139 Amendments of Helmut SCHOLZ related to 2014/2228(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 b (new)

- having regard to the European Social Charter,

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. ~~Believ~~Notes that the United States is the EU’s key strategic partner; ~~stress~~notes that the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) is ~~the most significant recent EU-US project and will~~intended to reinvigorate the transatlantic partnership as a whole, beyond its trade aspects; emphasises that ~~its successful conclusion is of high geopolitical importance at a moment when the US is pivoting to Asia and concluding the Trans-Pacific Partnership; underlines that the TTIP will have a~~concluding the partnership will be of positive international significance only if the establishment of a large transatlantic market and, in the process, the adoption, as is intended, of new, shared standards are integral components of international efforts to achieve a fair, partnership- based and multilateral world trading system and do not reinforce the current supremacy of lead markets; rejects therefore the hijacking of the TTIP by leading posliti~~ve impact on jobs and growth for the two economies, which have both been hit by the crisi~~cians both in the US and in EU Member States who conceive of it as an 'economic NATO', which is a euphemism for the geopoliticising of transatlantic market cooperation, that being the purpose of the TTIP negotiations;

2015/03/02
Committee: AFET

Motion for a resolution
Citation 5

– having regard to the joint statement of 16 November 2014 by US President Barack Obama, Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker, European Council President Herman Van Rompuy, UK Prime Minister David Cameron, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, French President François Hollande, Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi and Spanish Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy, following their meeting on the margins of the G20 Summit in Brisbane, Australia5 , __________________ 5http://europa.eu/rapid/press- release_STATEMENT-14-1820_en.htmdeleted

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1. - Point (d) - Subpoint (i.)

~~i) to specify the role and the legal quality of th~~(i.). takes the view that the Commission’s proposal of more extensive Rregulatory Ccooperation ~~Council’s fi~~, which would grant the trade and in~~gs,~~ vestment partner and undertakings in~~to consideration that any direct application of its recommendations for the relevant EU instances would imply a breach~~ the pre-legislative or legislative phase of the EU legislation procedures, the Member States and the local and regional territorial entities a privileged right to be heard or the possibility of delaying or stopping legislation procedures through demands for impact analyses of legislation on trade and investment, would imply an inadmissible circumvention of the law-making procedures laid down in the Treaties;

2015/03/06
Committee: AFCO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1. - Point (d) - Subpoint(i.) a (new)

i.)a. confirms that all important questions of detail of the TTIP agreement should be negotiated, and there may generally be no subsequent transfer of regulatory questions to expert committees set up specifically for that purpose;

2015/03/06
Committee: AFCO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1. - Point (d) - Subpoint (i.) b (new)

i.)b. demands the inclusion of a revision clause in the agreement, in order to be able to examine the impact of the agreements reached and make amendments where appropriate, and also to be able to terminate the agreement;

2015/03/06
Committee: AFCO

Motion for a resolution
Citation 10

– having regard to the EU’s textual proposals tabled for discussion with the US in the TTIP negotiating rounds, in particular those which have been declassified and made public by the Commission, inter alia the EU position papers entitled ‘TTIP regulatory issues - engineering industries’8 , ’Test–case on functional equivalence: proposed methodology for automotive regulatory equivalence’9 , and ‘Trade and sustainable development chapter/labour and environment: EU paper outlining key issues and elements for provisions in the TTIP’10 , and the textual proposals on technical barriers to trade (TBT)11 , sanitary and phytosanitary measures (SPS)12 , customs and trade facilitation13 , small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs)14 , possible provisions on competition15 , possible provisions on state enterprises and enterprises granted special or exclusive rights or privileges16 , possible provisions on subsidies17 , and dispute settlement18 , initial provisions on regulatory cooperation18 a __________________ 8 http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2015/j anuary/tradoc_153022.pdf 9 http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2015/j anuary/tradoc_153023.pdf 10 http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2015/j anuary/tradoc_153024.pdf 11 http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2015/j anuary/tradoc_153025.pdf 12 http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2015/j anuary/tradoc_153026.pdf 13 http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2015/j anuary/tradoc_153027.pdf 14 http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2015/j anuary/tradoc_153028.pdf 15 http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2015/j anuary/tradoc_153029.pdf 16 http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2015/j anuary/tradoc_153030.pdf 17 http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2015/j anuary/tradoc_153031.pdf 18 http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2015/j anuary/tradoc_153032.pdf 18 a http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2015 /february/tradoc_153120.pdf

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1. - Point (d) - Subpoint (i.) c (new)

i.)c. considers the very high level of protective measures and standards which exist and were democratically agreed in the European Union to be an achievement which is worthy of protection to the highest degree and demands that the legal standards which exist in the EU and its Member States, for example in respect of product safety, health, social, environmental, climate, foodstuff and animal protection and consumer and data protection rights, may in no way be lowered and corresponding rules are to be established for this purpose in the TTIP; emphasises the necessity of instead guaranteeing an improvement of current standards for both partners of the TTIP, and corresponding democratic participation on both sides of the Atlantic;

2015/03/06
Committee: AFCO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Demands t~~hat the main outcome of the negotiations be an ambitious and comprehensive agreement, bringing a significant market opening for EU companies, including SMEs~~o suspend the TTIP negotiations and calls on the Commission to conduct a public consultation on the content and goals of the negotiation;

2015/02/26
Committee: IMCO

Motion for a resolution
Citation 11 a (new)

- having regard to the study of Austrian Foundation for Development Research "Assess TTIP: Assessing the Claimed benefits of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP)"19b __________________ 19bhttp://www.guengl.eu/uploads/plenary- focus-pdf/ASSESS_TTIP.pdf

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1. - Point (d) - Subpoint (ii.)

ii.) ~~while the investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) is an appropriate tool to protect investors and assure that investments are treated in a fair and non- discriminatory way, to overs~~emphasises that the continued existence of European legislation and the capacity of European, national and local authorities to legislate their own policies may not be undermined by the TTIP and is to be observed in legal action issues before national or European courts of law; firmly rejects any form of investment protection regulations and dispute settlement mechanisms in the investor and state relationship between th~~at it does not~~e EU and the USA (ISDS) which bypass ordinary jurisdiction and undermlines the capacity of European, national and local authorities to legislate their own policies, in particular social and environmental policies, and therefore respect the constitutional framework of the Member States; at democratically legitimised and constitutionally created political and administrative measures, in particular with regard to subsequent compensation claims, may not be called into question by courts of arbitration;

2015/03/06
Committee: AFCO

Motion for a resolution
Citation 11 b (new)

