Union with a significant Muslim population;
Amendment 212 #
2019/2169(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the plan to table an additional recommendation on the prevention of harmful practices, and to launch an EU network on the prevention of both gender-based and domestic violence; requests that the definitions and goals of the Istanbul Convention be applied and that women’s rights and civil society organisations be involved on a continuous basis;
Amendment 214 #
2019/2169(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the plan to table an additional recommendation on the prevention of harmful practices, and to launch an EU network on the prevention of both gender-based and domestic violence; requests that the definitions and goals of the Istanbul Convention be applied and that women’s rights and civil society organisations be involved on a continuous basis without causing an increase in the EU budget;
Amendment 239 #
2019/2169(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Urges the Commission to present the long-awaited EU strategy on the eradication of trafficking in human beings and underlines the need for a clear gender focus, as women and girls are the most affected and are trafficked for purposes of sexual exploitation; insists on the importance of including measures and strategies to reduce demand; demands that surveys be carried out among the chancelleries and diplomatic representations to the European Union of countries known to be practising slavery in order to verify whether such practices are not covered by the immunity conferred on them;
Amendment 243 #
2019/2169(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Urges the Commission to present the long-awaited EU strategy on the eradication of trafficking in human beings and underlines the need for a clear gender focus, as women and girls are the most affected and are trafficked for purposes of sexual exploitation and organ trafficking; insists on the importance of including measures and strategies to reduce demandput an end to human trafficking;
Amendment 253 #
2019/2169(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. WelcomNotes the announcement of a new EU-wide survey on the prevalence and dynamics of violence against women;
Amendment 258 #
2019/2169(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Stresses that the promotion of uncontrolled migration flows leads to serious violations of the rights of women who are often exploited and discriminated against by transnational and transcontinental criminal organisations operating in the area of human trafficking;
Amendment 263 #
2019/2169(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
Amendment 289 #
2019/2169(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Welcomes the Commission’s commitment to table binding measures on pay transparency by the end of 2020; points out, however,Points out that the issue of equal pay for equal work or work of equal value across different occupational sectors still needs to be addressed; strongly recommends the inclusion of the principle of equal pay for work of equal value between women and men, which could be defined as follows: ‘Work shall be deemed of equal value if, based on a comparison of two groups of workers which have not been formed in an arbitrary manner, the work performed is comparable, taking into account factors such as the working conditions, the degree of responsibility conferred on the workers, and the physical or mental requirements of the work’; points out that gender-neutral job evaluation tools and classification criteria need to be developed for this purpose;
Amendment 307 #
2019/2169(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
Amendment 319 #
2019/2169(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
Amendment 330 #
2019/2169(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
Amendment 342 #
2019/2169(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
Amendment 360 #
2019/2169(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Urges that gender mainstreaming be incorporated into EU environmental and climate policies, such as the Green Deal, that financial and institutional support, gender expertise and strong policy measures to encourage the equal participation of women in decision-making bodies and national- and local-level climate policy be guaranteed, and that recognition and support be given to women and girls as agents for change; calls on the European authorities to treat the climate issue with all the seriousness it deserves and to avoid recourse to media figures, in particular minors, whose independence and credibility are open to question on this account;
Amendment 374 #
2019/2169(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Notes that tax policies have varying impacts on different types of households; stresses that individual taxation is instrumental in terms of achieving tax fairness for wcan have positive consequences in order to help parents, and more particularly mothers, carry out their educational tasks at homen;
Amendment 386 #
2019/2169(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
Amendment 397 #
2019/2169(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Deplores the fact that such a remarkable and courageous personality as Taslima Nasrin had to flee Germany and then Sweden to take refuge in the United States and India; calls on the aforementioned Member States of the European Union to make amends for the harm she has suffered and to provide her with diplomatic protection;
Amendment 398 #
2019/2169(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 b (new)
Paragraph 18 b (new)
18b. Deplores likewise the fact that Ayaan Hirsi Ali, even though of Dutch nationality, was forced to emigrate to the United States, where she received American nationality, after the refusal of her own government to ensure her protection; calls on the Member States of the European Union to make amends for the harm she has suffered and to provide her with diplomatic protection;
Amendment 401 #
2019/2169(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
Amendment 413 #
2019/2169(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
Amendment 424 #
2019/2169(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
Amendment 12 #
2019/2167(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the principle of equality between women and men is a core value of the EU, and gender mainstreaming should therefore be implemented and integrated into all EU activities and policies; whereas the EU should contribute to creating a world in which all people, regardless of gender, sexual orientation, race and ability can live peacefully, enjoying equal rights and the same opportunity to realise their potential;
Amendment 13 #
