Activities of Bart STAES related to 2014/2228(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
Negotiations for the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) (debate) NL
Amendments (37)
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
B a. whereas Article 168 TFEU stipulates that a high level of human health protection shall be ensured in the definition and implementation of all Union policies and activities; whereas there are serious concerns that this will be rendered far more difficult in case of regulatory cooperation with the US, due to the significant divergencies and different approaches between the US and the EU;
Amendment 32 #
Draft opinion
Recital B b (new)
Recital B b (new)
B b. whereas unlike more than 150 countries worldwide, the US have not ratified major international conventions on chemical substances (e.g. the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, the Rotterdam Convention on the trade of certain hazardous chemicals), which shows that the US is isolated in international chemicals policy; whereas moreover, the US refuses implementing the environmental part of the UN globally harmonised system for the classification and labelling of chemicals, which illustrates that when it comes to chemicals, there is disagreement between the US and the EU at the most basic level;
Amendment 33 #
Draft opinion
Recital B c (new)
Recital B c (new)
B c. whereas according to the US report on Technical Barriers to Trade of 2014, the US has raised concerns regarding REACH at every WTO TBT Committee meeting since 2003, intervening "with concerns that aspects of REACH are discriminatory, lack a legitimate rationale, and pose unnecessary obstacles to trade", which indicates a rather fundamental opposition to REACH by the US;
Amendment 34 #
Draft opinion
Recital B d (new)
Recital B d (new)
B d. whereas the fundamentally different nature of the US Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), adopted in 1976, as compared to REACH, adopted in 2006, is commonly accepted; whereas for that reason, the negotiations on the TTIP do not intend to harmonize the two systems; however, the negotiations concern future cooperation concerning the implementation of REACH; given the strongly diverging views on risk governance of chemicals and the fundamental and sustained opposition of the US to REACH, there are no benefits in cooperating on the implementation of these diverging laws, all the more since implementation is far from being a merely technical or uncontroversial exercise;
Amendment 35 #
Draft opinion
Recital B e (new)
Recital B e (new)
Amendment 36 #
Draft opinion
Recital B f (new)
Recital B f (new)
B f. whereas the draft EU negotiation text of the EU on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures tabled for the round of 29 September - 3 October suggests obliging Parties to apply tolerances and maximum residue levels by the Codex Alimentarius Commission within 12 months after their adoption, unless the importing Party had signalled a reservation in the Codex Alimentarius Commission; whereas there is a general pattern of lower amounts of pesticide residues allowed on food in the EU as compared to the Codex Alimentarius Commission; whereas over the last four years, the European Food Safety Agency (EFSA) has filed a reservation in 31-57% of all cases, which highlights the large degree of disagreement by EFSA with the Codex standards; whereas EFSA currently feels free to express its reservations, within the limits possible; however, once the TTIP has been adopted, it is very questionable whether EFSA will be allowed politically to continue to do so, given that the draft text intends to commit the EU and the US to collaborate in the international standard setting bodies 'with a view to reaching mutually satisfactory outcomes', which could discourage EFSA from filing reservations to the Codex Alimentarius Commission in the future and thus lead to weaker standards in the EU;
Amendment 37 #
Draft opinion
Recital B g (new)
Recital B g (new)
B g. whereas the US TBT report of 2014 refers to the concerns of the US chemical and crop protection industry with regard to the hazard-based cut-off criteria to be developed for endocrine disrupters, and stated that the US raised concerns with DG Environment's proposal bilaterally as well as in WTO TBT and SPS Committees; whereas the Commission decided to launch an impact assessment on the development of criteria for endocrine disrupters in July 2013; whereas this decision is the main reason for the Commission's failure to adopt criteria by the 4-year deadline of December 2013; while the US welcomed the Commission's decision, both Council and the European Parliament decided to support Sweden in its court action to challenge the Commission's failure, illustrating fundamentally different views as to the nature of regulatory provisions in EU law;
Amendment 38 #
Draft opinion
Recital B h (new)
Recital B h (new)
B h. whereas the EU approach with regard to food safety is based on the precautionary principle, allowing for protective action in case of scientific uncertainty, and requires risk managers to take into account other legitimate factors when weighing policy alternatives; whereas the US approach requires robust scientific evidence of harmful effects before regulatory action is taken and does not acknowledge other legitimate factors;
Amendment 39 #
Draft opinion
Recital B i (new)
Recital B i (new)
B i. whereas there are links between unhealthy foods and diet-related non- communicable diseases (NCDs); whereas according to the UN Special Rapporteur (on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health), global trade, increased foreign direct investment (FDI) in the food sector and the pervasive marketing of unhealthy foods have increased the consumption of unhealthy foods*; whereas the Special Rapporteur concluded his report with a set of recommendations, aimed at States and the food industry, to take concrete steps to reduce the production and consumption of unhealthy foods and increase the availability and affordability of healthier food alternatives; * http://www.unscn.org/files/Announcemen ts/Other_announcements/A-HRC-26- 31_en.pdf
Amendment 40 #
Draft opinion
Recital B j (new)
Recital B j (new)