- having regard of the Global Development and Environment Institute (Tufts University) working paper no. 14- 03 "The Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership: European Disintegration, Unemployment and Instability"19c __________________ 19 chttp://ase.tufts.edu/gdae/Pubs/wp/14- 03CapaldoTTIP.pdf

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Citation 11 c (new)

- having regard to the Decision of the European Ombudsman following her own-initiative inquiry OI/10/2014/RA concerning the European Commission regarding transparency in the TTIP negotiations19 d __________________ 19 d http://www.ombudsman.europa.eu/en/cas es/decision.faces/en/58668/html.bookmar k

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Citation 12 a (new)

- having regard to the Commission's communication to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social committee and the Committee of the Regions entitled 'A Roadmap for moving to a competitive low carbon economy in 2050' COM(2011) 112.19 e __________________ 19 e http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52011DC0 112

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. to make publicly accessible the consolidated text versions combining EU and US positions on draft chapters and thereby providing for debate in parliaments and society; to make similar transparency efforts for other ongoing major trade negotiations;

2015/02/26
Committee: IMCO

Motion for a resolution
Citation 12 b (new)

- having regard to the UNCTAD World Investment Report 2014 "Investing in the SDGs: An Action Plan".19 h __________________ 19 h http://unctad.org/en/PublicationsLibrary/ wir2014_en.pdf

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 g (new)

1g. Emphasises that the Lisbon Treaty defines EU trade policy as an integral part of the Union's overall external action and that that policy therefore must address development, environmental and social objectives as well as contribute to meeting the other objectives set out in the Treaty on European Union; considers the high level of European safeguards for the general public in the European Union to be an achievement to be defended to the hilt when the TTIP is fleshed out, and insists that statutory standards in the EU Member States with regard to, in particular, product safety, health, welfare, the environment, climate change, food safety, animal welfare and consumer and data privacy protection rights must on no account be lowered - either in the agreement itself or, looking ahead, by the subsequent impact of transatlantic market radicalism and resulting fiercer competition - and that commensurate rules on this must be enshrined in the TTIP; stresses the need, rather, in the process, for both parties to the TTIP to seek and ensure improved standards and greater democratic decision-sharing for citizens on both sides of the Atlantic;

2015/03/02
Committee: AFET

Motion for a resolution
Citation 12 c (new)

- having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions "The Transatlantic Trad and Investment Partnership" ECOS-V-063

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Notes the TTIP’s strategic importance in strengthening and shaping global trade and economic governance based on the values shared by the EU and the US, particularly in an increasingly multipolar world; notes that its impact would go beyond the bilateral implications by facilitating the establishment of common regulations and rules that could later be adopted at global level;deleted

2015/03/02
Committee: AFET

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1. - Point (d) - Subpoint (ii.) b (new)

ii.)b Requests the Commission to note the responses to the public consultation which it conducted on ISDS, which clearly showed overwhelming opposition to ISDS; refers to the extraordinary success of the European citizens’ initiative ‘Stop TTIP’, which has gathered 2 million signatures despite being rejected by the Commission;

2015/03/06
Committee: AFCO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1. - Point (e) - Subpoint (iii.)

iii.) while a certain extent of confidentiality is necessary for effective negotiations on a trade agreement of such high economic and political importance, to continue its effort to render TTIP negotiations more transparent and accessible to the public, as European institutions should be at the forefront of promoting transparencyacknowledges the effort made by the Commission to render the negotiations more transparent, but, in view of the high importance of the ongoing negotiations, considers this to be insufficient for comprehensively informing the populations of the EU Member States; requests the Commission to take significant steps towards improved public access to negotiation documents;

2015/03/06
Committee: AFCO

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas the Commission argues that an ambitious agreement with the US mayight support the reindustrialisation of Europe and would help achieve the 2020 target for an increase of the EU’s GDP generated by industry from 15 % to 20 %; whereas ithe Commission argues that TTIP has the potential to create opportunities especially for SMEs, which suffer more from certain non-tariff barriers (NTBs) than larger companies; whereas the Commission argues that an agreement between the two biggest economic blocs in the world ~~has~~would have the potential to ~~creat~~impose standards, norms and rules ~~which will be adopted~~ at a global level,; wh~~ich would serve to the advantage of third countries as well~~ereas several independent impact assessment studies on TTIP project negative economic and budgetary consequences for the European Union and its Member States;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. ~~Highlight~~Notes that ~~the~~ conclusion of the TTIP ~~creates the~~would open up prospect ofs for a broad economic space, which would include third countries with which the EU and the US already have close, agreement-based trade and economic relations and with which new integration processes and interactions would emerge as a result of the conclusion, as is intended, of further bilateral or multilateral trade and investment agreements; points out therefore that, for that to happen, it is essential that the TTIP forgo any type of arrangement which constrains the political leeway of the parties to act on the development, environment, health and social policy demands of their citizens;

2015/03/02
Committee: AFET

Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)

Aa. whereas the abolition of tariffs between the EU and the US translates directly into several billion Euro of losses in income for the EU budget in own resources.

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Considers that the very high level of European protection standards which exist for the general public in the European Union should be regarded as an attainment deserving of the utmost protection, and that the statutory standards which exist in the EU Member States, for example regarding product safety, social protection and the protection of health, the environment, the climate, food and animal welfare, as well as consumer protection and data protection rights, should on no account be lowered but rather, where possible, improved; believes that it should be ensured that these protection standards can in future be optimised and adapted unilaterally by a Member State in the light of the latest findings without any restriction;

2015/02/26
Committee: IMCO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1. - Point (e) - subpoint (vi.) -f- (new)

vi)f - demands that the ongoing TTIP negotiations be suspended and requests the Commission to carry out a public consultation with regard to the objectives and content of the TTIP negotiations, in a similar manner to the procedure for ISDS;

2015/03/06
Committee: AFCO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2b. Calls for all important questions of detail relating to the agreement to be decided in the negotiations, and considers it necessary to reject the proposal that regulatory issues should be subsequently referred to specially established groups of experts, bypassing the democratic legislative process;

2015/02/26
Committee: IMCO

Motion for a resolution
Recital A b (new)

Ab. whereas the creation of a transatlantic common market has been promoted by the Transatlantic Business Dialogue (TABD) for two decades, for it would benefit large and influential corporations, including in the financial sector, at the expense of small and medium enterprises and public budgets bearing the adjustment costs; whereas today without TTIP the U.S. and the EU are already their respective main trading partners with low tariffs applied in most sectors, and with a trade balance constantly in favour of the EU; whereas the EU should further diversify its trade partners with an emphasis on reinforcing its values and goals in terms of sustainable production, social and labour rights, environmental protection and cultural diversity;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Stresses that the EU’s energy supply largely depends on foreign sources; emphasises the considerable contribution the TTIP could make to the EU’s energy supply diversification and to its energy security by, inter alia, lifting licensing requirements for US gas exportPoints out that an energy chapter in the TTIP must contribute towards energy supply diversification and towards security of energy supply for all citizens at affordable prices and hence towards ending energy poverty and towards energy saving and efficiency; reaffirms the need for obligations, laid down in agreements, to strengthen a sustainable energy policy, focusing in the process on expanding alternative energy production methods;