2019/2167(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the principle of equality and complementarity between women and men, with their respective differences, is a core value of the EU, and gender mainstreaming should therefore be implemented and integrated into all EU activities and policies; whereas the EU should contribute to creating a world in which all people, regardless of gender, sexual orientation, race and ability can live peacefully, enjoying equal rights and the same opportunity to realise their potential;
Amendment 22 #
2019/2167(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas women and girls are particularly affected by violence, poverty, armed conflicts and the impact of the climate emergency; whereas there is a growing global trend towards authoritarianism and an increasing number of fundamentalist groups, both of which are clearly linked to a backlash against women’s and LGBTIQ+ rights; whereas any understanding of security that focuses on States rather than human beings is defective and will not lead to peace;
Amendment 25 #
2019/2167(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas women and girls are particularly affected by violence, poverty, armed conflicts and the impact of the climate emergency; whereas there is a growing global trend towards authoritarianism and an increasing number of fundamentalist groups, particularly associated with radical Islam, both of which are clearly linked to a backlash against women’s and LGBTIQ+ rights; whereas any understanding of security that focuses on States rather than human beings is defective and will not lead to peace;
Amendment 29 #
2019/2167(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas women and girls are particularly affected by violence, poverty, armed conflicts and the impact of the climate emergency; whereas there is a growing global trend towards authoritarianism and an increasing number of fundamentalist groups, both of which are clearly linked to a backlash against women’s and LGBTIQ+ rights; whereas any understanding of security that focuses on States rather than human beings is defective and will not lead to peace;
Amendment 41 #
2019/2167(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
Amendment 46 #
2019/2167(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
Amendment 58 #
2019/2167(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
Ea. whereas international relations are primarily a prerogative of sovereign States and whereas their freedom in that regard must not be encroached upon;
Amendment 66 #
2019/2167(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas GAP II constituted an important step forward inefforts to fostering gender equality in the EU’s external relations, but its implementation still displays a number of shortcomings such as a narrow scope, the absence of gender- responsive budgeting, a lack of commitment on the part of the EU’s leaders, and a lack of institutional architecture and incentives to motivate and adequately support staffare very seriously hampered, on a daily basis, by the rise of Islamic principles, both in a social and in a societal context, in societies where Islam is the majority religion, but also in countries that are members of the European Union and which are confronted with mass immigration, jeopardising the foundations of European civilisation;
Amendment 70 #
2019/2167(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
Amendment 73 #
2019/2167(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H a (new)
Recital H a (new)
Ha. whereas women must be able, if they so wish and provided that they are equally competent, to be selected for the same posts and responsibilities, in return for the same pay, as men;
Amendment 76 #
2019/2167(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
Amendment 79 #
2019/2167(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I a (new)
Recital I a (new)
Ia. whereas the personal and professional objectives of women and men are often different, and whereas for the majority of posts efforts to achieve equal representation are counterproductive, as women and men do not have the same aspirations, certain occupations attracting a majority of women or a majority of men;
Amendment 87 #
2019/2167(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J
Recital J
J. whereas progress has been made in the realisation of sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) across the world, but important shortcomings continue to exist and threats of regression persist; whereas in 2018 the number of EU actions on SRHR decreased and the lowest number of global actions by Commission services on gender equality pertained to SRHRmedically assisted procreation can only be made available to infertile couples of different sexes who are either married or in a stable relationship;
Amendment 96 #
2019/2167(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital L
Recital L
Amendment 104 #
2019/2167(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital M
Recital M
Amendment 112 #
2019/2167(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Calls on the EU and its Member States to commit to advancing towards a foreign and security policy that incorporates a gender-transformative vision, putting the need to address unequal structures and power relations at its centre; stresses the need for such policy to be grounded in rigorous gender analysis and systematic gender impact assessm, in their external relations, to defend women who are victims of discrimination because of political and ideological systems that reduce them to second-class citizents, and for a meaningful and equitable role at all levels and stages of decision-making to be secured for women and for people from diverse backgroundsparticularly in countries which apply Islamic law;
Amendment 121 #
2019/2167(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 149 #
2019/2167(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses the need to ensure continued commitment at the highest political levels to the implementation of GAP III; requests that GAP III specify that 85 % of official development assistance (ODA) should go to programmes which have gender equality as a significant or as a principal objective, and that, within this broader commitment, 20 % of ODA should be allocated to programmes with gender equality, including SRHR, as a principal objective; calls for further targeted actions to achieve gender equality; calls, furthermore, for the new plan to strengthen qualitative analyses and to move beyond the ‘box ticking’ logic to assess the real impact of such programmes in advancing gender equalityConsiders that the main conditions and objectives of official development assistance (ODA) should be gender equality and combating migration;
Amendment 154 #
2019/2167(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 166 #
2019/2167(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
Amendment 184 #
2019/2167(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Calls on the Member States to create a formal Council working group on gender equalitythe situation of women who are under the yoke of Islamic law around the world;
Amendment 190 #
