Activities of Hannu TAKKULA related to 2012/2322(INI)
Shadow opinions (1)
OPINION on online gambling in the internal market
Amendments (30)
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses that protecting minors from exposure to online gambling should remain a major policy objective; underlines the need to implement EU-wide standards forstrict and reliable age and identity verifications to prevent underage gamblers from accessing remote gambling products;
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Recalls that almost 2 % of the European population suffers from gambling addiction; is concerned that easy access to online gambling websites is likely to increase this percentage, especially among young people; considers, therefore, that efficient preventive measures should be enforced, such as the implementation of strict deposit limits and loss limits set by the player himself;
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas, in the absence of harmonisation and with due regard to the principle of subsidiarity, the Member States maintain a margin of discretionhave the right to regulate online gambling in accordance with their own values and pursued objectives of general interest;
Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas currentlybecause of its specific nature and in application of the subsidiarity principle, the supply of online gambling services is not subject to sector- specific regulation at European Union level, remaining –and gambling has been excluded from secondary legislation such as the E- commerce, the Services, and the Consumer Rights Directives, while remaining, nevertheless –, subject to a number of EU secondary legislative acts;
Amendment 58 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has confirmed that the provision of games of chance or gambling is an economic activity, which consequently falls within the scope of of a special nature, where therefore restrictions to the fundamental freedoms of the TFEU, notably the free movement of services, and any restrictions imposed thereto need to comply with those provided for by the TFEU, notably under Articles 51 and 52may be justified by overriding reasons in the public interest such as consumer protection, prevention of fraud or preservation of public order;
Amendment 70 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the risks involved in terms of consumer protection, fraud prevention and law enforcement against illegal activities, such as money laundering and match fixing, require coordinated action at EU leveleffective action;
Amendment 72 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas it is essential to introduce mechanisms for scrutinising sports competitions and financial flows, along with common supervisory mechanisms at the EU level;
Amendment 75 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Calls upon all sports governing bodies to commit to good governance practices in order to reduce the risk of falling victim to match-fixing;
Amendment 77 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas a comprehensive overview of the online gambling market,sector in terms of information and data regarding domestic and cross-border, intra-EU and global, authorised and unauthorised offer, is currently missing;
Amendment 80 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 86 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Notes that match fixing is criminalised in all Member States and that the main shortcomings in relation to the prosecution of match-fixing cases are of an operational nature. Therefore encourages Member States to produce legislation specifically suited to fight match-fixing at a national level;
Amendment 93 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls for a general ban to prevent sportspersons and organisers of sporting events from placing bets on their own matches or events; in this context, emphasises also strict and reliable Member State level age and identity verifications systems;
Amendment 107 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recognises that the, in application of the subsidiarity principle, Member States have the right to determine how the offer of online gambling services is to be organised and regulated, atnd the national levelright to enforce measures against illegal gambling services, while observing the basic EU Treaty principles;
Amendment 120 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 141 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls on the Commission to continue to carry out effective checks on compliance with EU law of national laws and practices, and to take legal action against gambling monopolies that do not reduce gambling opportunities or limit promotional activities for gambling in a consistent manner, in line with CJEU case-law;
Amendment 161 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Notes the risks associated withat a general prohibition of online gambling services and withor excessive restrictions for consumers; calls on the Commission andn pose, and highlights the balance theat Member States to weigh, as part of the work of the group of experts on gambling services,need to find between the social costs of permitting regulated gambling activities againstversus the harmful effects of consumers resorting to illicit markets;
Amendment 172 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Emphasises that Member States that open up their online gambling market must provide for a transparent procedure based on objective and non- discriminatory criteria,' online gambling sector must be in full compliance with EU law;
Amendment 188 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls on the expert group on gambling services and on the Commission to facilitate, as much as possible, the flow of data between regulators in the exchange of information among Member States in order to allow for the establishment of a common system for identifying players and to makesharing of best practices for example on obligatory reliable identification of players, enforcement measures against illegal operators as well as white lists and black lists and self- exclusion mechanisms applicable throughout the EU;
Amendment 219 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Stresses the importance for theof this expert group to work towards removing unnecessary administrative burdens that prevent legal online operators from offering their services to consumersas a step forward towards a cooperation between Member States and the Commission;
Amendment 231 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Believes that the competent national regulatory authorities should be able to agree on equivalence clausexchange good practices that would facilitate the application of national licenses, including agreement on technical standards foron technical standards and gaming equipment; and calls on the competent national regulatory authorities to introduce a regulatory principle whereby a gambling equipment; company can only operate (or bid for the required national licence) in one Member State if it does not operate in contravention of the law in any other Member State;
Amendment 247 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Agrees with the Commission that a fairproperly regulated offer of gambling services is necessary for consumer protection, because in its absence consumers are more likely to turn to unreliableillegal gambling websiteoperators;
Amendment 267 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Calls on the Commission to continue to explore measures at the EU levelactions to protect vulnerable consumers, including formalised cooperation between regulators, and the introduction of an online trustmark for legal operatornational competent authorities;
Amendment 273 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Asks the Commission to study what could be done to stop the practice that some companies based in another Member State market online-gambling services for example via satellite-tv or advertisement campaigns in a Member State where they are not licensed to offer their services;
Amendment 300 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Calls on the Commission to consider legislationexplore with Member States to create an EU-widenational self- exclusion register,s accessible by national authorities and licensed gambling operators, so that any customer who chooses to exclude him- or herselfself- excluding from one gambling operator has the opportunity to be automatically self- excluded from all other licensed gambling operators;
Amendment 320 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Notes that the workshop agreement published in February 2011 by the European Committee for Standardisation (CEN)1 could serve as self-regulatory initiatives can serve as contributions for identifying the content of common standards; reaffirms its position that, in as sensitive an area basis for identifying the content of common standard gambling, industry self- regulation can only complement but not replace national regulations;
Amendment 333 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Takes the view that common standards for online gambling should address the rights and obligations of both the service provider and the consumer, including by means of measures tothe forthcoming European Commission Recommendations on consumer protection and advertising common standards for online gambling should include enforcement measures that Member States need to put in place for ensureing a high level of protection for players, particularly minors and other vulnerable persons, and the prevention of misleading advertisements as well as the prohibition of advertising by illegal operators;
Amendment 355 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Recommends the introduction of uniform and pan-European common standards forexchange of best practices between Member States on electronic identification and cross border e-verification services; notes that the different registration procedures across the EU undermine regulated operators, and can push consumersas well as on enforcement measures such as the blacklisting and the banning of illegal websites, definition of safe and traceable payment solutions and banning measures for transactions in order to ensure that consumers cannot turn into the hands of illegal operators;, calls, therefore, on Member States for registration and identification procedures to be streamlined and made more efficient;
Amendment 361 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. Stresses the importance of funding from gambling for public interest causes, calls for the specific features and the sustainable contributions from lotteries to society to be recognised and taken into account in any coordinated approach at EU level;
Amendment 366 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 b (new)
Paragraph 16 b (new)
16b. Calls for the strict regulation or the prohibition, after an evaluation conducted at the level of each Member State, of dangerous forms of gambling;
Amendment 373 #
17. Stresses the fact that online gambling is a non-cash-based environment and that – given the dependency on third-party financial service providers –consumer / card not present (CNP) environment and therefore additional safeguards against money laundering canneed to be found in the EU's regulatory framework for establishing and licensing financial service providersservice providers procedures such as a reliable electronic identification at registration phase;