2015/03/02
Committee: AFET

Motion for a resolution
Recital A c (new)

Ac. whereas the conclusion of an EU - U.S. FTA appears to be incompatible with the advancement of an self-determined European Union promoting its goals in terms of environmental protection, application of the precautionary principle, social cohesion, decent work, defence of civil liberties in particular with regard to data protection, access to health services, cultural policies and cultural diversity, food security and safeguarding of family agriculture; whereas the reduction of certain unnecessary regulatory provisions and differences should be embedded in multilateral processes instead of a bilateral FTA;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Recital A d (new)

Ad. whereas the U.S. Trade Representative annually denounces EU and Member State regulations in the areas of environmental protection, food safety and consumer information, as well as the application of the precautionary principle;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. ~~Insists, while~~to respect~~ing~~ the freedom of governments to protect public services~~, that EU service providers must have full market access to liberalised services in the US,~~; to make sure that public services are excluded from the scope of negotiations; to ensure that service providers shall be given market access to liberalised services under the precondition that they are in possession of the requested qualification, and under transparent rules at both federal and sub-federal levels;

2015/02/26
Committee: IMCO

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas, given the growing interconnectedness of global markets – up to 40 % of European industrial products are manufactured from imported upstream products – it is crucial that p~~olicymakers~~arliaments and civil society shape the way these markets interact, and to regulate the conditions of preservation, production and consumption; whereas proper trade rules are ~~fundamental~~supportive to creating added value ~~in Europ~~, the implementation of the United Nations' International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights has become of fundamental importance, since industrial production takes place in global value chains;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. to apply a positive list approach when negotiating chapters on trade in services; to reject in general a negative list approach, as well as so-called ratched clauses;

2015/02/26
Committee: IMCO

Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)

Ba. whereas currently 62 per cent of the EU trade is consisting of intra-EU exchanges, while impact assessment studies project that TTIP would cause a 30 per cent decrease of intra-EU trade and expose EU producers, in particular SMEs, to fierce competition of US producers in many sectors who benefit from relatively lower production costs due to lower environmental, consumer safety and labour standards and access to low- cost energy gained from unsustainable generation methods like fracking;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3b. Considers it necessary to ensure that the right of self-government of municipal and local authorities is preserved as one of the core aspects of the right of municipal self-administration and that it remains possible, without reservation, to restore local authority control in the light of local circumstances and on the basis of the wishes of the local electorate;

2015/02/26
Committee: IMCO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 d (new)

4d. Underscores that fact that, when the TTIP is developed, priority must be given to making use of existing multilateral fora, for recognition of the equivalence of rules on new technologies, over new regulatory structures to be set up unilaterally, not least in the interests of cooperation with the key future export markets in Asia; points in this connection to what has been achieved, and what could still be achieved, with regard to securing a high degree of international convergence on rules through cooperation within the United Nations Commission for Europe (UNECE);

2015/03/02
Committee: AFET

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)

3c. Considers that it should be made clear to the negotiating partner that public services as referred to in Paragraph 19 of the EU negotiating directives means those which, according to the case-law of the contracting party or member concerned, are subject to specific regulatory regimes or which are distinguished by specific obligations imposed on service-providers at national, regional or local level in the public interest; notes that they include, for example, water and energy supply, disposal of waste and effluent, emergency services, public health and social care, local public transport, housing construction and town planning and urban development measures;

2015/02/26
Committee: IMCO

Motion for a resolution
Recital B b (new)

Bb. whereas 87 per cent of the more than 20 Million SMEs in the EU rely on domestic demand and are not involved in international trade and that for them progress in further developing local, regional and the European common market is of much higher priority;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 d (new)

3d. Considers that a horizontal exemption from all obligations arising from the principle of market access and national treatment should be secured for public services as referred to in Paragraph 19 of the EU negotiating directives and, in addition, with reference to public services, that, for the benefit of the contracting parties, a reservation should be entered for all sectors and all existing and future measures which limit the number of services and service-providers, impose specific obligations on service-providers and regulate the provision of these services in the public interest;

2015/02/26
Committee: IMCO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 e (new)

3e. Rejects further opening-up, particularly for educational services with mixed funding, inter alia in the field of pre-school education, schools and higher education, as well as adult education and further education, as the multilateral GATS agreement already contains more than enough provisions on liberalisation;

2015/02/26
Committee: IMCO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 f (new)

3f. Considers that it should be made clear to the negotiating partner that it must remain possible for Member States, regions and municipalities to adopt any regulatory and financial measure to protect or promote cultural diversity, media freedom and pluralism, and the preservation or development of audiovisual and other corresponding services in order to serve the democratic, social and cultural needs of each society, irrespective of the technology used or the distribution platform; considers it vital to preserve the sovereignty of the Member States with regard to cultural and media matters by means of a clear derogation for culture and the media;

2015/02/26
Committee: IMCO

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas we are faced with an under- regulated ~~picture of global~~globalisation, a trade agreement focussing on even more deregulation by targeting mainly exisationg and ~~a well-designed trade agreement could contribute to harnessing liberalisation; whereas such an agreement should not only focus on reducing tariffs and NTBs but should also be a tool to~~future non- tariff barriers would be detrimental to workers' and consumers' right, while large corporations and investment funds would further harness this sort of liberalisation; whereas a cooperation agreement is needed that focusses on the protection or workers, consumers and the environment; whereas a ~~strong and ambitious trade agreement is an opportunity to create a framework by~~trade agreement could only be complementary to such a major effort to strengthen~~ing~~ regulation to the highest standards at a global level in order to prevent social and environmental dumping;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)

Ca. whereas an institutionalised regulatory cooperation as currently proposed by the Commission prejudices legislative prerogatives of the European Parliament as well as of national parliaments and therefore have a chilling effect on the application of the values of the Union as laid out in Article 2 TEU;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. ~~Welcomes the fact that the Commission is taking steps aiming to improve the transparency~~Acknowledges the steps taken by the Commission to improve the transparency of the ongoing negotiations, but, in view of the scope thereof, regards them as inadequate for providing EU Member State populations with comprehensive information, and therefore insists that the negotiations be suspended; calls on the Commission to conduct a public consultation, along the lines of the approach taken to ISDS, on the objectives and substance of the negotiations.