B j. whereas according to the WHO Global action plan for the prevention and control of noncommunicable diseases 2013-2020*, the cumulative output loss due to the four major non-communicable diseases together with mental disorders is estimated to be US$ 47 trillion; whereas according to the WHO, this loss represents 75% of global GDP in 2010 (US$ 63 trillion); whereas according to the WHO, continuing 'business as usual' with regard to non-communicable diseases will result in loss of productivity and an escalation of health care costs in all countries; * http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/9 4384/1/9789241506236_eng.pdf?ua=1
Amendment 41 #
Draft opinion
Recital B k (new)
Recital B k (new)
B k. whereas the Director General of the WHO stated at the 8thGlobal Conference on Health Promotion in June 2013 that 'efforts to prevent noncommunicable diseases go against the business interests of powerful economic operators' *; * http://www.who.int/dg/speeches/2013/heal th_promotion_20130610/en/
Amendment 42 #
Draft opinion
Recital B l (new)
Recital B l (new)
B l. whereas the TTIP, similar to the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement, could constrain the ability of the EU and Member States to protect nutrition policy from the influence of vested interests, reduce the range of interventions available to actively discourage consumption of less healthy food (and to promote healthy food), including via public procurement policies, and limit the EU and Member States' capacity to implement these interventions;* * http://www.healthpolicyjrnl.com/article/S 0168-8510(14)00203-6/abstract
Amendment 43 #
Draft opinion
Recital B m (new)
Recital B m (new)
B m. whereas the TTIP seeks to enhance transatlantic trade; whereas enhancing trade should not be an objective in its own right, but only a means to achieve the overarching objective of sustainable development; whereas it is therefore essential for the TTIP to internalise the external climate, health and environmental costs of aviation, shipping and road freight in order to ensure sustainability of global trade in goods; whereas in the absence of effective international action to internalise these costs, the EU should introduce and implement regional non-discriminatory measures to address such externalities;
Amendment 44 #
Draft opinion
Recital B n (new)
Recital B n (new)
B n. whereas the EU and US legislators have taken a very different approach as regards the regulation of genetically modified organisms (GMOs): while in the EU, GMOs need to pass a risk analysis process prior to authorisation, regulators in the US allow them on the market without a distinct regulatory regime;
Amendment 45 #
Draft opinion
Recital B o (new)
Recital B o (new)
B o. whereas the EU and US legislators have taken a very different approach as regards pathogen reduction treatments for meat and poultry: while a number of different pathogen reduction treatments are allowed in the US, EU regulation requires all operators along the food chain to follow good farm to fork hygiene practices in order to ensure pathogenic microbes are not present in foods of animal origin, and does not allow decontamination treatments to substitute good hygiene practices;
Amendment 46 #
Draft opinion
Recital B p (new)
Recital B p (new)
B p. whereas the US federal law on animal welfare is well below the level of EU regulation, including the lack of legislation on welfare standards for farmed animals before the point of slaughter; whereas unfortunately, animal welfare is not considered by the Commission to be a trade concern in the same way as food safety or animal health for the purposes of import requirements;
Amendment 47 #
Draft opinion
Recital B q (new)
Recital B q (new)
B q. whereas the EU and the US have a very different regulatory approach, average emission starting point and ambition level as regards reducing the average greenhouse gas emissions of light duty vehicles; whereas this area should therefore not be subject to mutual recognition;
Amendment 48 #
Draft opinion
Recital B r (new)
Recital B r (new)
B r. whereas the EU is in the process of defining specific rules on food from clones animals and their offspring, while the US have decided not to require pre-market approval or labelling for such products;
Amendment 55 #
Draft opinion
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the US Trade Representative consistently denounces EU standards in these areas as non-tariff trade barriers "that impose significant costs, create unnecessary barriers, reduce efficiency" and states that "thus, in the negotiations, the United States seeks to reduce such barriers and prevent future ones, while ensuring our continued ability to regulate";
Amendment 60 #
Draft opinion
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
C a. whereas the EU and US legislators and regulators have taken a very different approach to tackling greenhouse gas emissions and addressing climate change; whereas countering the significant threats posed by climate change and maintaining the integrity of adopted climate policy should take priority over trade promotion;
Amendment 63 #
Draft opinion
Recital C b (new)
Recital C b (new)
C b. whereas the methodology for accounting of greenhouse gas emissions of fossil fuels towards the emission reduction obligation under the Fuel Quality Directive was revised and watered down during its adoption in comitology under pressure from Canada and the US in order to accommodate perceived trade barriers from accounting the lifecycle emissions of tar sand crudes and fuel products derived from such crude; whereas as a result, compliance towards the greenhouse gas reduction obligation based on the adopted methodology does not reflect any increases in carbon intensity of fossil fuel crudes per installation or in Europe as a whole, against the original aim of the policy; whereas this is a clear example of the EU lowering its standards in response to trade interests by third countries;
Amendment 74 #
Draft opinion
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
D a. whereas on 7 January 2015, the European Ombudsman welcomed the progress made by the European Commission to make the TTIP negotiations more transparent, however, she also made numerous recommendations for further improvement, in particular with regard to public access to consolidated negotiation texts, greater proactive disclosure of TTIP documents and increased transparency as regards meetings that Commission officials hold on the TTIP with business organisations, lobby groups or NGOs;
