13 Amendments of Catherine STIHLER related to 2018/2008(INI)
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Takes note of the mandate given by the European Council to the High Level Forum for a Better Functioning Food Supply Chain to address the issue of dual quality; encourages Member States and their competent authorities to actively participate in ongoing initiatives, including the development of a common methodology and collection of further evidence; Stresses the need for active involvement of parties representing consumers' interests, including representatives of consumer organizations and research organizations that have conducted product tests in Member States; Regrets that the European Parliament has been neither involved nor properly informed of the progress made so far;
Amendment 85 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. EDraws attention to the fact that according to Guidance on the application of UCPD from 2016: “goods of the same brand and having the same or similar packaging may differ as to their composition depending on the place of manufacture and the destination market, i.e. they may vary from one Member State to another. Under the UCPD, commercial practices marketing products with a different composition are not unfair per se”; emphasises the importance of the guidance documents issued by the Commission in facilitating proper and coherent application of the UCPD; calls, therefore, on the Commission to clarify the relationship between the Notice and, the guidance; and the paper drafted by the HLF Internal Market Subgroup;
Amendment 92 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Welcomes that the Commission invites competent authorities to perform market tests that involve product comparisons across different regions and countries; highlights, however, that according to the Commission, such tests should be carried out with a common testing approach which has not been adopted yet; Stresses the need to stick to the timetable so that the results of the testing carried out under a common testing approach are made available and analysed by end of this year;
Amendment 102 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 b (new)
Paragraph 14 b (new)
14b. Underlines that counterfeiting of branded products exposes consumers to health and safety risks, undermines consumer confidence in the brands and leads to loss of revenue for producers; Notes that range of counterfeit products recovered in the EU remains broad and includes nearly all types of goods;
Amendment 105 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Recalls that according to the Commission, studies made on brand loyalty demonstrate that brands act in the mind of consumers as a certificate for a controlled and constant quality; agrees with the Commission that this explains why some consumers may expect branded products to be of equivalent quality if not exactly the same wherever and whenever purchased and brand owners to inform them when they decide to change any important element of the composition of their products; considers therefore, that the provision of any additional information, although in the principal field of vision of a package, is insufficient unless the consumer clearly understands that the product in question differs from products of a same brand sold in another Member States;
Amendment 108 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 b (new)
Paragraph 15 b (new)
15b. Takes note of the arguments that products may differ due to regional consumer preferences; Believes that consumer preferences should not be used as an excuse for lowering quality and/or offering different quality grades on different markets; stresses that consumers must be transparently informed and aware of this adjustment for each individual product and not only in general terms, that this "established practice" exists;
Amendment 111 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Points out that national competent authorities can select samples and perform tests only on the territory of their Member State; stresses the importance, therefore, of enhanced, effective and transparent cooperation between national consumer protection and food authorities and the Commission; welcomes the adoption of the revised Consumer Protection Cooperation Regulation11that strengthens investigation and enforcement powers, improves information and data exchange and access to any relevant information and establishes harmonized rules setting out the procedures for the coordination of investigation and enforcement measures in this regard; _________________ 11 Regulation (EU) 2017/2394; OJ L 345, 27.12.2017, p. 1.
Amendment 118 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. Recognises the usefulness of the sweeps as important form of enforcement coordination carried out under the CPC Regulation and calls on the Commission and Member States to further strengthen them and broaden their scope;
Amendment 119 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 b (new)
Paragraph 16 b (new)
16b. Is convinced, that in case a company intends to place on the market of different Member States product that differs in certain characteristics, such a product cannot be labelled and branded in a seemingly identical manner;
Amendment 123 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Emphasises the value of public debate that leads to increased consumer awareness about products and their characteristics; notes that some manufacturers and owners of private labels have already announced changes to recipes; highlights the role of industry in improving transparency with regard to product composition and quality and its changes;
Amendment 142 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Calls for the increased support of national consumer organizations, so they can build capacity, develop their testing activities and contribute, alongside with competent authorities, to tracking and exposing situations of unfair product differentiation;
Amendment 150 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Believes that the experiences of competent authorities thus far suggest that they have been unable individually to tackle effectively any specific cases of dual quality at national level, also due to absence of an explicit legal provision on EU level;
Amendment 182 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22a. Emphasises that the outcome of the legislative process should be a clear definition of what can be considered as dual quality and how each case should be assessed and addressed by competent authorities;