28 Amendments of Christofer FJELLNER related to 2011/2084(INI)
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 4
Citation 4
– having regard to the relevant case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union1, __________________ 1 In particular the judgments in the following cases: Schindler 1994 (C- 275/92), Gebhard 1995 (C-55/94), Läärä 1999 (C-124/97), Zenatti 1999 (C-67/98), Anomar 2003 (C-6/01), Gambelli 2003 (C- 243/01), Lindman 2003 (C-42/02), Fixtures Marketing Ltd v OPAP 2004 (C-444/02), Fixtures Marketing Ltd v Svenska Spel AB 2004 (C-338/02), Fixtures Marketing Ltd v Oy Veikkaus Ab 2005 (C-46/02), Stauffer 2006 (C-386/04), Unibet 2007 (C-432/05), Placanica and others 2007 (C-338/04, C- 359/04 and C-360/04), Kommission v Italien 2007 (C-206/04), Liga Portuguesa de Futebol Profissional 2009 (C-42/07), Ladbrokes 2010 (C-258/08), Sporting Exchange 2010 (C-203/08), Sjöberg and Gerdin 2010 (C-447/08 and C-448/08), Markus Stoß and others 2010 (C-316/07, C-358/07, C-359/07, C-360/07, C-409/07 and C-410/07), Carmen Media 2010 (C- 46/08) and, Engelmann 2010 (C-64/08), Neukirchinger 2011 (C-382/08), Webb 1981 (C-279/80) and Canal Satélite Digital SL 2002 (C-390/99).
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the Internet gambling market is growing constantly, and European operators leading international technology and development in gaming,
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas gambling services fall under Article 56 TFEU and are thus covered by the rules on the provision of services,
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas gambling services are subject to a number of EU acts such as the Audiovisual Media Services Directive, the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive, the Distance Selling Directive, the Anti- Money Laundering Directive, the Data Protection Directive, the Directive on privacy and electronic communication, and the Directive on the common system of value added tax,
Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas market fragmentation not only makes it difficult for regulated providers to supply legal offeringprovide lawful gaming services on a cross- border basis, but also makes it virtually impossible to protect consumers and combat the crime associated with gambling,
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas market fragmentation not only makes it difficult for regulated providers to supply legal offerings on a cross-border basis, but also makes it virtually impossiblefor regulators to protect consumers and combat thepotential crime associated with illegal gambling,
Amendment 38 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas Article 56 TFEU guarantees the freedom to provide services, but Internet gambling was expressly exempted from the Services Directive because it is not a normal service,
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Recital F a (new)
Fa. whereas gambling is an economic activity to which internal market rules, namely freedom of establishment and freedom to provide services, apply; while restrictive measures imposed by Member States must be justified, appropriate, proportionate and necessary as laid down by the case-law of the Court of Justice,
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas Internet gambling and betting involve a greater risk of addiction and dangers thans with traditional physical, location- based gambling,
Amendment 55 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas Internet gambling and betting involvethere is no scientific evidence to suggest that on-line gaming constitutes a greater risk of addition and dangers than traditional physical, location- based gambling,
Amendment 59 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas gambling represents a considerable source of revenue for thewhich Member States, for can channel to publicly beneficial and charitable purposes and for the funding of sport,
Amendment 79 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point 2
Paragraph 1 – point 2
(2) contain the illegal gambling market"black market" as defined in the Commission Green Paper,
Amendment 101 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Underscores the standpoint of the European Court of Justice12, that the Internet is simply a channel for offering games of chance, not a separate market;
Amendment 106 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Is of the opinionRecognizes that the gambling sector has been very much shaped by the Member States' different traditions and cultures and that the gambling markets there for are very differently regulated, giving the subsidiarity principle a particularly important role in this sectorwhich has lead to the view that the principle of subsidiary has a particularly important role to play as far as gambling legislation is concerned;
Amendment 108 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Urges the European Commission to expand its enquiry to cover traditional physical gambling distribution channels as well as the online gambling distribution channel;
Amendment 116 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Recognizes however the consistent jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union emphasizing that national controls should be enacted and applied in a consistent, proportionate and non-discriminatory manner;
Amendment 118 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Rejects, accordingly, any European legislative act uniformly regulating the entire gambling market, but nonetheless takes the view that, in some sectors, a uniform European approach would be appropriateTakes the view that, a common and consistent European approach would be appropriate to regulate the gambling sector in Europe and to provide European consumers with a minimum standard of consumer protection which is essential given the cross-border nature of online gambling services;
Amendment 142 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Insists, however, that Member States which open up the Internet gambling market must ensure complete transparency and make non-discriminatory competition possible; suggest, in this instance, to the Member States that they introduce a licensing model which makes it possible for any European gambling provider meeting the conditions imposed by Member States to apply for a licence and which avoids additional administrative burdens by avoiding the duplication of requirements and controls;
Amendment 151 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Insists, however, that Member States which open up the Internet gambling market must ensure complete transparency and, make non-discriminatory competition possible; suggest, in this instance, to the Member Sta, guarantese that they introduce aany licensing model which makes it possible for anyll European gambling provider meeting the conditions imposed by Member States to apply for a licencebe awarded a license and that they avoid administrative burden by not duplicating requirements and controls between Member States;
Amendment 162 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Is of the opinion that currently the principle of mutual recognition of licences on the gambling market does not apply, but that nevertheless, in keeping with the internal market, simplified licence application procedures should be set up in some Member States;
Amendment 164 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Calls - in keeping with the principle of ‘active subsidiarity’ - for a common regulatory framework laying down binding high-level minimum standards with regard to preventing gambling addiction and betting fraud and to protecting young people; states that, where a provider complies with those minimum standards, the other Member States should recognise this accordingly, but may set further conditions; is of the opinion that a pan- European code of conduct for Internet gambling could be a first step;
Amendment 167 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Calls - in keeping with the principle of ‘active subsidiarity’ - for a common regulatory framework laying down binding high-level minimum standards with regard to preventing gambling addiction and betting fraud and to protecting young people; states that, where a provider complies with those minimum standards, the other Member States should recognise this accordingly, but may set further conditions; is of the opinion that a pan- European code of conduct for Internet gambling could be a first stepsuch as the CEN Workshop Agreement could be a first step towards such a framework;
Amendment 185 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Calls on the Commission, should no other agreement be reached, to propose a directive on minimum standards; states that, if necessary, thought should be given to stepped-up cooperation between Member States; to create a more uniform approach to gambling legislation, pending proposals from the Commission;
Amendment 186 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Calls on the Commission and the Member Sts guardian of the Treaties, into concert,tinue to carry out effective checks on compliance with the conditions set by Member StatesEU law and to penalise infringements;
Amendment 193 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Urges the Commission to continue its investigation in the possible inconsistencies of Member States gambling legislation (offline and online) with the TFEU and – if necessary – to pursue those infringement proceedings that are pending since 2008 to ensure that consistency;
Amendment 199 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Reminds the Commission as “guardian of the treaties” of its duty to swiftly act upon reception of complaints of violations of the freedoms enshrined in the Treaties; calls on the Commission therefore to urgently and systematically pursue existing and new infringement cases:
Amendment 245 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. notes that online operators licensed in the EU already play a role in identifying potential instances of corruption in sports;
Amendment 272 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Calls on the Commission and Member States to work with all sports stakeholders with a view to identifying the appropriate mechanisms necessary to preserve the integrity of sports and the funding of grassroots sports;