2019/2167(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Welcomes the work done by the EEAS Principal Adviser on gender; regrets, however, the limited capacity in terms of staff and resources assigned to this position, and calls for its holder to report directly to the VP/HR; calls on the VP/HR to create an organisational division within the EEAS on gender equality and the WPS agenda, and to have a full-time gender adviser in each EEAS Directorate, reporting directly to the Principal AdviserRegrets that, in its recommendations and its action, the EEAS does not take into account the situation of women in countries with Islamic cultures and does not in any way take their situation into account, in particular, in connection with the allocation of funding to third countries;
Amendment 195 #
2019/2167(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
Amendment 202 #
2019/2167(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
Amendment 209 #
2019/2167(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
Amendment 224 #
2019/2167(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
Amendment 229 #
2019/2167(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
Amendment 241 #
2019/2167(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Calls on the EU Delegations to monitor the backlash against gender equality and SRHR and the tendency towards shrinking space for civil society, and to take specific steps to protect them; urges the Commission, the EEAS, the Member States and Heads of EU Delegations to ensure political and financial support to local CSOs, including women’s organisations and human rights defenders, and to make cooperation and consultation with them a standard element of their workreserve the privilege of medically assisted procreation for couples of different sexes who are infertile and are either married or in a stable relationship;
Amendment 9 #
2019/0101(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) The type-approval requirements relating to emissions from motor vehicles have been gradually and significantly tightened through the introduction and subsequent revision of Euro standards. While vehicles in general have delivered substantial emission reductions across the range of regulated pollutants, this was not the case for NOx emissions from diesel engines or particles for gasoline direct injection engines, installed in particular in light-duty vehicles. Actions for correcting this situation are therefore needed, while not penalising individuals who already own vehicles with diesel or direct injection petrol engines.
Amendment 10 #
2019/0101(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3 a (new)
Recital 3 a (new)
(3a) The transparency of repair information for internal market actors is an important value of the Union, especially for Europeans wishing to sell or buy a second-hand car in Europe.
Amendment 1 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Draft opinion
Citation 1
Citation 1
Amendment 4 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Draft opinion
Citation 2
Citation 2
Amendment 7 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Draft opinion
Citation 3
Citation 3
Amendment 21 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Draft opinion
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas two draft laws stemming from citizens’ initiatives are before the Polish Parliament, one of which seeks to tighten up even further a law on abortion which is already one of the most restrictive in the EU, and the other to make providing sexual education to minors a criminal offence punishable by imprisonment;
Amendment 22 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Draft opinion
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas two draft laws stemming from citizens’ initiatives are before the Polish Parliament, one of which seeks to tighten up even further a law on abortion which is already one of the most restrictive in the EU, and the other to make providing sexual education to minors a criminal offence punishable by imprisonmentand whereas their content and possible adoption come under the sovereignty of Poland;
Amendment 30 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Draft opinion
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas the members of the Sejm were democratically elected on the basis of proportional representation, and whereas the Polish people elected their representatives freely and in the exercise of their sovereignty;
Amendment 31 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Draft opinion
Recital D
Recital D
Amendment 37 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Draft opinion
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas in 2019, the Polish people freely chose to elect to the Sejm a majority of members whose stance on abortion was known to the electorate; whereas it is not for supranational or foreign institutions and NGOs to state their opinions on matters of national competence when citizens can vote freely and governments and assemblies are elected democratically;
Amendment 44 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the factNotes that on 16 April 2020 the Polish Parliament voted to refer back to committee the two draft laws stemming from citizens’ initiatives on access to abortion and on the sexual education of minors;
Amendment 46 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 54 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Considers that legislation on abortion, as with all laws, comes under national sovereignty, primarily that of each country’s parliamentary institutions, and that the European Parliament should not become involved in a national, democratic matter in Poland;
Amendment 60 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
Amendment 69 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Considers that legislation on abortion must go hand in hand with measures to prevent abortion, given the large number of contraceptive techniques in existence today;
Amendment 75 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Amendment 86 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 92 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 100 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Deplores the fact that this campaign to discredit Poland in the eyes of the European Parliament is an example of the modus operandi of the EU, which actively distorts national democratic processes and undermines Europe’s diversity;
Amendment 43 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital -1 (new)
Recital -1 (new)
(-1) Whereas foreign companies have nearly tripled their public procurement contracts in Europe in 5 years, and whereas, according to the Commission's figures, non-European companies were awarded public contracts in the European Union worth 32 billion in 2017 compared with 10-17 billion in 2021; whereas the Commission admits that it has no information on the biggest procurement contracts awarded to European companies in the US and China.
