6 Amendments of Vittorio AGNOLETTO related to 2008/2135(INI)
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Is very concerned by the lack of transparency and democracy in this process of negotiation; considers that the text of the negotiations should be made public, and a transparent, accountable and consultative negotiation process should be adopted before continuing any negotiation;
Amendment 54 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Regrets that India maintains the principle of asymmetry; urges the Commission to push for a reciprocal, symmetrical FTAStresses that the commitments must reflect the different levels of social and economic development of the two parties;
Amendment 63 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Notes that India is concerned about the lack of harmonisation of micro-biological standards in the EU, implications of REACH, costly certificates and conformity procedures; stresses that these issues must be but considers that necessary, reasolved in the FTA, calls on both parties to ensure that regulation and NTB's do not get in the way of tradenable and justified regulations, on both sides, are in no way an obstacle to an increase in trade exchanges;
Amendment 74 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Points out that service liberalisation must in no way hinder the right to regulate services, and especially to maintain and develop strong public services, an essential element for development, social justice and democracy;
Amendment 119 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Welcomes India's commitment to a strong IPR regime; encourages its rigorous implementation and enforcementConsiders that IPR should not be part of the negotiation, unless they are oriented to improving access to medicines, as well as protection of biodiversity and traditional knowledge;
Amendment 123 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. RegretConsiders that the Indian Patent Amendment Act does not contain any provision on data exclusivity; notes that lack of data protection and exclusivity are major concern for EU pharmaceutical companies in IndiaCommission should not request data exclusivity, - as requested by the pharmaceutical industry -, because that would be a TRIPS + measure that would create another monopoly on medicines, and would be an effective barrier to safe, effective and affordable generics;