Amendment 127 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Considers it to be of utmost importance to ensure that the TTIP does not only fully safeguard EU standards for the protection of health and the environment, including food safety and consumer information, all of which have been adopted in democratic processes, but also creates no obstacle, neither legally nor politically, for the implementation of existing laws or the adoption of new ones;
Amendment 134 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Is very concerned that the objective of regulatory convergence, including in particular the creation of a Regulatory Cooperation Council, will lead to a far-ranging provisions for regulatory cooperation, including the creation of a Regulatory Cooperation Body, will de facto make it more difficult to implement existing EU standards, let alone develop and adopt new ones, thus leading overall to a lowering of future EU standards in key areas for the protection of human health, food safety and the environment in light of the significant differences as compared with the US;
Amendment 149 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Is particularly concerned that the draft provisions on regulatory cooperation on acts that have or are likely to have a significant impact on trade and investment between the EU and the US - grant the US formal rights with regards to implementing acts to be adopted pursuant to Article 291 TFEU, while the European Parliament has no right to scrutiny whatsoever with regard to implementing acts, - grant the US the right to enter into regulatory exchanges concerning the adoption of national legislation by Member States, including joint examination of possible means to promote regulatory compatibility, - could de facto make it more difficult for the EU to go beyond the lowest common denominator of international instruments due to the commitments to international regulatory cooperation and implementation of international instruments they have contributed to;
Amendment 154 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3 b. Considers that regulatory cooperation is only desirable in clearly specified sectoral areas where the US and the EU have similar levels of protection, and insists that it be clarified explicitly that any provisions on regulatory cooperation in the TTIP do not set a procedural requirement for the adoption of the Union acts concerned by it nor do they give rise to enforceable rights in that regard;
Amendment 156 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)
Paragraph 3 c (new)
3 c. Considers that the implementation of international instruments as part of promoting international regulatory cooperation can always only present minimum harmonisation;
Amendment 212 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 – indent 2 a (new)
Paragraph 5 – indent 2 a (new)
- affect EU rules on food labelling,
Amendment 220 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 – indent 3 a (new)
Paragraph 5 – indent 3 a (new)
- impair public access to data on clinical trials of medicines, in particular as laid down in Regulation (EU) No 536/2014 on clinical trials on medicinal products for human use, and as provided for in corresponding policies by the European Medicines Agency,
Amendment 226 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 – indent 3 b (new)
Paragraph 5 – indent 3 b (new)
- limit directly or indirectly the competence of Member States with regard to pricing and reimbursement of medicinal products,
Amendment 239 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Considers that TTIP could be beneficial with regard to harmonized implementation of the UNECE 1958 Agreement concerning the Adoption of Uniform Technical Prescriptions and the 1998 Agreement on UN Global Technical Regulations;
Amendment 240 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Calls on the Commission to safeguard the future of European public healthcare services by their explicit exclusion from the scope of application of TTIP, in the same way that there is already a carve-out in TTIP for the audio-visual sector and reflecting the existing carve-out of healthcare services from the Services Directive *; * see recital 22 and Article 2(f) of Directive 2006/123/EC
Amendment 243 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5 b. Calls for the TTIP to implement the uniform introduction of an improved test cycle in both the EU and the US based on the Worldwide Harmonized Light vehicles Test Procedures developed by UNECE, and to ensure market surveillance, conformity of production certification and in-use compliance tests, and transparency of the results;
Amendment 244 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5 b. Expresses concern that the published draft EU textual proposal on SPS measures does not make it explicit that the long term goal of aligning regulatory standards with regard to animal welfare should be to raise standards to the highest level rather than lowering them; draws attention to the fact that enforcement mechanisms of animal welfare provisions appear to be lacking; can only accept to include animal welfare matters in the negotiations, provided that the Commission insists on explicit recognition of the need to harmonise standards to the highest level, and to include animal welfare production standards as a requirement for importing goods into the EU;
Amendment 246 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 c (new)
Paragraph 5 c (new)
5 c. Calls for the TTIP to work through the UNECE process to introduce a global vehicle classification system for light and heavy duty vehicles;
Amendment 248 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 d (new)
Paragraph 5 d (new)
5 d. Calls for the TTIP to end fuel tax exemptions for commercial aviation in line with the G20 commitments to phase out fossil fuel subsidies;
Amendment 280 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Is deeply concerned about the lack of transparency in the negotiations, and urges the Commission toWelcomes the Commission's recent decision to make the TTIP negotiations more transparent, but regrets that its implementation is still rather patchy, as only very few and non-recent negotiation texts have been made publicly available, and insists that further steps need to be taken in line with the recommendations by the European Ombudsman, in particular by giveing all Members of the European Parliament as well as the public in general access to theupdated negotiation texts, in particular the consolidated ones.