Amendment 45 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) In accordance with Article 21 of the Treaty on European Union, the Union is to define and pursue common policies and actions, and improve cooperation in all fields in international relations in order, inter alia, to encourage the integration of all countries into the world economy, including through the progressive abolition of restrictions on internationallimiting unnecessary barriers to European trade.
Amendment 46 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1 a (new)
Recital 1 a (new)
(1a) In accordance with Article 18 of the Treaty establishing the EEC in 1957, the Member States shall declare their willingness to contribute to the development of international trade and the reduction of barriers to trade by entering into reciprocal and mutually- advantageous arrangements.
Amendment 47 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) Pursuant to Article 206 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, the Union, by establishing a customs union, is to contribute, in the common interest, to the harmonious development of world trade, the progressive abolition of by limiting unnecessary restrictions on international trade and on foreign direct investment, and the lowering of customs and other barriers.
Amendment 48 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3 a (new)
Recital 3 a (new)
(3a) Cooperation in Europe will bear fruit for all countries only if it is based on Community preference.
Amendment 50 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) Many third countries are reluctant or refuse to open their public procurement and their concessions markets to international competition, or to open those markets further than what they have already done. As a result, Union economic operators face restrictive procurement practices in many of the trading partner of the Union. Those restrictive procurement practices result in the loss of substantial trading opportunities. In this context, the introduction of measures aimed at encouraging the opening of third countries' public procurement markets and at achieving mutual reciprocity is a necessary stage in defending the commercial interests of the Member States and the Union. However, if the measures were to prove insufficient and European companies continued to encounter problems accessing the public procurement and concessions markets of third countries, the Commission and the Member States should investigate introducing more effective trade defence instruments without delay.
Amendment 53 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8 a (new)
Recital 8 a (new)
(8a) While many third countries persist in limiting access to their public procurement markets, large sections of the Union's public procurement markets remain open to international competition. Union companies operating in the internal market are thus confronted by unfair competition from economic operators based outside the Union, particularly where the latter receive government subsidies.
Amendment 54 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8 b (new)
Recital 8 b (new)
Amendment 64 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) In view of the fact that the access of third country goods and services to the public procurement market of the Union falls within the scope of the common commercial policy, Member States and their contracting authorities and contracting entities should not be able tomay, in keeping with the spirit of this Regulation, restrict the access of third country goods or services to their tendering procedures by any other measure than those provided for in this Regulationin order to ensure that foreign economic operators respect environmental, social and labour laws and all applicable national laws.
Amendment 71 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) If the existence of a restrictive and/or discriminatory procurement measure or practice in a third country is confirmed, the Commission should invite the country concerned to enter into consultations with a view to improving the tendering opportunities for Union economic operators, goods and services in respect of public procurement in that country. In order to encourage the country concerned promptly to take an active part in this dialogue, the Commission should decide, when the consultation procedure starts, to introduce on a temporary basis some measures set out in this Regulation, namely exclusion from participation in tendering procedures in EU public procurement markets or from price adjustment measures. The measures would apply to tenders from economic operators originating in that country and/or which deal with products and services originating in that country.
Amendment 75 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) If the consultations with the country concerned do not lead to sufficient improvements to the tendering opportunities for Union economic operators, goods and services within a reasonable timeframe, the Commission should be able to adopt, where appropriate, price adjustment measure applying to tenders submitted by economic operators originating in that country and/or including goods and services originating in that countryprolong the measures introduced at the start of the consultation procedure and where necessary to adopt additional measures contained in this Regulation.
