25 Amendments of Andreas SCHWAB related to 2020/2028(INI)
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas the European system of technical regulation and standardisation has demonstrated to be a driver for competitiveness, innovation and consumer safety in Europe, making European standards a global benchmark;
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas the current gaps in the content of harmonised standards are an obstacle to Member States in meeting their responsibilities with regard to structural safety, health and other construction-related matters;
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Points to the specific nature of the CPR, which differs in some areas from the general principles of the new legislative framework (NLF), chiefly because it does not harmonise any specific requirements or minimum safety levels for construction products, but instead defines a common technical language for measurassessing the performance of construction products over their essential characteristics;
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Is concerned that the deficient and incomplete implementation of the CPR in some Member States has led to severe legal uncertainties and unpredictabilities for builders, contractors, planners and architects; urges the Commission to find unbureaucratic and pragmatic solutions without delay and in consent with the Member States in order to overcome these undesirable and negative effects on the European construction sector.
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Notes that the common technical language set up by the CPR is defined by harmonised European standards, and by European Assessment Documents (EADs) for products not or not fully covered by harmonised standards; acknowledges that the European Committee for Standardisation (CEN) and the European Committee for Electrotechnical Standardisation(Cenelec) are the competent organisations for the drafting of harmonised standards, while the European Organisation for Technical Assessment (EOTA) and Technical Assessment Bodies (TAB) are responsible for the preparation of EADs;
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Points out that unlike other NLF legislation, the use of harmonised standards under the CPR is mandatory, which requires an effective system of adoption to address the needs of industry, keep up with technological developments and, ensure legal clarity and meet the regulatory needs of Member States;
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Is concerned by the fact that of the 444 existing harmonised standards for construction products, only 12 were issued after the adoption of the CPR; believes that the time required for the development and citation of standards, and the backlog for revising and updating existing standards (CPR acquis) and the lack of clear and pragmatic guidance by the Commission are among the most significant problems associated with the implementation of the CPR;
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Is concerned that a significant number of standards do not fully cover all product requirements necessary for their use in construction works; stresses the urgent need to review standards which are incomplete in a way that all construction products can be used without further precautionary measures;
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Urgently calls on the Commission to find a quick and viable solution to improve the standardisation processes and remove the backlog of non-cited standards; supports, in this regard, a combination of short-term measures to tackle the backlog as well as regulatory gaps alongside long- term measures to improve the process of defining the common technical language and preferably comprehensive standards; calls for existing harmonised European standards to be considered to be part of short-term measures;
Amendment 39 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Points to the fact that standardisation issues need to be addressed in all steps of the preparation process; calls for transparency and openness from all parties involved; highlights the need to ensure the high quality of the mandates issued by the Commission and the necessity to provide clear and pragmatic guidelines for the standardisation bodies; suggests establishing clearly defined timeframes for the Commission to assess the prepared standards and clear deadlines for all parties to ensure further revision if a mandate or the CPR is found not to have been adhered to; considers it important to define the scope of the standards more precisely so that manufacturers can have clear guidance when declaring that their products fall within the scope;
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Believes that owing to the mandatory nature of standards within the context of the CPR and the fact that they are considered part of Union legislation, the texts of issued harmonised standards should be available in all Union languages; highlights the need to ensure high-quality translation and involve national standardisation bodies in the translation process; calls on the Commission to further support and simplify the financial arrangements for the translation of harmonised standards;
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Is concerned by the fact that while the alternative route for products not or not fully covered by harmonised standards was included in the CPR also to allow innovative products to enter the market, the vast majority of EADs do not concern innovative products;
Amendment 46 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Believes, in consequence, that the current underperformance of the standardisation system is one factor leading to an increasing use of the European Organisation for Technical Assessment (EOTA) route as an alternative means of standardisation;
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Stresses that the current procedure for developing EADs has to address the manufacturers’ goal of putting innovative products on the market as quickly as possible;
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Notes that the CE marking is a mean to allow construction products legally placed on the market in one Member State to be marketed on the territory of any other Member State; highlights, however, that the CE marking under the CPR differs from other NLF legislation since it only refers to the product performance and does not attest the conformity with specific product requirements, as it is the case for other products that are CE marked under NLF;
Amendment 54 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 b (new)
Paragraph 13 b (new)
13a. Regrets the fact that the CE marking is wrongly understood as a quality mark, while it does not determine whether a construction product is safe or could be used in construction works; believes that further solutions are needed to provide end-users with precise and clear information with regard to safety of construction products and their compliance with national building safety and construction works requirements;
Amendment 59 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Calls on the Commission to consider the possibility of including in the CPR minimum product requirements aimed at ensuring health and safety, structural integrity and protecting the environment and other public interests, thereby following the approach of NLF legislation, which has proven to be effective;
Amendment 64 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Believes that digital solutions such as a ‘Smart DoP’ could be used to allow economic operators to quickly assess and compare requirements for construction works with the information provided in the DoP, so that users can benefit from the information provided by manufacturers in their declarations of performance; notes that the CPR should not only ensure the accuracy and reliability of the declared performance, but also its reliability;
Amendment 66 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. Believes that such an approach would increase trust in EU harmonisation, improve the quality of harmonised standards, strengthen the confidence of market players in the CE marking, ensure the safety of construction products placed on the market and help reduce fragmentation of the single market;
Amendment 72 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Amendment 73 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Calls on the Commission to adopt implementing acts under Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 in order to determine the uniform conditions of checks, criteria for the determination of the frequency of checks and the amount of samples to be checked in relation to certain products or categories of products, and to lay down benchmarks and techniques for checks on harmonised products, including construction products, both by taking into account the specificities of the construction sector which still should have an impact on a revised CPR;
Amendment 79 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Considers it necessarycrucial for national market surveillance authorities responsible for construction products to cooperate closely with national building control authorities to ensure a nuanced approach in assessing the conformity of construction products used in construction works with the declared performance or intended use, as well as ensure their compliance with building regulations, thereby guaranteeing the safety and security of end-users;
Amendment 106 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Emphasises that any revision of the CPR should be in line with the principles and objectives of Regulation (EU) No 1025/2012 as regards the preparation of harmonised standards in order to ensure their transparency and quality, as well as the specificities of the construction sector; highlights that any revisiond should ensure the appropriate involvement of all interested parties and Member states' regulatory needs;
Amendment 108 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Stresses the need to ensure legal clarity for a transitional period as regards any revision of the CPR and the review of the CPR acquis, in order to avoid a legal vacuum; involving all interested parties;
Amendment 109 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Is concerned that any revision of the CPR and, in particular, the review of the CPR aAcquis will take significant time, while manufacturers, building companies, builder-owners, awarding authorities, planners, member states users and end- users need immediate solutions to overcome the legal uncertainty resulting from the lack of updated harmonised standards and, among others, regulatory gaps; calls on the Commission to address this issue as a matter of priority, including a targeted short-term legal amendment to cope with the urgent legal and technical challenges and at the same time to forcefully advance a fundamental revision of the CPR; calls on the Commission to address this issue prior to any revision of the CPR and in the review of the CPR aAcquis;.