2015/03/02
Committee: AFET

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas e~~ven though common high standards~~xisting high standards in EU and Member State regulations, as well as existing regulations in areas where the U.S. or Federal States are advanced, are in the interest of the consumers~~, it~~ and should be ~~noted that they also make sense from an economic perspective, as the~~raised to a common goal of respective parallel legislative procedures, as higher costs stemming from higher standards are compensated by increased economies of scale in a market of 850 million consumers; whereas deregulation proved to lead to extremely high budgetary costs caused by an increase in health problems, insecurity, environmental damage or financial instability;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas many economic impact studies on TTIP should be taken with caution as they are built on computable general equilibrium economic models with very optimistic predictions about the capacity of the EU and the US to reduce regulatory barriers to trade; whereas the ~~TTIP alone will not resolve economic problems in the EU~~United Nations Global Policy Model provides an adequate and more inclusive impact assessment tool which should be used in future assessment studies commissioned by the EU; whereas the TTIP alone will not resolve economic problems in the EU, but might even worsen them for several Member States and for various segments of society, and no false hopes and expectations should be raised in that respect;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Ensure that the standard-setting aspects of European public procurement law are not put in jeopardy as seems to be the case particularly with regional implementation, for example the attention paid to compliance with labour-law, social and collective standards, green procurement policies or taking into account SMEs, which ensure that other criteria such as social and sustainable aspects can be taken into account when awarding the contract to the best bidder, not just the price;

2015/02/26
Committee: IMCO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5b. Guarantee that exceptions from EU procurement law as currently provided for in the various procurement and concession guidelines (thresholds, in- house, intermunicipal cooperation, sectoral exceptions such as for the water sector or emergency services) remain;

2015/02/26
Committee: IMCO

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)

Ea. whereas even when using the most optimistic CGE model, studies ordered by the Commission project that TTIP would bring only 0.30 per cent of additional growth after ten years of implementation of the agreement; whereas the publishing of the Commission's sustainability impact assessment has been repeatedly postponed; whereas the chief economist of DG Trade confirmed on March 5th, 2015, in the European Parliament Commission estimates that at least one million jobs in the EU would have to be relocated as a consequence of TTIP related changes;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. ~~Stresses that, while safeguarding the protection achieved by EU standards and regulations, TTIP should go beyond the WTO Technical Barriers to Trade Agreement, in area~~to evaluate options for alternatives to TTIP as for example negotiating separate or sectoral agreements on issues such as conformity assessment, product requirements, or standards, ~~as well as~~ providing for transparency ~~in the p~~repgar~~ation and availability of~~ding technical regulations;

2015/02/26
Committee: IMCO

Motion for a resolution
Recital F

F. whereas the wellbeing of ordinary citizens, workers and consumers has to be the benchmark for aEU trade ~~agreement~~policy; whereas 1.6 million citizens have signed a petition asking for a European Citizen Initiative on negotiating TTIP; whereas the Commission continues to ignore this extraordinary demand for public participation and consultation; whereas TTIP ~~should~~cannot be a model for a good trade agreement ~~responding~~as long as negotiations are not suspended in order to conduct a broad consultation to establish a clear understanding of citizens' concerns and requirements as a precondition to be responsive to these requirements;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. ~~Calls for the setting-up of~~to set up an ambitious and effective cooperation mechanism between the US Congress and the European Parliament, aimed at creating the highest common standards where possible in existing procedures, and to ensure that there is no unintended divergence in future standards in key sectors; ~~believes that EU-US common standards should be promoted~~to promote high common standards in all international for~~ums~~a;

2015/02/26
Committee: IMCO

Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)

Fa. whereas substantial differences exist also in the approach to food safety along the food chain. In the EU, food safety is guaranteed through the integrated "farm- to-fork" approach while the US system, on the other hand, mostly verifies the safety of the end product and therefore is more prone to resorting to pathogen reduction treatments.

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Insist that investment protection provisions and dispute resolution mechanisms in the investor-state relationship between the EU and the US (ISDS) which circumvent normal legal channels involve high risk, discriminate against domestic businesses and should therefore be rejected; stress that European legislation must not be encroached upon by a transatlantic free trade agreement and that legal action must continue to be taken in national courts; ensure that political and administrative measures – particularly regarding retrospective claims for damages – drawn up according to the principles of democracy and the rule of law are not jeopardised by courts of arbitration;

2015/02/26
Committee: IMCO

Motion for a resolution
Recital F b (new)

Fb. whereas European consumers are informed of the presence of GMOs in foodstuff thanks to mandatory labelling while in the US, the FDA recognises GMOs as "substantially equivalent" to their non-GMO counterparts.

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Recital F c (new)

Fc. 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;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Recital G

G. whereas the secret character of negotiations as they have been conducted in the past has led to deficiencies in terms of democratic control of the negotiation process; whereas full access to key negotiation documents to parliamentarians on different governance levels on both side of the Atlantic, as well as to journalists, researchers and citizens and their organisations in civil society should manifest a democratic principle; whereas consolidated texts continue to be accessible in reading rooms only, which paradoxically concerns more and more chapters as the negotiations advance;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Make clear to the negotiating partner that the precautionary principle is one of the fundamental principles of European environmental, health and consumer protection policy and is the basis for prompt, proactive negotiations to avoid putting the health of people, animals and plants at risk and damaging the environment; ensure that the negotiations do not result in the diluting of the precautionary principle which operates in the EU, particularly in the areas of environmental, health, food and consumer protection;

2015/02/26
Committee: IMCO

Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)

Ga. whereas the EU Ombudsman has conducted an inquiry concerning transparency in the TTIP negotiations and the Commission's handling of requests for access to information, and has come to a decision including ten recommendations for change;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Recital G b (new)

Gb. whereas both Article 1 and Article 10 (3) of the Treaty on European Union stipulate that "decisions shall be taken as openly and as closely as possible to the citizen";

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10

10. ~~Supports the establishment of a mandatory~~to discuss the existing structural dialogues and cooperation frames between regulators, and to deplore the low level of results of those well paid negotiators while calling on negotiators to deliver in accordance with their mandate, and in complete respect of regulatory autonomy, in particular in the engineering sector, comprising electrical and mechanical machinery, appliances and equipment; ~~stresses that this should involve early warning mechanisms and exchanges at the time of preparation of regulations; believes that regulatory divergences are the central~~to defend the view that existing regulatory divergences often have a background in different cultural and political approaches and that their value may be higher than their costs as non- tariff barrier (NTB) to trade~~, and that regu~~; to encourage legislators ~~should~~to explore ways to promote compatibility, such as ~~mutual recognition,~~democratic harmonisation procedures or alignment of requirements;