Amendment 79 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
Recital 24
Amendment 84 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27
Recital 27
(27) It is imperative that contracting authorities and contracting entities have access to a range of high-quality products meeting their purchasing requirements at a competitive price while remaining aware of the need to guarantee the long-term economic and social interests of the Member States and European citizens and consumers. Therefore contracting authorities and contracting entities should be able not to apply price adjustment measures limiting access of non-covered goods and services in case there are no Union and/or covered goods or services available which meet the requirements of the contracting authority or contracting entity to safeguard essential public needs, for example in the fields of health and public safety, or where the application of the measure would lead to a disproportionate increase in the price or costs of the contract.
Amendment 91 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
This Regulation establishes measures intended to improve the access of Union economic operators, goods and services to the public procurement and concessions markets of third countries and to guarantee equal conditions of competition in the internal market. It lays down procedures for the Commission to undertake investigations into alleged restrictive and discriminatory procurement measures or practices adopted or maintained by third countries against Union economic operators, goods and services, and to enter into consultations with the third countries concerned.
Amendment 92 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
It provides for the possibility of applying price adjustment measures to certain tenders for contracts for the execution of works or a work, for the supply of goods and/or the provision of services and for concessions, and measures aimed at excluding access to EU public procurement markets, on the basis of the origin of the economic operators, goods or services concerned. .
Amendment 98 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 5
Article 1 – paragraph 5
5. Member States and their contracting authorities and contracting entities shall notmay, in keeping with the spirit of this Regulation, apply restrictive measures in respect ofto third country economic operators, goods and services beyond those provided for in this Regulation in order to ensure that foreign economic operators comply with environmental, social and labour laws and all applicable national laws.
Amendment 107 #
2012/0060(COD)
Where an Islamist terrorist act takes place in the EU which is supported by demonstrators in a third country without their facing action by the government, the country concerned shall not be granted trade preferences or exemptions for access to the European internal market.
Amendment 108 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Local elected representatives may promote local employment and use of the official language in local calls for tenders by means of environmental, social or linguistic clauses which are mandatory even for subcontractors.
Amendment 111 #
2012/0060(COD)
2. The assessment by the Commission of whether the alleged restrictive and/or discriminatory procurement measures or practices have been adopted or are maintained by the third country concerned shall be made on the basis of the information supplied by interested parties and Member States, of facts collected by the Commission during its investigation, or both. The assessmentinvestigation shall be concluded within a period of eightsix months after theits initiation of the investigation. In duly justified cases, this period may be extended by fourthree months.
Amendment 115 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Where it is found as a result of an investigation that restrictive and/or discriminatory procurement measures or practices have been adopted or maintained by a third country and the Commission considers it to be in the Union interest, the Commission shall invite the country in question to enter into consultations. Those consultations shall aim at ensuring that Union economic operators, goods and services can participate in tendering procedures for the award of public procurement or concession contracts in that country on conditions no less favourable than those accorded to national economic operators, goods and services of that country and also with a view to ensuring the application of the principles of transparency and equal treatment. In order to encourage the country concerned promptly to take an active part in this dialogue, the Commission should decide, when the consultation procedure starts, to introduce on a temporary basis some measures set out in this Regulation, namely exclusion from participation in tendering procedures in EU public procurement markets or from price adjustment measures. The measures would apply to tenders from economic operators which originate in that country and/or which deal with products and services originating in that country.
Amendment 119 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3 – point i
Article 7 – paragraph 3 – point i
(i) resume consultations with the third country concerned, and/orprolong the measure(s) introduced at the start of the consultation procedure;
Amendment 121 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3 – point ii – paragraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 3 – point ii – paragraph 1
decide, by implementing act, to impose a price adjustment measure pursuant to Article 8dditional measures under this Regulation.
Amendment 126 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 6
Article 7 – paragraph 6
6. In the event that consultations with a third country do not lead to satisfactory results within 15 months from the day those consultations started, the Commission shall terminate the consultations and shall take appropriate action. In particular, the Commission may decide, by means of an implementing act, to impose or extend the exclusion of companies from the country concerned that are participating in tendering procedures for the award of EU public procurement contracts or to impose a price adjustment measure, pursuant to Article 8. That implementing act shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 14(2).
Amendment 129 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – title
Article 8 – title
Amendment 130 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Where it emerges, in the course of an investigation under Article 6 and after following the procedure specified in Article 7, that restrictive public procurement measures adopted or maintained by that third country are resulting in a substantial lack of reciprocity regarding market access between the Union and that third country, the Commission may adopt implementing acts in order to extend the exclusion of undertakings from the country concerned that are participating in tendering procedures for the award of EU public procurement contracts and/or adopt price adjustment measures. Tenders more than 50 % of the total value of which is made of goods and/or services originating in a third country, may be subject to a price adjustmentsuch measures where the third country concerned adopts or maintains restrictive and/or discriminatory procurement measures or practices.
Amendment 133 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 134 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The price adjustment measure shall specify the penalty of up to 20% to be calculated on the price of the tenders concerned. It shalMeasures adopted pursuant to paragraph 1 may take one of the following forms: (a) the exclusion of tenders of which over 50% of the total valso specify any restrictions toue is made up of goods or services originating in the scope of application of the measure, such as those related to:untry adopting or maintaining restrictive procurement practices and/or (b) a price adjustment measure.
Amendment 135 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a
Amendment 136 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) public procurement of specific categories of contracting authorities or contracting entities; The price adjustment measure shall specify a penalty of 25-40% to be calculated on the tender prices in question, taking into account any state aid or other subsidies granted to the economic operator. It shall also specify any restrictions to the scope of the measure in practice, such as those related to : (a) public procurement by specific categories of contracting authorities or contracting entities; (b) public procurement for specific categories of goods or services or tenders submitted by specific categories of economic operator; (c) public procurement contracts above or below certain thresholds; (d) tenders submitted for specific categories of concession; (e) the territories of certain subcentral levels of government.
Amendment 137 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point b
Amendment 138 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point c
Amendment 139 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point d
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point d
Amendment 140 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point e
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point e
Amendment 149 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – title
Article 10 – title
Withdrawal or suspension of procurement market exclusion or price adjustment measures
Amendment 151 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
The Commission may decide, by implementing act, to withdraw the procurement market exclusion or price adjustment measure or suspend its application for a period of time if the country concerned takes satisfactory remedial or corrective actions.
Amendment 152 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Where the remedial or corrective actions taken by the third country concerned are rescinded, suspended or improperly implemented, the Commission may reinstate the application of the procurement market exclusion and/or price adjustment measure, at any time, by means of an implementing act.
Amendment 153 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Where the remedial or corrective actions taken by the third country concerned are rescinded, suspended or improperly implemented, the Commission may reinstate the application of the price adjustment or procurement market exclusion measure, at any time, by means of an implementing act.
Amendment 155 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – title
Article 11 – title
Application of procurement market exclusion or price adjustment measures
Amendment 156 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Contracting authorities and contracting entities on the list adopted pursuant to Article 9 shall apply price adjustmentrestrictive measures to the following:
Amendment 157 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point b – paragraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point b – paragraph 1
tenders offering goods and services originating in the third country concerned, where the value of those goods, jobs and services accounts for more than 50 % of the total value of the tender.
Amendment 159 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Where a price adjustment measure is applied, contracting authorities and contracting entities shall require tenderers to provide information on the origin of the goods and/or services contained in the tender, and on the value of the goods and services originating in the third country concerned as a percentage of the total value of the tender. They shall accept self- declarations from tenderers.
Amendment 160 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Contracting authorities and contracting entities may decide not to apply the procurement market exclusion or price adjustment measure with respect to a procurement or a concession procedure if:
Amendment 167 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point b
Amendment 171 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point b – indent 1 (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point b – indent 1 (new)
- this is justified for overriding reasons of public interest.
Amendment 175 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2
Article 12 – paragraph 2
2. Where a contracting authority or contracting entity intends not to apply a price adjustmentrestrictive measure , it shall indicate its intention in the contract notice that it publishes pursuant to Article 49 of Directive 2014/24/EU or Article 69 of Directive 2014/25/EU or in the concession notice pursuant to Article 31 of Directive 2014/23/EU. It shall notify the Commission no later than ten calendar days after the publication of the contract notice.
Amendment 178 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
In the event that a contracting authority or contracting entity conducts a negotiated procedure without prior publication, under Article 2 of Directive 2014/24/EU or under Article 50 of Directive 2014/25/EU and decides not to apply a price adjustmentrestrictive measure , it shall indicate this in the contract award notice it publishes pursuant to Article 50 of Directive 2014/24/EU or Article 70 of Directive 2014/25/EU or in the concession award notice it publishes pursuant to Article 32 of Directive 2014/23/EU and notify the Commission no later than ten calendar days after the publication of the contract award notice.
Amendment 185 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 1 a (new)
The Commission shall collect and publish annually information on the 10 largest contracts awarded to European companies in third countries; The Commission shall collect and publish annually information on the 10 largest public procurement contracts awarded to third-country companies in the internal market.