2015/02/26
Committee: IMCO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10a. Oppose the suggestion for more extensive regulatory cooperation which would allow trade and investment partners and corporations in the pre- legislative or legislative phase of the legislative procedure of the EU or the US, the Member States or federal states and municipal and regional authorities to have a privileged say in, or the opportunity to delay or stop, legislative procedures by calling for impact analyses of legislation on trade and investments;

2015/02/26
Committee: IMCO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 12 a (new)

12a. to reflect that only a small percentage of the more than 20 Million SMEs in the EU are involved in international trade and that for them progress in further developing the European common market is of much higher priority; to caution against expectations that the creation of a transatlantic market would rapidly open new export opportunities for SMEs or ease market access requirements; to raise the issue that SMEs may be negatively affected by increased competition from large companies targeting their markets;

2015/02/26
Committee: IMCO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14a. Stress to the negotiating partner that most Member States oppose the cultivation, import and processing of genetically modified organisms (GMOs);

2015/02/26
Committee: IMCO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 14 b (new)

14b. Ensure that, for reasons of consumer and health protection for the agricultural sector, special rules will be drawn up according to which the import of certain products to the EU will not be permitted, in particular for products which do not comply with the EU Labelling Directive; products comprising or made out of GMOs; animals treated with growth hormones; the placing on the market of food from cloned animals, and for food treated with products which are or will be banned in the EU;

2015/02/26
Committee: IMCO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 14 c (new)

14c. Make it clear that agro-biodiversity is the basis of food production and ensure that trade agreements result in neither restrictions on old seeds or a weakening of our traditional crops nor obstructions to high-quality, ecologically-focused agriculture;

2015/02/26
Committee: IMCO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 14 d (new)

14d. Include a revision clause in the agreement to enable the impact of the arrangements agreed to be checked and where necessary changed and to be able to terminate the agreement;

2015/02/26
Committee: IMCO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point a – point i

(i) to ensure that TTIP negotiations lead to a ~~deep, comprehensive, ambitious,~~ balanced and high-standard trade and investment agreement that would promote sustainable growth, safeguard quality public services, support the creation of high-quality jobs for European workers, directly benefit European consumers~~, increase international competitiveness, and open up new opportunities for EU companies, in particular SMEs~~ by guaranteeing the protection of existing and future enhanced levels of protection, and open up new opportunities for EU companies, in particular SMEs; apply the precautionary principle, ensure data protection, keep and develop the necessary public services, for example for health and education, guarantee the existence of family agriculture and GIs, ensure cultural diversity and have a coherent policy of cooperation for development; the content of the agreement is more important than the speed of the negotiations;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point a – point i a (new)

(ia) to ensure that the human rights clause includes: – Confirmation of states obligations under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other relevant international human rights instruments including, but not limited to, the European Convention on Human Rights, the European Social Charter and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; – Assurance that state parties will interpret the provisions in the agreement in accordance with international human rights law; – Assurance that none of the obligations arising from the agreement will have the effect of modifying the obligations to respect, protect, and fulfil fundamental rights in the EU; – An exception permitting parties to suspend their obligations arising from the agreement if there are grounds to believe that it will result in a breach of fundamental rights; – A mechanism putting forward periodic human rights impact assessments to be conducted jointly by a designated committee of the US Congress and the European Parliament; – A mechanism to bring complaints in front of national courts in order to initiate an investigation by the designated authority into human rights disputes arising under the agreement; – Procedures to ensure that citizens have equality before the law; – Assurance that the Parties to the agreement will not in any way whatsoever relatively privilege their own citizens, or otherwise discriminate against non-citizens, merely according to their citizenship status in any matter affected by this agreement, concerning public order, national security, crime or grounds of important public interest; such as internationally recognised labour standards, environment, public health or food safety standards; – An accessible mechanism to impose sanctions when fundamental rights and standards are abused and dialogue or mediation have been exhausted;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point a – point i b (new)

(ib) to reject the approach of a so-called "living agreement" and to insist that all important questions of detail relating to the agreement be decided in the negotiations, as nothing shall be agreed until everything is agreed; to reject the proposal that regulatory issues should be subsequently referred to specially established groups of experts, bypassing the democratic legislative process;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point a – point ii

(ii) to emphasise that while the TTIP negotiations consist of negotiations on three main areas – ambitiously improving reciprocal market access (for goods, services, investment and public procurement at all levels of government), reducing NTBs and enhancing the compresent to Parliament and to the public in general the possible economic and social expected results of its TTIP project, in parti~~bility of regulatory regimes, and developing common rules to address shared global trade challenges and opportunities – all these areas are equally import~~cular for jobs and working conditions, sector by sector, country by country; to present to Parliament antd to ~~be included in a comprehensive package; TTIP should be ambitious and binding on all levels of government on bo~~the public in general, an evaluation of the possible costs of the reduction of the s~~ides of the Atlantic, the agreement should lead to lasting genuine market openne~~o called Non Trade Barriers, also with regard to a reduced level of the Commiss ion a reciprocal basis and trade facilitation on the ground, and should pay particular attention to structural means of achieving greater transatlantic cooperation while upholding regulatory standards and preventing social and environmental dumping;'s ambition to establish in the Union a legal framework for economic and financial actors, which would benefit the society in general.

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point a – point ii a (new)

(iia) to regard the very high level of European protection standards which exist for the general public in the European Union should be regarded as an attainment deserving of the utmost protection, and that the statutory standards which exist in the EU Member States, for example regarding product safety, social protection and the protection of health, the environment, the climate, food and animal welfare, as well as consumer protection and data protection rights, should on no account be lowered but rather, where possible, improved; to ensure that these protection standards can in future be optimised and adapted unilaterally by a Member State in the light of the latest findings without any restriction;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point a – point ii b (new)

(iib) to take immediate action to ensure that any dispositions in the Treaty are subordinated to the right of the EU and its Member-States to define the levels of protection and that any such policy is not secured at the cost of social cohesion or the delivery of critical infrastructure or public services and is addressed on the basis of maintaining the highest standards and is done so with regard to existing levels of protection, especially within areas such as health and safety, education, consumer, labour and environmental legislation;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point a – point ii c (new)

(iic) to bear in mind that the Lisbon Treaty defines EU trade policy as an integral part of the Union's overall external action and that that policy therefore must address development, environmental and social objectives as well as contribute to meeting the other objectives set out in the Treaty on the European Union;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point a – point iii

(iii) to keep in mind the strategic importance of the EU-US economic relationship in general and of TTIP in particular, inter alia as an opportunity to promote the principles and values that the EU and the US share and cherish and to designat concluding the partnership will be of positive international significance only if the establishment of a large transatlantic market and, in the process, the adoption, as is intended, of new, shared standards are integral commpon ~~approaches to global trade, investment and trade-related issues such as high standards, norms and regulations, in order to develop a broader transatlantic vision and a common set of strategic goals~~ents of international efforts to achieve a fair, partnership based and multilateral world trading system and do not reinforce the current supremacy of lead markets; to rejects therefore the hijacking of the TTIP by leading politicians both in the US and in EU Member States who conceive of it as an 'economic NATO', which is a euphemism for the geopoliticising of transatlantic market cooperation;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point a – point iii a (new)

(iiia) to insist that any expansion of coordination with the USA on matters of IT-security must be contingent on the end of mass surveillance programmes and targeted intrusion against EU citizens, institutions and Member states

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point a – point iii b (new)

(iiib) to be aware that the TTIP would effect third countries with which the EU and the US already have close, agreement-based trade and economic relations and with which new integration processes and interactions would emerge as a result of the conclusion, as is intended, of further bilateral or multilateral trade and investment agreements; to ensure therefore that, for that to happen, it is essential that the TTIP forgo any type of arrangement which constrains the political leeway of the parties to act on the development, environment, health and social policy demands of their citizens;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point a – point iv

(iv) to ensure, especially given the recent positive developments in the World Trade Organisation (WTO), that an agreement with the US serves as a stepping-stone for broader trade negotiations and is not seen as an alternative to the WTO process; ~~bilateral trade agreements are always the second-best op~~to give priority to international and multilateral fora, to work on a bettering and democratizing of the international institutions, and ~~must not prevent improvements~~to refrain from the intention to propose or impose to the rest onf the ~~mul~~world global rules that have been negotilate~~ral level~~d without them;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point a – point iv a (new)

(iva) to conduct an assessment study of the effects of TTIP on developing countries; to minimize the potential serious risk of diminished market access and resulting trade diversion for some countries;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point a – point iv b (new)

(ivb) to be aware that TTIP and other mega trade deals are likely to reshape global trade rules and set new standards, while in doing so being discriminatory, by excluding some 130 countries from the negotiations and risking side-lining important issues for developing countries such as food security, agricultural subsidies and climate change mitigation; to step up efforts to advance in democratic multilateral fora, in line with the UNCTAD comprehensive Investment Policy Framework for Sustainable Development and to overcome the current Doha Development Round stalemate;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point ii

(ii) to ~~aim at the elimination of all duty tariffs, while respecting sensitive products on both sides;~~ evaluate the concrete cost and benefits for the economy and for the EU and MS budgets, and for the economy, of the elimination of the already very low remaining duty tariff between those two partners, sector by sector and country by country;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point ii a (new)

(iia) to table additional vulnerability provisions which will allow for the exclusion of susceptible sectors from any final trade agreement; any agreed provisions should be made in tandem with consultation with relevant stakeholders and interested committees.

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point ii b (new)

(iib) to include an ambitious safeguard clause, providing also for measures responding to deterioration in employment and environmental conditions;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point iii

(iii) to keep in mind that there are important offensive interests for the EU in the services sector, for instance in the areas of engineering, telecommunications and transport services; to keep also in mind that without TTIP, the trade balance in services is in favour of the EU, and that provisions in the agreement as currently proposed would diminish this advantage;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point v

(v) the negotiations should meaningfully address the current US restrictions on maritime and air transport services owned by European businesses, including in relation to foreign ownership of airlines and reciprocity on cabotage, as well as maritime cargo screening, and to guarantee that European working conditions, level of environmental protection and human health and safety at work are not compromised, while assessment of environmental and socio- economical impacts of the investments in transport infrastructure must meet the European and Member States standards;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point vi a (new)

(via) to ensure that the right of self- government of municipal and local authorities is preserved as one of the core aspects of the right of municipal self- administration and that it remains possible, without reservation, to restore local authority control in the light of local circumstances and on the basis of the wishes of the local electorate;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point vi b (new)

(vib) to make it clear to the negotiating partner that public services as referred to in Paragraph 19 of the EU negotiating directives means those which, according to the case-law of the contracting party or member state concerned, are subject to specific regulatory regimes or which are distinguished by specific obligations imposed on service-providers at national, regional or local level in the public interest; notes that they include, for example, water and energy supply, disposal of waste and effluent, emergency services, public health and social care, local public transport, housing construction and town planning and urban development measures;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point vi c (new)

(vic) to secure a horizontal exemption from all obligations arising from the principle of market access and national treatment for public services as referred to in Paragraph 19 of the EU negotiating directives and, in addition, with reference to public services, that, for the benefit of the contracting parties, a reservation should be entered for all sectors and all existing and future measures which limit the number of services and service- providers, impose specific obligations on service-providers and regulate the provision of these services in the public interest;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point vi d (new)

(vid) to reject any further opening-up for educational services with mixed funding, inter alia in the field of pre-school education, schools and higher education, as well as adult education and further education, as the multilateral GATS agreement already contains more than enough provisions on liberalisation;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point vi e (new)

(vie) to ensure that the standard-setting aspects of European public procurement law are not put in jeopardy, which are essential particularly with regard to their regional implementation, for example concerning compliance with labour-law, social and collective standards, green procurement policies or access for SMEs, and which provide for other criteria such as social and sustainable aspects to be taken into account when awarding the contract to the best bidder, not just the price;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point vi f (new)

(vif) to guarantee that exceptions from EU procurement law as currently provided for in the various procurement and concession guidelines (thresholds, in- house, intermunicipal cooperation, sectoral exceptions such as for the water sector or emergency services) remain;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point vi g (new)

(vig) to allow for individual member states to use state aid to vulnerable sectors of industry and allow for more proactive public sector enterprises.

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point vi h (new)

(vih) to acknowledge the importance of certain state-owned enterprises and to ensure that specific and identifiable provisions for the protection of State Owned Enterprises are prioritised;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Helmut SCHOLZ, Anne-Marie MINEUR, Eleonora FORENZA, Lola SÁNCHEZ CALDENTEY, Patrick LE HYARIC

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point vii a (new)

(viia) to take immediate action to ensure that systematic movement of capital across the Atlantic, in order to avoid tax payments in the country of production and/or sale of goods or services, is prohibited or subject to heavy taxation within the realm of TTIP;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point vii b (new)

(viib) to take immediate action to prevent fiscal competition, namely through the dumping in the taxation of profits and financial gains and maintenance of offshores and other fiscally privileged zones;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point x

(x) to keep in mind that the agreement should not risk prejudicing the Union’s cultural and linguistic diversity, including in the audiovisual and cultural services sector, and that existing and future provisions and policies in support of the cultural sector, in particular in the digital world, are kept out of the scope of the negotiations; to insist that it must remain possible for Member States, regions and municipalities to adopt any regulatory and financial measure to protect or promote cultural diversity, media freedom and pluralism, and the preservation or development of audiovisual and other corresponding services in order to serve the democratic, social and cultural needs of each society, irrespective of the technology used or the distribution platform;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point x a (new)

(xa) to consider the preservation of the cultural diversity as complementary to the exclusion of audiovisual services and not as an alternative, as both concepts of "cultural exception" and "cultural diversity" do not grant enough judicial guarantee to protect culture and audiovisual services;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point x b (new)

(xb) to include a clause in the agreement that ensures full compliance with the UNESCO Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions and full respect for Member States' practices,

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point x c (new)

(xc) to be aware of the risks for cultural production emerging from the different interpretation of what constitutes a trade secret in the U.S. and in the EU;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point xi a (new)

(xia) to be aware that the EU has opened unilaterally and very fast its own public procurement market and should not exchange the opening of public procurement in the US against the possibility to preserve or recuperate policy space on its own public procurement market that is very key, especially in order to face the economic crisis and boost local jobs creation;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point xiii

(xiii) to ensure that the US states are included in the negotiation process ~~in order to achieve meaningful results in opening up US public procurement contracts to EU companies~~, as well as sub-central levels in the EU;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point xiii a (new)

(xiiia) to demand a clear commitment to revoke existing anti-trade union laws such as the right to work acts;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point c – point i a (new)

(ia) to ensure that the agreement, if approved, will not affect negatively universal access to medicines;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point c – point ii

(ii) to base negotiations on SPS and TBT measures on the key principles of the multilateral SPS and TBT agreements; to aim in the first place at increasing transparency and openness, strengthening dialogue between regulators and strengthening cooperation in international standards-setting bodies; to recognise, in negotiations on SPS and TBT measures, the right of both parties to manage risk in accordance with the level either deems appropriate in order to protect human, animal or plant life or health, as illustrated by the farm to fork approach; to respect and uphold the sensitivities and fundamental values of either side, ~~such as~~including the EU’s precautionary principle, as well as the right of both parties to base food policy decisions on other legitimate factors than risk assessment; to guarantee that both parties will maintain their right on central and sub-central level to follow a hazard-based approach, notably when it comes to cosmetics, chemicals, pesticides and GMOs;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point c – point ii a (new)

(iia) to insist that the precautionary principle is one of the fundamental principles of European environmental, health and consumer protection policy and is the basis for prompt, proactive negotiations to avoid putting the health of people, animals and plants at risk and damaging the environment; to ensure that the negotiations do not result in the diluting of the precautionary principle which operates in the EU, particularly in the areas of environmental, health, food and consumer protection;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point c – point ii b (new)

(iib) to defend the view that existing regulatory divergences often have a background in different cultural and political approaches and that their value is often higher than their costs as non-tariff barrier (NTB) to trade; to point out that the costs for coping with the consequences of deregulation can be extremely high for public budgets;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point c – point ii c (new)

(iic) to point out that the vast majority of the population of most Member States is strongly opposed to the cultivation, import and processing of genetically modified organisms (GMOs);

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point c – point ii d (new)

(iid) to ensure that, for reasons of consumer and health protection for the agricultural sector, special rules will be drawn up according to which the import of certain products to the EU will not be permitted, in particular for products which do not comply with the EU Labelling Directive; products comprising or made out of GMOs; animals treated with growth hormones; the placing on the market of food from cloned animals, and for food treated with products which are or will be banned in the EU;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point c – point ii e (new)

(iie) to point out that agro-biodiversity is the basis of food production and to ensure that trade agreements result in neither restrictions on old seeds or a weakening of our traditional crops nor obstructions to high-quality, ecologically-focused agriculture;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point c – point ii f (new)

(iif) to commission an independent assessment study on the possible consequences of a trade deal with the US for the European agriculture at family scale, and for the EU policy for agriculture, for food safety, for the traceability of food and products, and for environment.

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point c – point ii g (new)

(iig) to ensure the exclusion of any provision in all the horizontal chapters and in all sectorial annexes of the TTIP that would involve regulation of chemicals and pesticides, affect the EU's integrated approach for food safety, including EU legislation on GMOs, hormones and possible future legislation needed such as food containing endocrinal substances.

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point c – point ii h (new)

(iih) to firmly protect the EU's "farm to fork" approach to food hygiene whereby good hygienic practices (GHP) must be in place all along the production chain to guarantee that food sold to the final consumer is safe, to reject the delegation of food control tasks to private operators, to stand firm on the contention that a food system based on third-party safety audits cannot be deemed equivalent to a system based on public independent inspections.

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point c – point iii a (new)

(iiia) to set up an ambitious and effective cooperation mechanism between the US Congress and the European Parliament, aimed at creating the highest common standards and at avoiding unintended divergence in future standards in key sectors; to promote high common standards in all international fora;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point c – point iii b (new)

(iiib) to oppose the suggestion for any institutionalised form of extensive regulatory cooperation which would allow the trade and investment partner and corporations in the prelegislative or legislative phase of the legislative procedure of the EU or the US, the Member States or federal states and municipal and regional authorities to have a privileged say in, or the opportunity to delay or stop, legislative procedures for instance by calling for impact analyses of legislation on trade and investments;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point c – point iv a (new)

(iva) to provide information on the way agreements by either the USA or the EU with third countries may affect regulatory co-operation and, in particular, to clarify how these agreements would interact, if they provide for similar forms or regulatory co-operation;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point c – point v a (new)

(va) to take immediate measures to ensure that in particular the recommendation for the development on a European strategy for IT independence and an EU cyber strategy, as included in the European Parliament resolution of 12 March 2014 on the US NSA surveillance programme, surveillance bodies in various Member States and their impact on EU citizens' fundamental rights and on transatlantic cooperation in Justice and Home Affairs, are implemented;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point c – point v b (new)

(vb) to prevent the inclusion of encryption standards, or the certification thereof, in the TTIP agreement, since there is no economic benefit, but a serious potential economic and societal loss deriving.

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point c – point v c (new)

(vc) to ensure that a comprehensive and unambiguous horizontal clause that fully exempts EU rules on the protection of personal data from the agreement should be incorporated, without any condition that it must be consistent with other parts of any trade agreement;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point d – point ii

(ii) to ~~ensure~~make it a precondition to the signing of an agreement that the sustainable development chapter aims at the full and effective ratification, implementation and enforcement of the eight fundamental conventions of the International Labour Organisation (ILO) and their content, the ILO’s Decent Work Agenda and the core international environmental agreements; provisions should be aimed at improving levels of protection of labour and environmental standards; an ambitious trade and sustainable development chapter should also include rules on corporate social responsibility based on the Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and a clearly structured civil society involvement;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point d – point vi

(vi) to ensure that the economic, social and environmental impact of TTIP is examined through a thorough trade sustainability impact assessment, including the amount of energy used related to the increased trade of goods across the Atlantic, with clear involvement of stakeholders and civil society;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point d – point vi a (new)

(via) to refrain from including a specific energy chapter in TTIP, unless it contributes towards energy supply diversification and towards security of energy supply for all citizens at affordable prices and hence towards ending energy poverty and towards energy saving and efficiency, and that contains obligations to promote sustainable energy policy and cooperation in research on alternative sustainable energy production methods;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point d – point vii

(vii) to e~~nsure that in course of~~xclude from the negotiations ~~the two sides examine ways to facilitate natural gas and oil exports, so that TTIP would abolish any existing export restrictions on energy between the two trading partners, thereby supporting a~~any provision to facilitate the extraction transport and importation to the EU of shale gas or any highly polluting fuel; and to ensure that no provision in any trade agreement will jeopardise the adoption and dieve~~rsification of energy sources;~~lopment of an ambitious policy of the EU against climate change.

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point d – point vii a (new)

(viia) to reject clauses that would lead to negative environmental consequences of the TTIP related to the expansion of fracking, offshore oil drilling and gas exploration;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point d – point vii b (new)

(viib) to negotiate provisions that would support the achievement of the goal to reduce Europe's dependence on imported oil and cut carbon emissions in transport by 60% by 2050, transition away from conventionally-fuelled cars in cities, reduce carbon emissions from aviation and shipping, and facilitate transport modal shift.

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point d – point xi

(xi) to ensure that TTIP includes a specific chapter on SME’s and aims at creating new opportunities in the US for European SMEs, for instance by eliminating double certification requirements, by establishing a web-based information system about the different regulations, by introducing ‘fast-track’ procedures at the border or by eliminating specific tariff peaks that continue to exist; it should establish mechanisms for both sides to work together to facilitate SMEs’ participation in transatlantic trade, for instance through a common SME ’one- stop shop’stablish a proper consultation of actual SME's, in order to consult them separately on the possible costs and benefits of a possible trade deal with the US and to establish with them what are the eventual real useless requirements that could be withdrawn, even without necessity of a comprehensive trade agreement;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point d – point xii

(xii) to ~~ensure that TTIP contains a comprehensive chapter on investment including provi~~accept the result of the public consultation held by the Commissions on both market access and investment protection; the investment chapter should aim at ensuring non-discriminatory treatment for the establishment of European and US companies in each other’s territory, while taking account of the sensitive nature of some specific sectorsthe ISDS arbitrary mechanisms, and therefore to exclude in all non-ratified trade deals the any special arbitrary jurisdiction for investors, and to stick to national justice; to establish a mechanism of state to state consultation and dispute mechanism reserved for the few case of really deny of justice;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point d – point xiv

(xiv) to ensure that foreign investors are treated in a non-discriminatory fashion and have a fair opportunity to seek and achieve redress of grievances, which can be achieved without the inclusion of an ISDS mechanism; ~~such a~~to insist that investment protection provisions and dispute resolution mechanisms i~~s not necessary in TTIP given the EU’s and the US’ developed legal systems;~~n the investor- state relationship (ISDS), even if reformed, circumvent normal legal channels, involve high fiscal risks, threaten democratic legislative procedures, discriminate against domestic businesses and must therefore be rejected; to stress that European legislation must not be encroached upon by a transatlantic free trade agreement and that legal action must continue to be taken in national courts; to ensure that political and administrative measures – particularly regarding retrospective claims for damages – drawn up according to the principles of democracy and the rule of law are not jeopardised by courts of arbitration; to defend a state-to- state dispute settlement system and the use of national courts ares the most appropriate tools to address investment disputes;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point d – point xiv a (new)

(xiva) to respect developing countries governments and parliaments right to regulate investment and to ensure obligations and duties for all investors, including foreign, so that labour, environmental, human rights and other standards are respected;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point d – point xv

(xv) to ensure that TTIP includes ~~an ambitious~~no Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) chapter that includes strong protection of precisely and clearly defined areas of IPR, including enhanced protection and recognition of European Geographical Indications (GIs), and reflects a fair and efficient level of protection such as laid out in the EU’s and the US’s free trade agreement provisions in this area, since the EU did not harmonise in a comprehensive manner intellectual property rights, including copyright, trademarks and patents; to evaluate alternative ways such as a bilateral agreement on enhanced protection and recognition of European Geographical Indications (GIs), while continuing to confirm the existing flexibilities in the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), notably in the area of public health;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point d – point xvi a (new)

(xvia) to respect that the reform of Copyright in the EU is an ongoing process and should therefore not fall into the scope of TTIP-negotiations, and that reducing the freedom of access to cultural production for citizens must be avoided; to safeguard in any event that EU copyright can protects authors and European creation while providing for exceptions for individual and institutional users like libraries, schools, Universities and Institutions for non- formal art and educations (like fair use), and will not be subjected to any attempt of control by large transnational companies;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point e – point ii a (new)

(iia) to take immediate measures to implement all recommendations made by the European Ombudsman in case OI/10/2014/RA;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point e – point iii a (new)

(iiia) to officially recognise that the "Stop TTIP" European Citizen Initiative has succeeded to collect already more than 1,6 million signature of 8 different countries, instead of continuing to ignore so many EU citizens;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point f a (new)

(fa) to evaluate options for alternatives to TTIP as for example negotiating separate or sectoral agreements on issues such as conformity assessment, product requirements, or standards, providing for transparency regarding technical regulations;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point f b (new)

(fb) to include a revision clause in the agreement to enable the impact of the arrangements agreed to be checked and where necessary changed and to be able to terminate the agreement; to include a general exception permitting parties to suspend their obligations arising from the agreement if there are grounds to believe that it will result in a breach of fundamental rights;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point f c (new)

(fc) to refrain from any intention to present this agreement to the Council as an agreement of exclusive competence of the EU, and to guarantee instead that it will present it as a mixed agreement requiring discussion and ratification by the Parliaments of the Member States, considering the huge consequences that it would have for the daily life and well- being of European citizens;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point f d (new)

(fd) calls on the Commission to abandon the export-led growth model and explore and prioritise other ways of stimulating much needed growth and creation of decent jobs in the EU, such as promoting counter-cyclical actions aimed at stimulating domestic demand and consumption and countering high unemployment and social exclusion, revoking the 1/20 rule on debt reduction, and allowing for all public investments to be regarded as fiscally neutral as regards the Stability and Growth Pact;

2015/03/30
Committee: INTA